A new court filing reveals the evidence, the witnesses, and the three specific moments prosecutors say Nick Houck lied under oath.

"I'm Shay McAlister, and this is Shay Informed: an independent, ad-free platform dedicated to honest journalism with compassion and clarity.

This story is a 'Shay Original', which is available to paid subscribers only. You can become a member for $4.99/month and gain access to all of my work, including full interviews, behind-the-scenes content, and my weekly podcast.

A new document filed in the Nick Houck perjury case just gave us something we rarely get this early in a criminal proceeding: a window into exactly what prosecutors are working with.

The Commonwealth's Response to Discovery and Pre-Trial Order of Compliance- filed July 31st by Commonwealth Attorney Kyle Williamson- is a standard pre-trial document. But what's inside it is anything but standard. And I want to walk you through what stands out, because this tells us a lot about where this case is headed.

Let me start with something important for context: we did not get anything like this in the Brooks Houck case. We didn't get it in the Lawson cases either. To see this level of detail about the evidence this early is notable.

We now know exactly when prosecutors say Nick Houck lied

The indictment told us the alleged perjury happened somewhere between July 15, 2015 and August 16, 2023. That's an eight-year window. But this document narrows it down considerably.

The discovery filing lists three specific grand jury appearances- three specific moments when Nick Houck was under oath. And prosecutors appear to be saying the lies happened in at least one, if not all, of them.