http://museum-security.org/
securma@xs4all.nl
SITE MAP
September 21, 1999
CONTENTS:
- query: stolen and forged Russian icons
- Re: Interpol CD (Patrice Cohen, Jouve)
- Re: Interpol CD (David Shilingford)
- Re: Interpol CD (Robin Rogers)
- Re: Interpol CD (Virginia M. Curry)
- Museum recovering from Floyd (Drayton Hall historic site)
- Re: Quick Poll, charge for checking bags (Joy Jackson)
- Junk shop 'Monet' may fetch UKP.1.1m on the Net
From: Roi James rjstudio@roijames.com
Subject: Do you have information:
Hello,
I was hoping that you would have information or could direct me to other sites which would possibly have information on the current export trade on russian icons and forged russian icons in the west. I am concerned about some which I've bought. I did search your site and read a small amount on this but perhaps you know of other sites as well.
Please let me know.
Sincerely,
Roi James
From: Patrice Cohen pcohen@pommard.jouve.fr
Subject: Reaction to your product review and other email
Dear Ton,
I've read with interest your review of our Interpol "Stolen Works of Art" CD-ROM and the reactions it brings. We intend to improve our work the way our customers may need it so comments and criticism are very welcome.
I would like to make some comments if you don't mind.
First of all, a minor correction : the product's price is 480 Euros or 498 USD, including shipment fees.
About the capability to check who is accessing the database : I want to bring 2 points :
1) The cd is sold with UPDATES, meaning that if you don't receive the updates you are using old data.
2) Interpol receives a copy of all the invoices and has legal/contract rights to cancel any subscription to any unclear subscriber (of course we reimburse the subscriber). This seems to me a good compromise between two opposite and understandable points of view.
About the pictures and the ratio items/country :
- The data comes from the police. Each country is responsible for the information about stolen works of art they want to send to Interpol.
This explains why we have more or less items per country. However the CD-ROM never intended or claim to be useful to study the world stolen works of art market.
- The pictures comes from the victims. We hope that this cd will help everybody to use more and more the Object ID description in order to provide better information to the police.
- Interpol does not insert items in the database that are too poorly described to be found. It could be easy for Interpol to have a 100.000 items database full of "non useful information". As the database is a tool it need to be as useful as possible. The good news is that since we released the first cd (23 august) some countries already contacted Interpol to let them now that they will send information about more stolen items (some more thousands).
I guess a lot more could be said about it. We, at Jouve, are welcoming your readers questions and we will try to answer all.
Best regards.
P a t r i c e C o h e n
Manager Jouve-Diffusion
Tel : +33 (0) 1 44 76 54 26
Fax : +33 (0) 1 44 76 86 10
E-mail : pcohen@jouve.fr
www.jouve-diffusion.fr
J O U V E S.I.
11, Bld de Sebastopol
BP 2734
75027 PARIS Cedex 01
FRANCE
From: "David Shillingford" DavidSALRNY@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re:Interpol CD
Dear Steve,
You make an important point when it comes to an on line database of stolen art. There are indeed industry sectors (insurance and the art trade) and law enforcement that have differing missions and therefore different needs and they do sometimes pull in different directions. There is, as ever, the need for compromise which is why the ALR is discussing this important matter in detail with the insurance industry (who want recoveries), law enforcement (who want arrests) and the art trade (who want a convenient and cost effective mechanism of due diligence). In fact, discussions were started a while ago and are on going. There are, of course, those who are demanding the service now. Better to get it right slowly than rush in.
One solution is to provide an on line service where the searcher must show good credentials before being allowed access and then can be monitored both in real time and from an historical point of view which will deter searchers from 'turning a blind eye' to possible or probable matches. Technically this is feasible; I think many would be surprised by what information may be recorded when they search a seemingly 'passive' web page. In doing this:
- access would be allowed to those who need it,
- recoveries would continue for the insurance industry (who's backing has been instrumental in the ALR's development), and 3. immediate leads (through matches) and a means of looking back at who checked what (within the guidelines of data protection law) to augment an existing case would serve the needs of law enforcement.
A thief, whether consciously or not, will balance the risk and the reward of a crime. Improving physical security systems is important but history tells us that the determined thief will get through somehow. A complimentary deterrence is to increase the difficulty of selling the item (decrease the reward) and increase the chance of getting caught (increase the risk). Efficient data management aids both recovery and deterrence.
