Rembrandt "Storm on the sea..." paint chips a fake
tribe
The Boston Herald reported that the US Attorney's office conclusively
found the paint chips given to the FBI (claimed to have been from the
stolen Rembrandts) are a fake. Jailed Randolph resident (held on
unrelated charge),William Youngworth, who attempted to facilitate the
return to the Gardner museum in exchange for the reward seems to have
been shown to be trying to pull a sham, IMO. There's a hell of a lot
more to this story...
Jakewark
The paint chips in question were analyzed in October by Walter J. McCrone, who
may be the world's leading authority on suspect documents, and he came to the
conclusion that they were authentic in the sense that the age, style, and type
of materials are consistant with both Rembrandt and Vermeer -- both painted in
17th century northern Europe and used similar materials. Without the painting
that they were alleged to have come from, an absolute confirmation was
impossible, but this should be kept in mind when thinking over the FBI's
statement as well. Further, a Boston Herald reporter observed one of these
paintings firsthand, and described details that Gardner officials thought were
very promising.
The FBI has steadfastly refused to deal with Youngworth, preferring to
nickle-and-dime him into poverty and imprisonment, perhaps in hopes that he
will bargain with them, rather than vice-versa. The Gardner Museum has
apparently not decided on a policy yet, having gone back and forth between the
Feds and the convicted fence like a hungry kitten. The fact remains that
Youngworth is the single best chance for the artwork's return: while the chips
may not be from either of the two paintings specifically mentioned in the FBI
statement, they could very likely be from one of the other Rembrandt or Vermeer
paintings stolen that day.
Youngworth may be an unsavory character, but I think if anyone is working a
scam here, it's the FBI. They have a solid lead, who was in prison at the time
of the robbery and could not have been involved, and who is willing to accept
no more than the original reward. It's Federal pride and a desire to solve
cases "the old-fashioned way" that has Mrs. Gardner spinning in her grave, and
has Rembrandt's only seascape rolled up in a poster tube in a warehouse
somewhere.
--Jake
tribe
interesting take on this story....I must say that I do not share your faith in Mr.
Youngswotrth's motives. Nor on his ability to actually retrieve those paintings. I
find it highly suspicious that his involvement in this case came only after a very
large reward was offered for the return of the paintings. To allow the press to
play referee in this game of wills between Youngsworth and the FBI is wrong. I
find it a strange coincidence that the Herald has been manipulating their coverage
of this story since the Woodward trial was placed on the back burner. IMO, this
case will never be solved until Youngsworth is positivly id'd as the imposter he is
and the paintings show up at some flea market hidden under a calico cat painting on
black velvet.
Jakewark
>interesting take on this story....I must say that I do not share your faith in
Mr.
>Youngswotrth's motives. Nor on his ability to actually retrieve those
paintings. I
>find it highly suspicious that his involvement in this case came only after a
very
>large reward was offered for the return of the paintings.
I must seperate my faith in Youngworth's ability to retrieve the paintings from
any faith in his motives. I get the feeling, as you obviously do, that he is
something of a scoundrel, and probably did not come by the paintings through
honest and legitimate channels. The reward, I'm sure, is the root of his
offer. This reward, by the way, has been standing for years -- long before
Youngworth and his similarly-imprisoned comrade Connor offered their services
to the Gardner.
>To allow the press to
>play referee in this game of wills between Youngsworth and the FBI is wrong.
I
>find it a strange coincidence that the Herald has been manipulating their
coverage
>of this story since the Woodward trial was placed on the back burner.
If you read the Herald regularly, you will remember that it began covering the
Youngworth/Connor story earlier this year, before anyone outside Elton had
heard of Louise Woodward. The Herald became involved when the Gardner's
impotence and the FBI's refusal to cooperate left Youngworth with few options
to deliver the art and claim the reward. If it weren't for the newspaper, it
is doubtful that the case would have gotten even this far. As it stands,
strong circumstantial evidence has been developed by the paper showing that
there is something to Youngworth's claims.
> IMO, this
>case will never be solved until Youngsworth is positivly id'd as the imposter
he is
>and the paintings show up at some flea market hidden under a calico cat
painting >on black velvet.
Would it be solved if Youngworth were able to produce the goods? I'd say so.
--Jake
tribe
yes, if he were to produce the goods, it would be solved, to one degree anyway. The
masterpeces would be back. I would not trust his account of where ot how he came
into possession of them. As far as the Herald, I am aware that it's coverage has
been going on for a while. I did not mean to degrade the paper...I just am
uncomfortable with allowing a reporter to become a main player in a story he is
writing. No doubt in my mind that Youngsworth is using this reporter, and the paper
allows it cause it SELLS papers. Whatever happened to integrity?