Federal Art Theft Charges


Stephen Kurkjian and Shelley Murphy have an article in yesterday’s Boston Globe about the arrest of Robert Mardirosian, an attorney charged with attempting to possess, conceal, store, and sell stolen art. The Boston Herald has a story as well.

The 72 year-old Madirosian had been entrusted with the paintings by his client the thief nearly 30 years ago. This work, Paul Cezanne’s Pitcher and Fruits was stolen from Michael Bakwin, back in 1978. He recovered the work a few years ago, and it was sold by Sotheby’s for close to $30 million.

In a strange series of events, the paintings were hauled all over the world in an attempt to sell them, from Massachusetts to Switzerland, London and Monaco. As the Boston Herald’s AP article details:

In 1988, Mardirosian moved the paintings to Monaco, thinking he might have a legal claim to ownership or a 10 percent ”finder’s fee,” according to a May 2006 affidavit from FBI Special Agent Geoffrey Kelly, also unsealed Tuesday.

Lloyd’s of London was contacted in 1999 by an unknown person about insuring the paintings before sale, the affidavit says, and discovered they were listed with the database Art Loss Register as having been stolen. It says Julian Radcliffe, chairman of Art Loss Register, determined that the paintings were being sold by a Panamanian corporation called Erie International Trading Company, later found to be registered to Mardirosian.

Radcliffe contacted Bakwin and brokered a deal with unnamed agents of Erie, who agreed to return the Cezanne in exchange for the other six paintings. Two months after retrieving the Cezanne, Bakwin auctioned it through Sotheby’s in London for $29.3 million.

As part of the contract, the owner of Erie agreed to disclose his identity in a sealed envelope. A British judge later ruled the contract void because Bakwin ”signed it under duress.” He ordered the envelope unsealed, revealing Erie’s owner as Robert Mardirosian, and ordered the lawyer to pay Bakwin $3 million.

It’s fascinating stuff, and reveals a number of things about the current state of the market. First, the shroud of secrecy surrounding transactions is not productive. Second, import controls are not working. It is just not possible to adequately inspect most of what gets shipped around the world. Finally, how does an attorney expect to get away with this kind of thing? It seems the final straw was the fact that Madirosian’s colleague, Paul Palandjian, got tired of having the stolen works in his own attic and went to the police.

This prosecution is sure to generate a great deal of attention. These works high value continues to fuel illegal activity. The only sure way to prevent it is to erect safeguards in the market place. On one level, its very easy to criticize Mardirosian’s behavior. However, how many of us would think twice about turning over a $30 million work to the police, no questions asked? I would like to think most of us would, but that kind of money must be extremely tempting.

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

7 thoughts on “Federal Art Theft Charges”

  1. It is interesting to note that Mr Bakwin was forced to sell the Cezanne because of the demands of the Art Loss Register, Julian Radcliffe in partiqular, in being paid 10% of market value for recovering the Cezanne.

    In order to register a stolen artwork with the Art Loss Register, the loser must agree to give 10/15% of market value of any recoverded stolen artwork, thus losers are normally forced to sell the recovered artworks to pay the fee of the Art Loss Register.

    Whether this is moral is open to debate, but it does give one food for thought when the Boston Lawyer said he wanted a finders fee of 10%, is he any less moral than Julian Radcliffe?

  2. It cost money to do what the Art Loss Register does you moron. Without them, no one would be looking for or finding anything.
    I don’t see that you have recovered any stolen art lately.
    Why don’t you take up residence with Hugo Chavez?

  3. 10 percent to recover stolen art? Hasn’t the artwork increased in value enough to cover the small fee? I applaud the Art Loss Register for their work.
    Well done!

  4. I FOUND ART HOSTAGE’S COMMENT QUITE SILLY. CHECK OUT HIS WEB PAGE IF YOU WANT TO SEE WHAT THIS PETTY NUT IS ALL ABOUT. I HAVE SEVERAL LOST ITEMS LISTED WITH ART LOSS REGISTRY AND THEY HAVE FOUND A NUMBER OF THEM. NO ONE ELSE WOULD HELP ME. I AM HAPPY TO GIVE THEM SOMETHING FOR THEIR YEARS OF WORK. NEVER MET RADCLIFFE, BUT KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!

  5. One way to help foster much-needed transparency and openness in the art market and art-recovery realms would be to prohibit the posting of anonymous comments on serious blogs like this. It just cheapens the whole process and damages the debate.

  6. The insurance to keep this painting safe is equal to its value. With such a highly publicised case do you think it would ever be safe in Bakwin’s home again? It was a hard decision for Bakwin to sell it. It was a beloved gift from his parents.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *