museum-security

http://museum-security.org/
securma@museum-security.org

AUGUST 31, 1997

- Stolen art and copyright
- Risks of lending to museums - are there any?
- Antique dealer now demands Connor release (Isabella Stewart Gardner
Museum)
- Request (Gardner Museum case)
- Meeting on art heist expected (Gardner Museum case)
- New Dickinson Poem purchased for $24,150 Proved Fake

(Museum-L)
From: "Robert A. Baron" <rabaron@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject: Stolen art and copyright

At 03:54 AM 8/25/97 GMT, you wrote:
>Some of you may have read previous messages from me on this subject
>I am writing a law review article on searching for stolen
>art/antiquities on the internet. Previous responses to my postings
>have offered tremendous on-line resources, but I wonder if anyone can
>help with a more historical perspective -- how did you handle
>searching for your stolen art/antiquities prior to the internet.
>Anecdotes are welcome, and attribution given!
>Thanks in advance for the help!
>Laura McFarland-Taylor
>The John Marshall Law School
>HomeMcT1@aol.com
>
Here is a hypothetical question regarding stolen art and copyright:
A work of art, under copyright, is stolen from a museum which owns
the object, but not the rights of reproduction. Might the copyright
holder successfully claim infringement if the object owner places
reproductions of the stolen work on the various databases and lists
maintained to help identify and find stolen works?
I see nothing in the "fair use" provisions of the U.S. copyright law
which might apply here. Normally copies of such works are allowed for
"internal" object management and insurance; but public databases of
stolen art, especially if placed on the Web, may be thrown into the
same basket of infringing usages as public dababases of artworks that
are not stolen.
Robert Baron
rabaron@pipeline.com
-------------------------

(Museum-L)
From: Antony F Anderson <antonya@ANTONYA.ACE.CO.UK>
Subject: Risks of lending to museums - are there any?
To: MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

In 1990 the $5M Denney Modern Art Collection on loan to the Dallas
Museum of Art was removed by means of forged letters purporting to
have been written by the owner -actually dead. This classic case is
reported at: http://museum-security.org/denney/index.htm
The case raises a number of issues concerning the security of loan
collections - or does it? Was is just an isolated case, or have there
been other similar cases elsewhere?
What precautions do museums generally take to ensure that loaned
items are as well protected as a museum's own property? Are members
of the list aware of events where loan collections have been removed,
or nearly been removed, from museums by unauthorised third parties or
where loan collections have mysteriously disappeared? On discovery of
fraud, what was then done to recover the loan, and with what success?
I am trying to build up a general picture of where problems have
arisen with long term art loans. Any information about problems with
loans to museums, or comments on the Denney case itself, would be
gratefully appreciated.
Antony Anderson
antonya@antonya.ace.co.uk
http://museum-security.org/denney/index.htm
---------------------

