FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Former Postmaster Sentenced to 3 Years’ Probation for Money Order Fraud

Delos Thurston, 28, of Clinton, New York, was sentenced on August 27, 2026, for fraudulently issuing 179 money orders and stealing $118,088.19 from the U.S. Postal Service.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 1, 2026, 5:01 p.m. ET
Developing · not yet checked for updates

This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.

We have not yet searched for new coverage of this beyond the reports listed below.

On September 1, 2026, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York announced that Delos Thurston, 28, of Clinton, New York, was on August 27, 2026, to three years’ probation for money order fraud. The announcement was made by First Assistant U.S. Attorney John A. Sarcone III and Matthew M. Modafferi, Special Agent in Charge of the Northeast Area Field Office of the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General. Between April 2025 and January 2026, while employed as Postmaster of the Morrisville, New York, Post Office, Thurston fraudulently issued 179 money orders for his own benefit without paying for them, stealing $118,088.19 from the United States. Senior U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby also ordered Thurston to pay restitution to the U.S. Postal Service in the amount of $118,088.19. First Assistant U.S. Attorney John A. Sarcone III said, “This defendant was entrusted with serving his community and the American public as Postmaster. He violated that trust by using his position to steal more than $100,000 from the United States Government and, by extension, the American taxpayer. Thanks to the swift action of the USPS Office of Inspector General, his misconduct was uncovered, and he will now be required to repay the stolen funds, and serve a term of strict supervision while on probation.” Matthew M. Modafferi, Special Agent in Charge of the Northeast Area Field Office, USPS Office of Inspector General, added, “Today’s sentencing reinforces that employees who abuse their positions of public trust for personal gain will be held accountable. The USPS Office of Inspector General remains committed to protecting the integrity of the Postal Service. We thank the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York for its continued partnership.” The case was investigated by the USPS-OIG and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew J. McCrobie.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 11 Sept 2026, 21:01current

    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.