.

Attleboro City Councilor Will Plead Not Guilty and Stay in Race

Attleboro City Councilor Kim Allard said she will continue her race for an at-large council seat.

Attleboro City Councilor Kim Allard, who is seeking reelection in November for another term as city councilor at-large, said she is moving forward with her campaign for reelection despite being Friday on two counts of grand larceny.

"I haven't seen the charges yet," Allard said Tuesday afternoon. "But I will be pleading not guilty."

Asked if she has plans to withdraw from the city election, Allard said: "No, I am not."

Allard said she could not comment any further on the indictment until she has seen the charges and has spoken to her attorney.

Allard's arraignment is scheduled for Nov. 1, just days before the election.

Rick DiGiacomo October 11, 2011 at 09:02 PM
Jerome, the indictment came out of Bristol but it's going to be tried in Plymouth per the Sun Chronicle article http://www.sunchronicle.com/articles/2011/10/04/news/doc4e8b68cbe1363548494804.txt If they're incorrect take it up with them. I don't need to do research to know that when an elderly gentleman with dementia signs over a $300K house to his caregiver for $1 on the same day he bought it without the family knowing about it there's cause to look into it. The fact that there was a settlement between the family & Ms. Allard proves that there was a dispute as to the events. This notion that the family then caused the Grand Jury indictment is ridiculous. All we hear from a couple of vocal (anyonymous) Allard supporters is that there's more to the story that no one else is privy to and we're supposed to believe them over the press, the DA and the Executive Office of Elder Affairs, not to mention just plain old common sense?
Michelle October 21, 2011 at 03:20 PM
WRONG...the caregiver worked 7days a week and 24hrs a day when the Elder became unable to live along (thats not easy, I've had to do it for a family member and he is not). Also she wasn't given the house by an elderly gentleman with questionable mental faculties, HE BOUGHT THE HOUSE WITH APARTMENT while he had all his facilities - so that when he had to move, he would have a place HE WANTED to go to and be well taken care of. THIS WAS HIS IDEA and while it was discussed his family and MR BOWLES were well aware of it. In fact, BOWLES even took the elder to speak with the Providence attorney while discussions were in progress. I did speak with the elder many times while this was taking place and know it was what HE wanted. ALSO she is paying for the house which is NOT what the elder intended.
Michelle October 21, 2011 at 03:37 PM
Rick, do you know anything about Bowles. He was chosen by sons as they can control him or so they thought. The ELDER chose someone else long before his mental faculties started to fail. If you look into the many public records in New Bedford courts the elder had to hire his own attorney to fight to try and get Mr. Bowles removed as conservator. What did Bowles do? He USED THE ELDERS MONEY TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY FOR HIMSELF, to fight the elder! I think you'd find the records very interesting and eye opening. That the courts would allow this and many other POOR rulings is just one suspicious act that should be investigated. Also suspicious is Bowles selling the elders waterfront condo on Thames St. in NEWPORT at a huge lose, brining money to the table in fact, is not the responsible act of someone I'd want in charge of my finances! AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT BOWLES IS BEING PAID to help his friend????? Glad he no longer represents the city or state!
Tisiphone October 21, 2011 at 05:33 PM
I thinkthere is some misunderstanding of Grand Juries here. The purpose is to prevent the DIstrict Attorney from bringing frivolous charges. It is an acknowledgement that they are wont to do this. Notice the "charge inflation" of criminal defendants in an election year. In any case, the District Attorney must present sufficient evidence to the jurors to convince them that an indictment is appropriate. The charges may not "stick", but the Grand Jury is intended to prevent free rein on the part of the District Attorney. One may deduce from an indictment that sufficient sufficient evidence was produced to move the Grnad Jury to indict.
Tisiphone October 21, 2011 at 05:46 PM
Michelle. let us understand something about Mr. Bowles position. He was appointed conservator by a court, his appointment is a court order. The "Elder", as we delicately put it, (why do we freely name Ms. Allard and Mr. Bowles, but not the "Elder") was seeking to reverse a court order. So, he had to hire an attorney, as would anyone else. He may have sold the condo at a "huge loss", but his job is to "preserve the assets". Is there any evidence that the condo is worth more now? It would seem there is a great likelihood that it might be worth less. And, what benefit was the ownership to the "Elder". If it was not being used, taxes, maintenance, etc. were a drain without benefit. As to what Mr. Bowles is being paid, he willbe required to file "accounts" including his compensation.