David Shillingford
d_j_s@bigfoot.com
Tel : 212 262 4831
Fax: 212 202-3722
Cell: 917 520 5093
UK: 171 235 3393
Web: http://www.artloss.com
From: riskmgmt@lava.net
Subject: Database Access
Goodmorning all:
I have been monitoring everyone's thoughts and I have to agree with Steve Keller's last. When we conduct insurance investigations and other research, we run into the standard "Access only by Law Enforcement". The last case which I wrote about is completed. However, in the process I contacted the FBI in Washington and was referred to the FBI field office in the area in question. It is a little funny, but not really, that the average field officer is not aware they have an Art Website. And unless the FBI has a case involing a high profile theft in the local community, it is not likely they will have the time or desire to help out investigators locally. But they are the keepers of the data. So, without access to these databases, the investigator locally really has limited resources.
I think I understand the arguments on both sides because of a project I am working on. I am building a database of art and artists from my area. Although most galleries, both public and retail, have been quite supportive, the over-riding question is who will have access to the data that tells people where certain pieces are located. My answer is No ONE! But this is a database of art that is not stolen. And obviously you would want to limit access to location issues.
The issue being discussed here, seems to be about art already stolen. Doesn't it make sense that anyone, down to the level of an individual, should know when something is stolen. Otherwise, the only people who will know is the interpol staffer, policeman, or FBI agent that has no link to the average person or average shop on the street that buys secondhand art. Even a good officer cannot be aware of every case and its inventory worldwide.
My vote is to allow access, if your agenda is to recover the art. As far as the indentity of who is accessing, I dont care...I will give you my name and a business card also! But I dont see the link. Are you saying the people accessing are the thieves? That does not make sense! So what exactly is the issue of who is accessing the database?
Robin Rogers
rogers@lava.net
From: USartcop@aol.com
Date sent: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 17:06:00 EDT
Subject: Interpol CD Rom
To: securma@xs4all.nl
Dear Mr. Cremers,
My opinion is my own personal one on this matter, but it is based on many years of actual experience in this field. On the occasions in which I have broached this subject in discussion with my international police colleagues, I have never encountered one agency which approves of the open, unaccountable access of the stolen art databases to the public without the benefit of an audit trail. The only interests pushing this CD distribution program, to my knowledge, are some excellent analysts at Interpol Lyon, Ottawa, and Washington, some well meaning scholars, some museum authorities, and the art trade industry. My experience with the Art Loss Register,(ALR) is that they will advise authorities that they have had an inquiry concerning a property in their database which was either entered into their database by the investigating officer or within the jurisdiction of the investigating officer, entered by the victim or an insurance company. The physical production of this record is then compelled by a court order, such as a federal grand jury subpoena. Otherwise, there is no "tracking" of inquiries provided to law enforcement by the ALR. There is no invasion of personal privacy by the government.
Yet even in the face of a police report of theft, most auction houses (including the three most prominent) with which I have dealt, immediately alert the consignor of what they characterize as a "Title Dispute". This notification to the consignor as though it were a completely civil matter further complicates an investigation and prosecution. As an example, in a consignment of eighteen paintings, when five are listed with the ALR as having police reports of theft during times within a time span of say, three years, the consignor should be considered to have some knowledge of the stolen property and it is not merely a "title dispute". Under US law, possession of stolen property in proximity to the time of theft is associated with guilty knowledge of possession of stolen property. It has been documented in several accounts of the Quedlingberg Treasure that this property was examined by representatives of both New York auction houses and these companies recommended that the property could only be sold privately, or in the case of one of the "opinions", saved to be the "inheritance" of future generations. Implying that it would be further removed in time from it's theft. Had this property been reported to law enforcement authorities in New York, the eventual problem that arose from the prosecutorial statute of limitations may have been averted. Neither of these auction houses saw fit to alert police authorities. More often than not, persons making inquiries into the stolen art databases are accomplishing several things. They are attempting to discover on most occasions whether or not there is a reward for the stolen property, or in fact, are legitimately performing due diligence before investing large sums of money. On the practical side, the ALR charges a nominal fee for an inquiry to it's database by private parties. The fee for an active, up to date, retrival seems more cost effective than the purchase of the CD Rom which is fairly out-dated by the time of its release.
