For Immediate Release 1/8/16

After a preliminary examination hearing and briefing by both parties, Judge Mott handed down his memorandum opinion “dismissing entirely” the complaint filed against South Haven Police Chief, Jason Boyd, who was represented by Jess Hoeme of Joseph, Hollander & Craft.

“From the beginning of this investigation, we insisted Chief Boyd’s actions were not criminal and we were confident we could support that position,” said Jess Hoeme. “This is exactly how the justice system is supposed to work—Chief Boyd was given his day in court and we presented a defense for Boyd that overwhelmed the State’s legal theory which, in turn, highlighted the fact that the State should not have filed charges against Chief Boyd. Despite the fact the Constitution required a presumption of Chief Boyd’s innocence, sometimes an aggressive offense is the best defense.”

Some of the more notable comments in Judge Mott’s memorandum include:

“The cases cited by the State do not support its positon [on Count 2].”

“Even more puzzling than the allegation in Count 2 [] is the [S]tate’s allegation in Count I that the City of South Haven was deceived into giving up the property which it never possessed and never owned. It’s no surprise there is zero evidence of any deception [] against the City . . . [the City] never had the money. ”

“Boyd’s actions are wholly inconsistent with an intent to deceive . . .. Other evidence is troublesome for the [S]tate as well: there was evidence Boyd bought some items for the police department . . ..”

“The State’s own charging document reveals an ambivalence rarely seen in charging documents as to the element of intent to permanently deprive.”

“For the reasons mentioned on the record at the preliminary hearing, Count 3 is dismissed as well. The complaint is dismissed entirely, for lack of probable cause on the charges brought.”


Other Sources: KWCH, SUTV

Original Post