Rick DiGiacomo October 21, 2011 at 06:01 PM
Thanks Tispihone, it's painfully obvious that some of the Allard supporters have no idea what a Grand Jury indictment is or what it entails. I don't claim to be privy to the details of the case, I have merely pointed out the irony that those who claim all manner of conspiracy between the family, the Conservator, the DA, the presiding judge and the jurors in obtaining an indictment see nothing at all suspicious about an elderly gentleman with dementia signing over a house to a caretaker for $1 without the family's knowledge.
Penny Lane October 21, 2011 at 07:53 PM
How creative that Tisiphone chooses to comment using this name....being the name of one of the Furies in Greek mythology who pursued criminals and drove them mad!! I have a question for Michelle since she seems to know alot about Councilor Allard's work ethic. Has Councilor Allard worked for any one else as a caretaker and been names as a Trustee on this person's Trust???
Tisiphone October 21, 2011 at 11:08 PM
Rick, thank you. There is always a desire to believe that a situation is "new". Documented disputes over inheritance and "family money" go back to Greek mythology, and probably earlier. Notice the number of characters in Shakespeare killed off for reasons of inheritance. There is rarely anything "new" here, almost everything has already been tried. I suspect that the law of inheritance, conservators, executors, etc is as "down pat" as it is possible to be. The whole system of appointments, inventories, accounts, etc is centuries old and is designed to make everything "transparent". Genealogists regularly dig these out from the 17th and 18th centuries. I am hard pressed to believe that a relatively huge number of people would be prepared to but their careers on the line to protect Mr. Bowles. As the "Elder" was once required to "avoid even the appearance of impropriety", I think the same should apply, in some degree, to Ms. Allard. I would consider it ethical of her to withdraw from the election. While it is unlikely to draw the national attention of the "one cent tax bill", it has a potential for infamy that will not benefit the city's reputation. I expect the voters will repudiate her.
The Truth October 22, 2011 at 11:26 AM
Hmmmmmm? I think it's time to introduce myself to Mr. Bowles.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 07:40 PM
This stinks to high heavens! Kim Allard was sought out because she was a long-time friend of the judge. It is difficult to comment on what should be a family issue, but after all partirs agreed that records remain sealed, Ed & Bowles decided to go to the Globe in Boston with their filing. And then... Its interesting that Reynolds, is connected with one of the elderly agencies, Bowles sought out to push this into the criminal courts. As they say; you can indite a ham sandwich. This is pure evil and is much larger than any policy or issue; it's pure vengence! During a phone conversation, Reynolds couldn't place the name Bowles, and said dhe never heard of him before he began working on her campaign. You can decide for yourself if she's being truthful, or living on another planet.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 07:59 PM
As they say; you can indict a ham sandwich. This stinks to high heavens! Kim Allard was sought out because she was a long-time friend of the judge. It is difficult to comment on what should be a family issue, but after all parties agreed that records remain sealed, Ed & Bowles decided to go to the Globe in Boston with their filing. And then... Its interesting that Reynolds, is connected with one of the elderly agencies, Bowles sought out to push this into the criminal courts. This is pure evil and is much larger than any policy or issue; it's pure vengeance! During a phone conversation, Reynolds couldn't place the name Bowles, and said she never heard of him before he began working on her campaign. You can decide for yourself if she's being truthful, or living on another planet.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 08:20 PM
What did Kim steal? Nothing! So, how could she be convicted? Luckily there will be final judgement for the true guilty party. I wouldn't want to explain my actions at the pearly gates if I were Bowles. Which act, in the end, is more damaging? 1) Accepting a gift given to you by a life-long friend. Or 2) Destoying an entire family, and city because you had your feelings hurt.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 08:55 PM
