FirstAlerts

Elkins Man Charged with Check Forgery

Thomas Patrick Southard faces a felony charge after allegedly forging checks at two Elkins stores.

3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 25, 2026, 12:45 a.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 25, 2026, 12:12 a.m. ETWritten Aug 25, 2026, 12:52 a.m. ET
Thomas Patrick Southard, 40, of Elkins, has been with one count of forging or uttering other writing, a felony, according to The Intermountain. The charge is only an accusation; Southard is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law. He has not been tried, and his guilt has not been determined. Southard was after the Elkins Police Department alleged he took checks belonging to his father and used them at two Shop 'n Save stores in Elkins, writing six checks totaling approximately $771.83 without permission. The case is pending, and no trial has occurred.

Earlier reports

  1. Aug 25, 2026, 12:50 a.m. ET

    Elkins Man Charged with Check Forgery

    Thomas Patrick Southard, 40, of Elkins, has been charged with one count of forging or uttering other writing, a felony, according to The Intermountain. The charge stems from allegations that Southard took checks belonging to his father and used them at two Shop 'n Save stores in Elkins, writing six checks totaling approximately $771.83 without permission, as reported by The Intermountain. The Elkins Police Department investigated the case. The matter is at the charging stage and has not been resolved; as with all criminal charges, Southard is presumed innocent until proven guilty in court.

  2. Aug 25, 2026, 12:45 a.m. ETFirst report

    Elkins Man Charged with Check Forgery

    Thomas Patrick Southard, 40, of Elkins, has been charged with one count of forging or uttering other writing, a felony, according to The Inter-Mountain.

    The government alleges that Southard took checks belonging to his father and used them at two Shop 'n Save stores in Elkins, writing six checks totaling approximately $771.83 without permission. The Elkins Police Department is investigating the case.

    The charge is only an allegation, and the case has not been decided by a court. Southard is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 125 Aug 2026, 04:50current

    First published.

  2. Version 125 Aug 2026, 04:45current

    First published.

  3. Version 125 Aug 2026, 04:52current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.