The Sword AND The Stone (Part Seven)

Blog Table of Contents
Statehouse Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Looking at the Gardner Heist investigation, from the standpoint of those most directly touched by it, in nearly every instance, the investigation has either been openly criticized, or else the first person accounts of people’s experiences with the authorities on matters related to the case cast serious doubts about the quality of the investigation.  And not for the actions of investigators, but for their inaction, along with their imposition of inaction upon others, such as the museum and state and local law enforcement, who might otherwise have an interest or some formal legal basis pursue it.  

Former Gardner Museum Trustee
Francis W. Hatch Jr. 
Gardner Heist investigation critics include: The former head of the Gardner Museum Anne Hawley, a leading Gardner Museum trustee and citizen of the Commonwealth, Francis Hatch, the Director at the Hyde Collection, Frederick J. Fisher, the current security director, Anthony Amore, (although what Amore said was not intended as criticism) and both of the authors who have written well received nonfiction books about the case, Ulrich Boser and Stephen Kurkjian.

Gardner Heist Author Ulrich Boser
There is also a private security systems consultant brought in by the Museum, Steve Keller who was very critical based on his experience being interviewed, along with both eye witnesses who have spoken publicly about their experiences with the investigation, Rick Abath and another witness who wished to remain anonymous have criticized it.  

Also, the Governor of Massachusetts at the time of the robbery Michael Dukakis, and the then mayor of Boston Raymond Flynn. Another critic is a former head of the state police who was a lower ranking officer at the time of the Gardner Heist, Colonel Thomas J. Foley.  A member of the Gardner Museum security team rank and file at the time of the robbery Marjorie Galas, and the experiences of some uniformed members of the Boston Police also suggest a less than thorough and determined effort to find out who was responsible, as has been chronicled by Stephen Kurkjian in his book Master Thieves and in the case of Galas in the Boston Globe.  

Even the founder of the FBI’s own art crime recovery team Robert Wittman has said aspects of the investigation to him “doesn't make sense.”  In addition, a former assistant US attorney, Robert Fisher, who oversaw the Gardner investigation from 2010 to 2016,  “was frustrated by how little spadework had been done by the FBI,” according to Globe Gardner Heist reporter and Master Thieves author Stephen Kurkjian.

There is nary a specific act anyone can point to and endorse as something that the FBI has done that has furthered the cause of apprehending or identifying the suspects to the public on the record.   

The FBI has followed this steady course consistently over a generation without shame, without rancor, without any displays of anxiety, or uncertainty.  “We're solely focused right now on the recovery of the paintings” Richard DesLauriers, Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the Boston Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said in March of 2013.

Before that? Searching for the historical King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table  is comparable to independently verifying the historical attempt by the FBI to identify and apprehend the Gardner Thieves as opposed to recovering the paintings, where there ample proof of a robust and determined effort.  

Over the decades, the FBI made bare mention of the effort to identify and catch the criminals. One exception, was the day after the release of the Gardner Heist eve surveillance video. The video had stirred up a kind of ”Internet frenzy” according to the Globe. Peter Kowenhoven, the FBI’s assistant special agent in charge in Boston, perhaps to dampen interest in the whodunit aspect of the investigation the release of the video was sure to inspire, on the heels of the video’s release said: 
“’The focus of the investigation for many years was: Who did this heist? And we have, through the great investigative work, identified who did this heist, and both those individuals are deceased,’ Kowenhoven said. “So now the focus of the investigation is the recovery of the art.” He declined to identify the men.” Five months earlier The New York Times reported:  “On his PowerPoint, Mr. Kelly showed me that Mr. Reissfelder and Mr. DiMuzio closely resembled police sketches of the two men who had entered the museum,“ showing the FBI’s willingness to identify the men, though not their willingness to name them.
The topic of that portion of the investigation into who did this heist was not discussed until long after it had been declared officially over; the suspects dead, though never identified, and with evidence that might have definitively linked them to the crime, lost.
Two and a half years earlier the Boston Globe reported the determination of the identities of the thieves was not based on great investigative work but on a tip: 
“The latest, exhaustive phase in the inquiry is based on a tip that a caller made to authorities in 2010, according to Anthony Amore, the Gardner Museum’s head of security and chief investigator. He said Tuesday that the tip was so fruitful — leading to the announcement that investigators know the identities of the thieves.” 

This story was couched in hazy enough language that Kowenhoven’s statement was not a total contradiction, for those trying their best to follow along. But it was interesting in that investigators were not claiming to have been pursuing a lead, a lead had found them and it had not only allowed them to identify the thieves, but pointed to the whereabouts of the paintings (or not as it turned out.)