It is interesting to me that the family insisted that Kim remain as caretaker while the judge was fighting for his independence from Bowles, who he hated. I never caught the outcome of the judge's emergency appeal to void Bowles' appointment as his legal guardian. Don't forget, this arrangement with Ms Allard spanned several years. Why didn't one of the son's step forward, and why have we only heard from one of them? For that matter, where were the wives, and grandchildren? BTW: The judge was living in Newport, and only purchased the home in Attleboro, to accomidate his life-long friend all but forced by conscience into the role of caretaker.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 09:23 PM
File this under "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished" The grand jury is only people off the street. Their goal is to, after hearing accusations from the prosecutor, determine if there is evidence to proceed. The prosecutor paints a picture of a gold digger, who forced property from vulnerable old rich guy. The members of the jury are not privy to the life-long father/mentor-daughter relationship between the 2, or the fact that the woman agreed to place herself in further peril, after Bowles went to the press to destroy her last year, agreed to stay on as caretaker indefinately, because her loyalty and platonic love for this man noy allow her to abandon him. She also had agreed to return any & all property to the estate, because she felt the turmoil would be too taxing on her friend's physical condition. Now without the details, how would you as a jury member vote? Remember, you are only exposed to Bowles' accusations spoken through the DA's mouth. This how/why Kim was indicted. So, as a grand jurer, you'd have to indict, but who could ask for a better, more loyal friend than Kim.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 09:38 PM
Ah Roxanne, We've emailed before. You were always a stickler for wording over content. I agree that the grand jury system needs to be fixed. Naturally you are focused on other things. This person expressed what a grand juror does. It's frustrating to know cases are political at that level. You're given a choice between A and B, but not told what B is. Hopefully I haven't offended you.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 09:45 PM
Kim P, My experience with Roxy, is that she's a tad eccentric...not worth worrying over. I appreciated your expressing the frustrations of serving in an antiquated system. It's easy to see how Bowles et al pushed this through, and it's wrong!
Steve October 22, 2011 at 09:48 PM
The woman gave up her life to care for her life-long friend. Would love to have someone this dedicated on my side. Take your morals and pray you are not judged by someone as unqualified as yourself.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 09:52 PM
AMEN! We could all use a friend like Kim. She took all the crap Bowles had and then some, but would not break her commitment.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 09:58 PM
Are you a school teacher or something? Kim Has responded to problems at 6AM, 11PM, weekends, & holidays. The few thousand a coucil member makes annually has very little to do with attendance at meetings.
Rick DiGiacomo October 22, 2011 at 10:50 PM
@Steve, I find it interesting that there are so many Allard supporters posting here purportedly with intimate knowledge of the situation yet they all post anonymously. You ask how they can indict her since she didn't steal anything. Just because a bank robber isn't successful in an attempt to rob a bank doesn't mean they don't go to jail.
Steve October 22, 2011 at 11:01 PM
Mr. Scott...Of course this is your warpped reasoning. Put yourself in her place. If you were falsely accused I suppose you would run and hide. How does that help? Mr. Bowles already not only has misled us all, and pushed this action from behind the scene, and is now on staff for at least one At Large candidate.
Rick DiGiacomo October 22, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Another post by the anonymous Steve giving us all manner of inside information. Do you have any proof that Ed & Bowles went to the Globe? Isn't it possible the Globe picked up the story from either a reporter who covers the courthouse or a news story in the Sun Chronicle? Is the story newsworthy? I would suggest that this type of story would definitely make the news one way or another. Once again an anonymous person alleging all manner of back channel activities & conspiracies involving several parties but who doesn't think theres anything suspicious with an elderly gentleman with dementia signing a $300k+ house over to a caretaker for $1. I don't care what kind of relationship they had, it raises suspicion and the family has completely reasonable grounds for looking into it. As Tisiphone stated in another post, family estate issues have been fought over for centuries and this one is no different. In the case of an incapacitated individual the family will and should get the benefit of the doubt unless there are extenuating circumstances.