As previously reported here in this Network, the Cooperman art (insured for 12.5 million) was recovered by the FBI and prosecuted by the FBI, only as the result of a reward inquiry made to the ALR. In some instances, the ALR may be speaking directly to a thief or to a co-conspirator, therefore careful documentation of this contact is crucial. Employees of the ALR/IFAR have been required to testify in criminal court on numerous occasions concerning the records they have produced and the inquiries made by all parties. The ALR does not respond to anonymous inquiries and only provides information concerning queries to their database when there is a "possible hit". The prospect of an on-line, accountable, "smart" database is a commendable one. However, the expenses of establishing, staffing and maintaining such a secure system are indeed, very costly. Mr Cremers, I know that you are personally aware of the difficulties of raising funds for an altruistic cause of this nature. I would personally respond to those who would equate the negotiation for the return of stolen property with the recovery of a human kidnapping victim by saying that I do not agree that the value of a single human life can possibly be compared with any work of art or cultural patrimony, whatever the value of the treasure. By promoting negotiation for stolen property, for some form of compensation, usually money, you are merely creating the market for future exploitation. You are creating the demand side of the equasion. Most countries do not negotiate with terrorists over human life, why should there be negotiation with "terrorists" who threaten to hide or destroy art?
I reiterate, however, that like anything else, this CD would be passed, as CD-Roms generally are, from individual to individual and there is no real way to safeguard an access chain or know exactly WHEN someone has accessed this information, WHICH piece, WHO it is, and in what judicial JURISDICTION (national or international) they reside. It's most definitely not a matter of keeping this information away from the public. I am sure that you would agree that the ability to legally recover stolen property is obviously a great consideration. The data base for Interpol is only 14,000 pieces. Unfortunately it is very, very slow and is usually six months behind because of delays in processing/translating information.
So, law enforcement is asked, "Why not trust the industries to do the right thing and step forward to report those parties who have produced/offered stolen property? It's in their best interest to come forward, right?" Unfortunately, NO is the response to that question. The history of the Quedlingberg treasure and the New York auction houses has shown that even the most reputable of establishments would rather side-step than become involved in time consuming, criminal prosecution or long term civil litigation. It's simply a matter of economics.
Virginia M. Curry
(Museum-L)
From: Wade Lawrence wl@DRAYTONHALL.ORG
Subject: Re: Museum recovering from Floyd
As Hurricane Floyd approached the South Carolina coast, many of us in Charleston -- I can certainly included all of us at Drayton Hall -- had visions of Hugo on our minds last month. We were lucky. We had enough time to prepare our irreplaceable historic resource and our own homes, and the storm turned away at the last minute, causing only a few downed trees. Drayton Hall suffered no broken glass, no water damage, and no other damage to speak of except a detached gutter. Our worst fears did not come true, and aside from closing from Tuesday through Saturday for preparations, storm, and clean-up and the inconvenience of being without power and phones for three days, we are just fine. Our hearts go out to everyone in North Carolina and further north who did not fare so well.
--
Wade Lawrence
Assistant Director, Drayton Hall
A National Trust historic site in Charleston, South Carolina
E-mail: wl@draytonhall.org
Web: http://www.draytonhall.org
From: Mark Mark.Dalrymple@TylerAndCo.uk.Com
Subject: Re: Museum Databases
Louise Hallett's enquiry refers. Art Form provide a superb software package which may be suitable. However don't have their UK contact details, but suggest she tries Directory Enquiries.
From: "Joy Jackson" JJACKSON@city.london.on.ca
Subject: Re: Quick Poll (charge for checking bags)
We do not have a charge for admission - just a donation box. Also, we do not have sufficient staffing to have someone at a coat-check who can watch your coats, umbrellas, etc.
We are considering having lockers (similar to malls & bus stations) that way, anyone wanting to have security can use the lockers, others can simply leave their belongings in the cloak room.
Has anyone else tried this?
Joy
Junk shop 'Monet' may fetch UKP.1.1m on the Net
FROM GRACE BRADBERRY IN LOS ANGELES
A PAINTING bought in a junk shop, but thought to be a Monet, is being auctioned on the Internet. So far, one bid of $1.8 million (UKP.1.1million) has been made for Boats on the Banks of Gennevilliers, which is up for sale on eBay. The picture is being sold by two men from Lincoln, Nebraska, who paid $225 (UKP.139) for what they thought was a copy. Wayne Rankin and Fred Niemann noticed the junk shop while they were collecting a pizza. They were told the picture was a copy, but decided that even so, it was worth considerably more than the asking price. The whereabouts of the original painting have been unknown for decades. Once owned by a New York collector, the picture was then sold to an Omaha country club, but disappeared. A law firm hired to track the painting's history found it in the catalogue of Paris's Wildenstein Institute. So far the painting has not been authenticated. The $1.8 million bidder, Mark Borghi, owner of the New York gallery Borghi & Co, says he will buy the work only after seeing it. Two years ago, a Monet sold at Sotheby's for a record $33 million (UKP.20.3million) and it is thought unlikely that Rankin and Niemann will sell the picture unless the bidding goes higher.
The Monet sale follows a series of astonishing offers on eBay.
(Times of London)
Main Indexpage