A Mancos man was acquitted Wednesday on one count of sexual assault in the first degree on a helpless victim.

Keith Hurst, 32, was accused of raping a local woman, then 15, while at his home more than three years ago in the presence of his wife, Melinda, and brother-in-law, Carl Holaday, who was the alleged victim’s boyfriend at the time.

In December 1997, the four allegedly smoked marijuana at the Hursts’ residence in Mancos, and according to Carl Holaday’s testimony for the prosecution, the victim became unconscious and was sexually assaulted by Keith Hurst. Carl Holaday said he and his sister had also fondled the victim at the same time but were granted immunity from prosecution by the district attorney’s office.

"She was like a wet noodle," Carl Holaday testified Monday. He insisted that the girl had not been in a state of mind to give consent and that she would not have approved of the acts that took place.

The alleged victim told the jury Tuesday she didn’t remember very much the next morning and thought it had been "just a bad dream." However, her boyfriend, Holaday, had promptly told her of the alleged events and the two decided not to tell anyone because of the embarrassment that might arise.

Keith and Melinda Hurst have since divorced.

It was at the time of the divorce in April 2000, Melinda (Hurst) Holaday testified Tuesday, that her soon-to-be ex-husband told her he had a videotape that would ruin her family. Melinda Holaday said Hurst claimed the video contained events from an evening 2 1/2 years earlier — the night of the alleged sexual assault.

She testified that Keith Hurst was using the tape as blackmail in order to get what he wanted out of the divorce.

Melinda Holaday said she then went to the alleged victim, now 18, and told her of the tape Hurst claimed to have.

"I felt she had a right to know," Melinda Holaday said.

She added that her intentions were not to enlist the girl as a tool to assist in the divorce.

"I wasn’t out to hurt him (Hurst)," Melinda Holaday said.

The alleged victim said that it was at that point she decided to pursue sexual-assault charges against Hurst.

"My biggest fear was that my mom, a relative, or possibly someday my child would come home asking me why I was on the cover of a (pornographic) movie," she said under questioning by District Attorney Joe Olt, as tears came down her face. She said the idea of the video had brought up bad memories and she felt it was time to deal with them.

"I was very upset," she said. "I thought it was part of my past."

The alleged videotape never surfaced during the course of the trial.

Without any physical evidence, the weight of the case relied on Carl Holaday’s testimony.

However, during cross-examination, defense attorney Tim Tuthill brought into question Carl Holaday’s inconsistencies and "character" considering that he had also smoked marijuana that night and had not intervened in the alleged assault.

The prosecution rested its case Tuesday afternoon and the defense brought only one witness to the stand before closing arguments.

Tuthill called Montezuma County Sheriff’s Detective Steve Harmon, who had previously testified for the prosecution, only to reiterate that there was no physical evidence in the case and to further discredit testimony by Melinda Holaday.

Keith Hurst never took the stand.

During closing arguments Wednesday morning, Tuthill argued the prosecution had not presented a case that would support the allegations, emphasizing points of the law stating that the defendant is to be assumed innocent unless proven otherwise.

"That’s why this game was over at halftime," Tuthill told the jury.

Olt argued that the jurors should keep in mind that while making their decision they were able to believe all, part or none of a witness’ testimony and that the only evidence presented in the case was testimony stating the act had occurred and there was no one testifying it hadn’t.

The jury of nine men and three women returned an hour later with the verdict of not guilty.

Olt said he was disappointed with the outcome because he felt the prosecution had presented a "good case" but acknowledged that it was a difficult one to prove, with the time lapse and lack of other witnesses.

Despite the outcome, Olt said he plans to continue to bring the tough cases to trial and take every allegation that comes through his office seriously.

"I just want to put sex offenders on notice that we’re not laughing at these charges," Olt said Wednesday.

Tuthill was not available for comment.