But it did seem to contradict statement made to the BBC’s Alastair Sooke for a BBC documentary called “The World's Most Expensive Stolen Paintings”
Sooke: The FBI now believes they knew who broke into the Gardner that night in 1990. But there are no immediate plans to arrest their suspects.
Sooke to Kelly: What's happened to them?
Kelly: I can't say that.
Sooke: But I mean they're not in jail right.
Kelly: I can't say about where they are at this time. Because the statute of limitations on that actual theft expired in 1995. So if someone were to come forward tomorrow and say they were involved in the Gardner Heist, there's nothing we could do to prosecute them.
Sooke: So they got off.
Kelly: They did absolutely.
Two years later the “Internet frenzy” started by the old regime at the U. S. Attorney’s office was quietly put to rest.  The U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, Carmen Ortiz stepped down in January of 2017. The social media campaign, begun under her leadership,  was halted not with a press conference as when it began or even a press release, but instead, “in response to inquiries by the Globe.”   
“A spokeswoman for the FBI’s Boston office Kristen “Setera said investigators have identified the man, but declined to name him publicly or say whether his admission to the museum is considered suspicious.”
“Investigators have determined the identity of the individual and the public’s assistance is no longer needed,” Setera said.  While other news outlets picked up on the raised reward story no one other than the Globe reported about the person in the video was known, but their identity would be withheld from the public.
The FBI has remained steadfast and unflinching on their mysterious course. However, that does not necessarily mean they embraced the public role that was thrust upon them by the previous U. S. attorney.
Richard DesLauriers, Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the Boston Division of the FBI announced his retirement retired three months after the start of the first social media campaign initiated by the state U. S. Attorney’s office in 2013 in support of the Gardner Heist investigation.  And DesLauriers’ replacement, Vincent Lisi, announced his retirement a week before the onset of the next U.S. Attorney’s office campaign social media in August 2015.  That social media campaign centered on the video of the unauthorized visitor from the night before the robbery. “Lisi’s announcement surprised many who had worked with him,” the Boston Globe reported. 

If these two FBI leaders both with only 26 years of service were optimistic about the social media campaigns and their ability to solve the largest property crime in U.S. History, one or both would likely have stayed on and seen these efforts through.  It is hardly an endorsement of the U.S. Attorney’s command of FBI personnel and resources for their initiative.

But as DesLauriers also pointed out in March of 2013, “a generation of agents have worked on this case in addition to several AUSA's from the district of Massachusetts, and indeed several U. S. Attorneys have worked diligently on this case as well.”

Quite simply, too many have worked on this case for too long for the failure to aggressively not pursue the actual thieves in contrast to the great lengths taken to get back the paintings to be explained by some kind of graft or corruption.  The explanation lies elsewhere.  

by Kerry Joyce

 copyright 2017 

Popular posts from this blog

The Gardner Heist Investigation In The Media (Part VII)

Image
"To Do" Calendar of a Theory Feb 26, 2015 Field test it on the road There was a prelude to the widespread coverage of the Gardner Heist 25 th anniversary in late February. Gardner Museum security chief, Anthony Amore along with the FBI’s lead agent in the Gardner Heist investigation, Special Agent Geoff Kelly met with a storied and respected reporter of the Gardner robbery, former Boston Herald reporter and editor Tom Mashberg, now working for the out of town but nationally influential New York Times. “Investigators were anticipating a wave of interest, and possible criticism, on the eve of the robbery’s 25th anniversary,” Mashberg revealed. After “twenty five years of theories,” as the headline read, and virtually nothing else, the investigators put forth their latest, four years in the making according to Mashberg, but with a lineage dating back to 1997, and a cast of wise guys all dead or choosing long stretches of hard time over freedom and the poten...
Read more

The Sword AND The Stone (Part Ten)

Image
Blog Table of Contents     Retired U.S. Army Sergeant Clyde Conrad convicted in Germany of high treason June 6, 1990 Was there a suspect, quickly known to federal authorities, but beyond their reach? Someone they would have been reluctant to identify publicly from the beginning? One possible suspect the FBI might be constrained from revealing if he were known to be one of the robbers is convicted spy Rod Ramsay.   A Boston native and admitted fomer bank robber, at the time of the Gardner Heist, Ramsay, who was arrested just ten weeks after the Gardner Heist for espionage, was facing a possible life sentence, for acts of espionage he had already admitted to, months before, starting in November of 1989.  As a spy and not a mere robber, Ramsay is someone whose misdeeds might not qualify him for a deal with a federal prosecutor for the return of some paintings,  and he was also someone whose name might not be released to the public for...
Read more
Image
False Facts In Last Seen Podcast Season One      False Facts In Episode 1   Words taken directly from the podcast are in blue.  1. HORAN: “The thieves wound duct tape around Randy and Abath’s heads from chin to scalp across their eyes and across their mouths with only a slit so they could breathe." There was no duct tape covering Abath's mouth. See official crime scene photo above. At a public talk he gave in Bedford, MA, Anthony Amore said:  He [Abath] had to stay like that until the police photographer came "because we needed to get the  m.o.  of how these guys did it."  “We’re Boston police,” [Supervisor Patrick] Cullity told them. “Just sit there a couple of seconds longer; our police photographer is on his way and we don’t want to touch or change anything until he gets his pictures.” —Master Thieves page 59  Later in the same episode the other guard, "Randy," can be heard saying: "I wa...
Read more