Steven Scott October 23, 2011 at 01:47 AM
Warped reasoning? I have posted links from at least 2 separate news agency's only to be flagged and removed. I stand by my comments, that if there were a smoking gun to clear Allard of these charges it would of been presented long ago. Just the fact that this has gone on so long with no comments from Allard, says volumes to me. And don't tell me it's out of respect that she has remained silent, if she had anything to say that would clear her remaining silent would be nothing short of Disrespectful.
Steve October 23, 2011 at 10:36 AM
rick, I signed onto patch with the name steve (happens to be my name). what does this have to do with anything I've stated.
Rick DiGiacomo October 23, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Steve, you make claims in your posts without offering any evidence and you post anonymously. For all we know you could be Ms. Allard or a close family member and therefore might have an agenda, we just don't know. It's not just you, it's a pattern. There are others posting anonymously in support of Ms. Allard. These anonymous supporters post as if they have intimate knowledge of the situation and make unsubstantiated claims. Please understand, I have never met Ms. Allard nor do I have a personal beef with her. I started posting on this thread when I found it ironic how many unsubstantiated conspiracy theories were being thrown out there yet an elderly gentleman with dementia signing a house over to a caregiver (who happens to be a connected politician) without the family's knowledge was completely overlooked. Also the amount of misinformation being posted about the Grand Jury process got me interested in the thread.
Steve October 23, 2011 at 12:21 PM
Rick, You'll need to be more specific about my disputes of this witch hunt.
Tisiphone October 23, 2011 at 03:55 PM
Since no one else has mentioned it, anyone who knew the "Elder" knows that he had an "eye for the ladies" and a "weakness for the fair sex". This was long before the onset of any dementia. This is not "evidence", but I am sure that this may have influenced Mr. Bowles view of things.
Rick DiGiacomo October 24, 2011 at 11:05 PM
@ Steve, following are some direct quotes from your posts: 1. "... but after all parties agreed that records remain sealed, Ed & Bowles decided to go to the Globe in Boston with their filing..." You know they went to the Globe? How? 2. "And then... Its interesting that Reynolds, is connected with one of the elderly agencies, Bowles sought out to push this into the criminal courts..." I can see you're trying to make some connection between Bowles &/ Reynolds & you state Bowles sought to push this into the criminal courts. How do you know Bowles did this? 3. "During a phone conversation, Reynolds couldn't place the name Bowles..." Again, how do you know this? And then there are the many unsubstantiated claims by the anonymous Michelle, too many to go into. It's a pattern, Allard supporters are anonymous and posting a bunch of stuff as though they're facts but offering no evidence to support their claims. The kicker is: "The woman gave up her life to care for her life-long friend." Gave up her life? Really? $600/week and a $300K+ house is giving up one's life? Maybe she didn't end up getting the house in the end but let's not make this some grand altruistic gesture, there was definitely a sizeable financial reward contemplated.
blueskies October 24, 2011 at 11:14 PM
They are NOT gone. They own the land and owe the tax and if they don't provide the required number of jobs...they will lose their "tif" and owe even more taxes.
Michelle November 01, 2011 at 11:24 PM
talking about 9 others to pick from - would you pick Peter Blais? I understand he owned a service station which worked on city vehicles long before he signed it over to his son. Oh yes in fact this is the same son that now works for the city! Don't you remember seeing all the articles from the unions and workers? They were protesting the fact he was hired and put in charge over many men that are just as capable and that have many years of senority because of "special treatment". Not only is his son now working for the city, but so are his daughter and daughter-in-law. Something here doesn't smell right and I personally won't be voting for him!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something