“Parker is completely incompetent, she has no idea how GTA was funded, cannot understand accounting, cannot comprehend the audits, does not know the difference between accrual and cash accounting let alone any nuance of articulation between balance sheet and income statements.” December 10, 2015; Steven Ingersoll email to Bruce Harger.
If you thought that was fun, you should see what Steven Ingersoll claimed to his favorite pen pal, Bruce Harger just two days before.
On December 8, 2015, a little after 6:00pm, Ingersoll sent Harger another sentencing hearing testimony update, reproduced below and shown at left:
Evidentiary hearing is going quite well. I began my testimony today after Brad finished. I would like to update you by phone but it appears that you are already down South.
Brad had sent an email to a potential financiers [sic] back in March about possibly funding a private school project for LD students. In it he referenced a "retired LSSU administrator" that Parker forced him to say was you.
The blogger has gone to town with this news alteady [sic].
The Judge cut Parker off by saying "How is that relevant?" His comment stopped the topic which I will revisit in my testimony tomorrow. I intend to testify that your only involvement was an expressed interest in the proportion of a successful educational model, nothing beyond that.
However, in the hostile blogger universe that I am sorry to say is of little value.
Please call for a more detailed update when you can.
I am in the witness box for the foreseeable future, likely several more days.
Overall, very positive at this point.
We are unaware of how Parker got the private email bereeen [sic] Brad and his financier acquaintance.
It was pointed out that Brads inquiry went nowhere past initial introduction of the topic.
Stopped the topic?
No, it didn't. (And just where is this "hostile blogger universe" this guy keeps talking about?)
And did Parker, as Ingersoll claimed, "force" Habermehl to cough up Harger's name as one of the investors in a planned "private school project" for learning disabled students?
Could it be that Habermehl, under oath in a federal courtroom and caught off guard by emails he likely thought would never see the light of day, just told the truth?
Sure looks like that to me:
In addition to shading Habermehl's testimony to suit his sunny recitation of his sentencing hearing, a December 10, 2015 email sent by Ingersoll to Harger (relaying his twisted take on the day's activities) unloads on AUSA Janet Parker.
Here's an especially misogynistic excerpt, where Ingersoll praises Judge Ludington and talks smack about Parker:
“My testimony today and all week could not have gone better. The Judge now gets what happened and realizes the government has no idea and still has no idea what they are even talking about.
Parker is completely incompetent, she has no idea how GTA was funded, cannot understand accounting, cannot comprehend the audits, does not know the difference between accrual and cash accounting let alone any nuance of articulation between balance sheet and income statements. In short, she has no idea what her own case is about.
The sad and scary implication is, of course, the utter invincibility of government power. A government dunce who has no idea what her case is even about can actually gain a conviction.
I defined the whole history of events while she flapped her arms in the periphery. The Judge finally had to stop her from interrupting me so the truth could be told. I think we won the case this week, at least as it relates to GTA.”
So, AUSA Janet Parker is a "dunce" that Ingersoll relegated to merely flapping "her arms in the periphery"?
Nice try, you putz.
(No wonder he looks down his nose at most teachers: it's a 'girl's job', you know.)
But that wasn't the only Ingersoll talked smack about Parker while cozying up to his hombre Harger.
In an October 29, 2015 email to Harger, Ingersoll claimed Judge Ludington was "glaring at Parker when Brad testified that the GTA board had not contacted Hackett and that she never attended a board meeting" and told what we used to call in Brooklyn a "big ass lie": declaring "both were critical and false testimony elicited by Parker".
Wrong again, Steve. It was your attorney, Jan Geht, who was questioning Habermehl.
Should I go to the transcript?
Sure, why not!
Boy, this was almost as much fun as watching a bunch of frat boys get caught ogling a chubby stripper!