Antique dealer now demands Connor release
Says he won't discuss Gardner heist with authorities until demand is
met.
By Stephen Kurkjian and Judy Rakowsky, Globe Staff,
08/29/97
Randolph antiques dealer who says he can arrange the return of
precious artwork stolen from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum
seven years ago will not talk with federal investigators until they
release Myles J. Connor Jr. - a convicted art thief with a history
of violence - from prison.
For the last several days, William P. Youngworth III has also
maintained he will not give the FBI any proof that he has access to
the paintings, or allow them to verify they are legitimate, unless
Connor walks free. ''They've got to understand that I will provide
nothing for them to authenticate until Myles is released from jail,''
Youngworth told a Globe reporter late Wednesday. ''The ante has gone
up.'' Also, Richard P. Klein, a lawyer who joined Youngworth's
defense team in Massachusetts and will advise him on the missing
Gardner paintings, said his client is worried that Connor, en route
to Boston from a federal prison in Pennsylvania, is being
mistreated. ''He feels that the federal government is treating
Connor adversely in an attempt to get him to provide certain
information that he has, and he is not pleased about it,'' said
Klein, of New Brunswick, N.J. In the Wednesday interview, conducted
in a Brooklyn motel room where he lived in hiding with his wife
and son, Youngworth maintained that investigators must meet all of
his demands before the 13 paintings and pieces of art, taken in a
1990 heist, would be returned. Connor is in the seventh year of a
10-year sentence for transporting stolen art and trying to buy drugs
from an undercover agent. Youngworth wants immunity from charges
pending in Norfolk County for possession of a stolen car and illegal
possession of firearms - and the museum's $5 million reward. Though
he is struggling to make ends meet, Youngworth said he recently was
hired as a ''paid consultant'' for a television network and was ready
to go on the air with an account of how he gained access to the
paintings. Youngworth also implied that he had undeveloped
photographs of the paintings. He said he offered a ''roll of
photographs'' to another reporter as proof, but the reporter gave it
back during the weekend. He declined to say why. In a front-page
story published Tuesday, a Boston Herald reporter said an informant
had taken him to a warehouse somewhere in the Northeast for a secret
glimpse of Rembrandt's ''The Storm on the Sea of Galilee,'' one of
the stolen paintings. The reporter, Tom Mashberg, wrote that the
canvas was removed from an oversized, sealed poster tube in the dark
storage room and quickly viewed by flashlight. The informant then
told Mashberg the rest of the stolen paintings also were there.
During the Wednesday interview, Youngworth declined to say whether
the undeveloped film depicted the paintings and the artwork in
storage or on display. Klein said yesterday that he did not know if
Youngworth had the film or if any photos of the artwork existed. As
Youngworth reiterated his stance, those involved in the case
yesterday would not predict any imminent breakthrough, or whether
serious negotiations - if they began - will yield results. Connor's
lawyer, Martin Leppo of Boston, said federal authorities told him his
client may not arrive in Boston until early next week. Harvey
Silverglate, Mashberg's lawyer, said yesterday he is waiting to talk
to Assistant US Attorney Brien T. O'Connor, the lead prosecutor in
the investigation, on whether O'Connor will seek Mashberg's
cooperation. Despite his public stance, Youngworth has had a
preliminary meeting with the FBI. But Klein and Howard Lewis of
Framingham, who also represents Youngworth, said the conditions for
cooperation still must be met before their client tells what he knows
to authorities. FBI agents are discouraged that the case has stalled,
according to a bureau spokesman. ''We're no closer to finding the
works of art today than we were yesterday,'' said the spokesman,
Peter S. Ginieres. ''Somebody knows where they are.'' Ginieres also
rejected Youngworth's demand for Connor's freedom without proof that
Youngworth's information is legitimate. ''The government is not in
the business of buying a pig in a poke,'' he said. ''There has to be
some sign that we're dealing with a legitimate source of
information.'' Those holding the art, he said, can easily
authenticate it. ''There are distinguishing characteristics that all
works of art have,'' said Ginieres. ''There are ways they can show
they have the paintings or have been in the presence of the
paintings. We're hoping that someone can show us they have the real
deal.'' Edward Clark, who formerly supervised art theft
investigations with the FBI, suggested sending photographs of the
paintings to bureau investigators. ''The most difficult thing in any
extortion or kidnapping is how to make the payoff without giving
up yourself or the goods,'' said Clark, who now directs his own
private investigations firm. ''You don't find the people who know
about this stuff in the church choir, but law enforcement wants
to be convinced before they give a quid pro quo to these men that
they will indeed be able to deliver.'' Globe staff reporter Ric Kahn
contributed to this article.
This story ran on page B01 of the Boston Globe on
08/29/97. c Copyright 1997 Globe Newspaper Company.
-----------------------------------

Date sent: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 20:58:27 -0500
From: Scott Kirsner <kirsner@worldnet.att.net>
Send reply to: kirsner@worldnet.att.net
Organization: AT&T WorldNet
To: securma@museum-security.org
Subject: Request (Gardner Museum case)
I'm working on a story for Wired News (www.wired.com), the online
companion to Wired Magazine, about art theft and the Web, focusing
specifically on the Gardner Museum case. Would you or anyone at Museum
Security Network be available for an e-mail interview? It would be a
great help to this piece.
Thanks,
Scott Kirsner
WIRED NEWS
---------------------------------

