.

P.S. 29 PTA Embezzler Providence Hogan Pleads Guilty

Hogan paid $50,000 today, and will not serve any jail time.

After she pleaded guilty to three counts of grand larceny for , and after her attorney handed a check for $50,000 to PTA Co-President Maura Sheehy, Providence Hogan gave a tearful statement.

Her eyes were focused on the piece of paper in her hands, but when she looked up, she directed her words toward the side of the courtroom where nearly a dozen PTA parents sat, and have sat more than a few times over the past eight months. Hogan asked for forgiveness.

"What I did was obviously criminal, but also morally reprehensible and spiritually bereft," Hogan said, pausing to catch her breath. "I am so, so sorry."

Hogan was able to pay $50,000 Tuesday in part because of a recent New York Times column written by Ginia Bellafante. Hogan's attorney Stephen Flamhaft told reporters after the sentencing that the profile had inspired multiple people, including an old aquaintance of Hogan's, to come forward and lend her money. One person, whom Flamhaft would not name, is now also a business partner at the .

Judge Suzanne Mondo has said all along that in order for Hogan to avoid trial and possible jail time, she needed to "make the school whole." Flamhaft met with Mondo and they came to the agreement on how she would make restitution to the school. She will pay back the remaining $30,000 over the next two years, followed by five years of probation.

Mondo warned Hogan about making payments on time.

"If you fail to make a payment, I will order a warrant for your arrest," she said. "I will not accept any excuses."

The PTA is ready to move on. Following the sentencing, more than a few parents said they were glad the ordeal was coming to a close, but would not say whether they were ready to forgive Hogan.

"We're very much looking to move forward and put our energies into something positive," said Natalie Green Giles, a former chairwoman of the school leadership team.

Hogan's last words made it clear that she was hopeful about the future, too.

"I will not let you down," she said.

--

Correction, Nov. 2, 6:35 p.m.: The original story reported that Hogan had received financial support from the Kane Street Synagogue. According to her lawyer, Stephen Flamhaft, Hogan did not receive support from Kane Street, nor is she a congregant there.

Anonynous November 01, 2011 at 07:24 PM
It is untrue that Kane Street Synagogue supported Ms. Hogan.
Anonymouse November 02, 2011 at 02:17 PM
If you haven't yet confirmed the lack of support by Kane Street, why not? Otherwise, please remove the sentence as it is factually wrong. A simple phone call would confirm your error.
Ryan Harrington November 03, 2011 at 12:42 AM
That is a pretty major accusation/retraction, Georgia Kral. I hate how bloggers think they're journalists. It's like when Providence thinks she has a soul.
Georgia Kral November 03, 2011 at 12:52 AM
Hi Ryan, I went off of what I knew and was told by the attorney. I am still looking into this. Stay tuned.
Anonymouse November 04, 2011 at 08:44 PM
So was your prior quote of the attorney wrong, or did the attorney change his story? How did the error occur and how does this comport with the principles of good journalism, per your bio? But for the followup in the comments, this story would have never been corrected and your correction is wrong and contains an error. But thanks for removing the sentence, which was entirely wrong.
Georgia Kral November 05, 2011 at 02:43 AM
Hi Anonymouse. The attorney told reporters that Hogan was financially supported by her synagogue. I asked if it was Kane Street, because I had been told by other sources in the past that she went there, and he said yes, he thought so. I reported that, as did The Brooklyn Paper. Hogan's attorney contacted me the next day and said there had been some confusion, and that he did not know what her synagogue was. The Brooklyn Paper now says it is Congregation B’nai Avraham in Brooklyn Heights, but I have not confirmed that.
Anonymouse November 08, 2011 at 09:40 PM
Respectfully, you have a Masters in Journalism and you may want to check facts, and not rely upon what someone tells you, before you print an article. Had the attorney not called you, you would have just ignored the comment, and now you rely upon another paper's reporting, which is incorrect, and you still haven't made any calls to confirm or deny the facts that you now claim to be true, which in fact are not true. You apparently think that writing a blog and working for AOL isn't very serious, but this is very sloppy journalism for something that isn't that difficult. Would you take this to your graduate level journalism professor and what reaction would you expect? If you're simply going to do cut and paste work, you may want to revise your mission statement. As you wrote, stay tuned (whatever that meant).
Anonynous January 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM
Does anyone know what is going on at her Spa ? I bought a gift certificate for a friend who told me that no one answered the phone when she tried to book a treatment.
Anonynous January 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM
Georgia, maybe it's time to do an update on this story. Being told that she closed her business and filed for bankruptcy protection. Wondering if this tactic is to avoid paying the money she owes PS 29 ??

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
See more »