Former Oxford First Selectman Mary Ann Drayton-Rogers showed up to Milford Superior Court Thursday hoping to learn more about the criminal case against Karen Guillet, the former tax collector accused of embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Instead, Guillet didn’t appear before a judge. Her case was continued to next week, a routine development as far as the justice system — but it didn’t sit well with Drayton-Rogers.
“I really did feel this far into the case that it is time for some action to be taken,” she said. “Everyone in Oxford wants this to be concluded. The longer it drags on, the longer a cloud hangs over the town of Oxford.”
Drayton-Rogers was the town’s chief elected official when the investigation into Guillet’s alleged theft began.
She said she came to court Thursday — her first time at one of Guillet’s criminal court dates — because she wanted to keep up on developments in the case if she’s called to testify in connection with a lawsuit the town filed against Guillet.
Drayton-Rogers was irked at the amount of time the case has been in court.
“There has been ample time for the sharing of information,” she added. “It was my hope it would be settled by now.”
Guillet, the town’s elected tax collector for some 20 years, was arrested in late November after a two-year investigation by state police.
The arrest warrant in the case said Guillet collected money and did not credit accounts, all the while living a lavish lifestyle.
In addition to the criminal case, the town has a civil lawsuit pending against Guillet, claiming she stole more than $600,000 — more than state police alleged in the warrant investigators received to charge Guillet.
Guillet’s lawyer, Dominick Thomas, said after Guillet’s last court appearance that he had completed reviewing evidence provided by prosecutors and has begun discussions regarding a resolution.
In court Thursday, the case against Guillet — charged with first-degree larceny and six counts of first-degree forgery — was continued for one week, but not before a judge expressed displeasure at Guillet’s non-appearance.
Judge Richard Arnold seemed puzzled as he was calling the day’s docket and came to the case against Guillet.
“What’s going on with the Guillet case?” the judge asked, with neither Guillet nor her lawyer, Dominick Thomas, in the courtroom.
Prosecutor Charles Stango told Judge Arnold that Thomas and State’s Attorney Kevin Lawlor had agreed to continue the matter to June 7.
That didn’t seem to sit well with Judge Arnold, who noted at the time — about 11:30 a.m. — that Guillet and Thomas weren’t present.
“When people are out on bond, I like to see their faces in court,” Judge Arnold said, noting that Guillet and Thomas had probably shown up earlier Thursday morning, but he couldn’t be sure.
“I would just like to be in the loop as to what’s going on,” the judge added before continuing the case to June 7.
Afterward, Stango declined to comment and referred questions to Lawlor. A message seeking comment was left at Lawlor’s office.
Thomas said Thursday afternoon that because of a scheduling conflict he had, he and Lawlor had agreed to the June 7 continuance Wednesday, “rather than have my client traipse down there and not be able to do anything.”
No discussions regarding the substance of the case occurred, Thomas said.
Click here to read every story the Valley Independent Sentinel has published on the case.