Whitfield County jury finds man not guilty in drug case
Published 12:37 pm Friday, March 1, 2019
DALTON, Ga. — A 43-year-old Dalton man who was recorded on video by confidential informants of the sheriff’s office in what the district attorney’s office said was a drug transaction was found not guilty of distribution of meth by a jury in Whitfield County Superior Court.
John Wyatt Holliday was arrested on July 7, 2018, and charged with sale of meth and use of communication facilities in drug transactions. He was indicted by a grand jury for distribution of meth.
The trial turned on a video that the state presented as evidence of the drug transaction, according to a press release from the Public Defender’s Office, which represented Holliday.
“Mr. Holliday’s attorneys argued that the video presented as evidence against him showed no such transaction taking place, and that the state’s informant witnesses were not credible,” the press release said. “Mr. Holliday’s attorneys were also able to elicit testimony from the WCSO (Whitfield County Sheriff’s Office) detective in charge of the investigation that she had not seen any of the marked bills from the alleged transaction in Mr. Holliday’s possession, and that she had not seen methamphetamine in his possession.”
Radford S. Bunker and Micah Gates represented Holliday. The trial was presided over by Chief Judge William T. Boyett. The jury deliberated for a little more than three hours, the press release said.
“I am glad that the jury looked at the evidence and cleared John’s name here in open court,” Bunker said in the press release. “He walks out of court today a free man, because the jury did not believe some of the state’s witnesses. Simply put, the system worked.”
Assistant District Attorney Christina Antalis prosecuted the case.
District Attorney Bert Poston said his office “respectfully disagreed” with the jury’s verdict. Poston said confidential informants “may or may not have video but it’s usually not fantastic because it’s not a Hollywood production. It’s going to be a very small, very discreet camera that is not going to capture everything perfectly. The purpose of the camera is primarily to identify the seller, not necessarily to capture the transaction as it may not be possible to have the camera pointed directly at the informant’s hands at all times without the seller realizing that something is amiss.
“The video showed the informant giving money to the defendant,” Poston said. “It did not clearly show the defendant giving the drugs to the informant but it should have been apparent that was what was happening. The informant did not have drugs prior to the exchange and did have drugs after the exchange.”
“As always, we appreciate the jurors’ service in deciding the case even if we respectfully disagree with their conclusion,” Poston said. “It is our job to present the evidence and their job to determine credibility of witnesses including informants and to reach a verdict, which they did.”