Meeting on art heist expected
By Stephen Kurkjian and Judy Rakowsky, Globe Staff,
08/30/97
Federal authorities investigating the theft of artwork from the
Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum expect to meet next week with Myles
J. Connor Jr., the imprisoned high-profile art thief, in hopes of
determining whether he will help them recover the priceless works.
However, US Attorney Donald Stern, whose office is spearheading the
investigation, said yesterday that he is unwilling to act on Connor's
behalf - or arrange to cut his sentence - until he gets ''credible
information'' that Connor can arrange the artwork's return.
''We are very interested in getting the artwork back and we will
deal with anyone to solve the crime or get the art returned,'' Stern
said. ''But to the extent that anyone is looking for a reduction [of
a sentence] or a release, without procuring credible information -
it's just not going to happen.'' Connor, serving time in a federal
prison, surfaced in the investigation after an associate, William P.
Youngworth III of Randolph, said he knows where the art is hidden,
but refused to talk with investigators until Connor - en route from a
prison in Pennsylvania to Boston - is freed. Meanwhile, sources said
museum officials held a secret meeting with an unidentified
individual and came away hopeful. According to one source, the
officials met with Tom Mashberg, a Boston Herald reporter who says he
had a brief glimpse of Rembrandt's ''The Storm on the Sea
of Galilee,'' one of the stolen masterpieces. One museum official,
who asked not to be identified, would only say that an ''event''
involving the stolen paintings had taken place at
the Fenway museum on Friday. The source would not
give specifics. Mashberg and the Herald declined to comment
yesterday. Youngworth, the antiques dealer who says he
arranged for Mashberg's viewing of the painting two weeks ago, was
unavailable for comment yesterday. But Richard P. Klein, Youngworth's
lawyer, said his client was interviewed by the ABC News program
''Nightline,'' which is scheduled for broadcast Tuesday night.
Youngworth, he said, did not give any more information on the
location of the paintings or their condition. Klein, of East
Brunswick, N.J., said that Mashberg did provide ''some corroborating
information'' about the paintings' existence during his interview
with Nightline. Klein declined to provide details. Both Klein and an
ABC representative said Youngworth was not paid for his interview
with Nightline - even though Youngworth told a Globe reporter late
Wednesday that he had become a ''paid consultant'' for the network.
The developments in the seven-year-old crime accelerated when
Youngworth was arrested on drug and weapons charges in Randolph last
month. Shortly after making bail, Youngworth reportedly said he had
knowledge of the stolen art, then began to broker a deal: information
about the painting in exchange for Connor's release - and the
museum's $5 million reward. Connor is in the seventh year of a
10-year sentence for transporting stolen art and making a drug
transaction with an undercover agent. Besides the reward money,
Youngworth wants immunity from charges pending in Norfolk County for
possession of a stolen car and illegal possession of firearms. Twice
last week, a Globe reporter interviewed Youngworth in a shabby hotel
room in the Sheepshead Bay section of Brooklyn, where he was in
hiding with his family. In the interviews, Youngworth said he had a
roll of undeveloped film of the stolen art. He also said he would not
allow officials to even authenticate the artwork unless Connor is
released. He also said that he was skeptical that the museum actually
had the reward, or that it would keep its pledge to pay it when the
art is returned, no questions asked. Yesterday, Klein denied that
Youngworth had been interviewed by the Globe. Despite his public
stance, Youngworth has had phone discussions with an FBI agent from
Boston this week. But Klein declined to say if any meetings between
them are scheduled. Whether those sessions might result in the return
of the masterpieces - stolen in the largest art theft in history - is
uncertain. Both sides have made disparaging comments about the
other's sincerity and credibility in meeting demands, or even
negotiating. ''I've never seen anything quite like a case like
this,'' said one individual involved in the negotiations. ''Every
time we think we know what we're dealing with, things change and
we're back to square one.''
Ric Kahn of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
This story ran on page A01 of the Boston Globe on
08/30/97. c Copyright 1997 Globe Newspaper Company.
------------------------

New Dickinson Poem purchased for $24,150 Proved Fake
Associated Press
Saturday, August 30, 1997; Page D07
The Washington Post

SPRINGFIELD, Mass.-There was no reason to doubt the origin of a
handwritten Emily Dickinson poem purchased for $24,150 by her
hometown library in Amherst. Even the words "Aunt Emily," penned on
the back, rang so true that the library curator wondered which
relative wrote them. That question set off a chain of inquiry that
has now exposed both the poem and manuscript as shams by one of this
century's most clever forgers, according to the Jones Public
Library and Sotheby's auction house. "It's an extraordinarily good
forgery," Selby Kiffer, a senior vice president at Sotheby's, said
Thursday. "The correct paper for the period, the correct writing
instrument for the period [the 1870s], the literary tone was quite
good -- and the imitation of the writing." The Jones Library bought
the two-stanza poem, which was written in faint pencil, through
Sotheby's on June 3. It is a meditation on classic themes of the
19th-century poet: death and the meaning of life. The poem had passed
through the hands of more than one document dealer, was reviewed by
Dickinson scholars and survived the scrutiny of Sotheby's as a
newly uncovered Dickinson work. The library intended to add the poem
to its collection of original Dickinson writings and research
material on the reclusive Amherst poet. Jones curator Daniel
Lombardo wondered, though, if he could identify the niece or other
relative who wrote "Aunt Emily" on the back. His first inkling of
trouble arose when he could find no matching hand among the poet's
relatives. But the real breakthrough came when a Dickinson collector
told library staff that he had been offered the poem by Mark Hofmann
in the mid-1980s. Then viewed as a legitimate documents dealer,
Hofmann was later convicted of two pipe bomb murders. He said he was
trying to cover his tracks on Mormon documents he had forged for
profit. In 1987, he was sent to prison for life. Library
investigators found a book on Hofmann in which he mentions a
Dickinson poem he had supposedly admitted forging. In the book,
Hofmann was reported to say he later saw it published as a newly
discovered Dickinson work. A 1986 book on collecting historical
documents supplied the last link of evidence: It carried a photograph
and transcript of just such a new Dickinson work. Lombardo studied it
under magnification; it was the library's, he said. "He was one of
the most skilled forgers in this century. The lengths he went to fool
all the experts were extraordinary."
Copyright 1997 The Associated Press
-----------------------

table of contents

inhoudsopgave

mail