VICTIM OF A GOOGLE BOMB
Theresa Franks, CEO of Fine Art Registry (FAR), is a defendant in the upcoming Federal Court trial of Park West Gallery v. Fine Art Registry, Theresa Franks et al. She has spent the past couple of years posting articles about Park West Gallery, which she believes overprices the artworks it sells and sells fake Salvador Dali prints. Since I am the Dali expert who has examined, researched and given opinions of authenticity for those Dali prints before the gallery bought them, she has also targeted me with lies and untruths. I have been the target of a cyber-mugging. Her shameful campaign to slander me and hopefully taint me as an expert witness constitutes what is now called a "Google Bomb". It's somewhat like a neutron bomb. When detonated, it destroys all the people in the area, but leaves the buildings standing.
There is a very good book about the phenomenon. It's by John W. Dozier and Sue Scheff and is titled Google Bomb. It's available at $14.95 and was published in 2009 by Health Communications, Inc. It perfectly described what has happened to me.
The bad news is that such a campaign can be launched on-line by anyone against anyone. If a patient feels a doctor has been wrong in his diagnosis and treatment, a manufacturer has sold inferior goods, an appraiser has given a low estimate of value, a day care center has traumatized a child, a coworker has unfairly been given a promotion, or a girlfriend has been mean, the party feeling injured can totally ruin the reputation and life of the target. The truth is usually a casualty and emotion trumps reason.
The even badder news is that there is very little that can be done about it. We have a 200 year history of protecting free speech. Free speech activists have been known to jump all over someone trying to defend themselves against a Google Bomb and have made it far worse. Judges are very loath to order that postings (no matter how scurrilous) be taken off the Web. Lawsuits may result in a cash payment, but the lies may remain on-line....forever.
I have been especially constrained in defending myself because I am an independent expert witness in the Federal Court case and a later Michigan state court case. As a disinterested third party, even as the most experienced and only independent Dali expert, I must not appear to be an advocate or take sides against a party in a case. It's been difficult to post some truths about Theresa Franks and Fine Art Registry in an attempt to defend myself without appearing to be a party to the larger controversies that I must address in court.
When Franks rants on and on about my being on the Park West payroll, I must wait until court to face that accusation (I'm not). When she writes (with Bruce Hochman's help) that I lie about having appraised the collection of The Salvador Dali Museum three times, I cannot do much other than get a letter from the Museum. I did so, but it was so badly written that I didn't post it because I believe it would have made the museum look bad and it's a splendid museum. When she crows that I am an appraiser and therefore not an authenticator, I must wait until court to set her straight, even though I have answered that red herring twice in depositions and she was there for one of them.
What has been the effect of this nasty, deceitful and truth-less campaign? When you Google my name, a long list of attacks against my integrity comes up. Many announce that I was sued by Fine Art Registry (a desperate attempt to intimidate me). None posted by FAR or others state that the suit was dismissed.
My practice, based on thirty-eight years of always doing it right and being the most ethical and moral member of my profession, has been destroyed. My livelihood has aways been based on my credibility. Theresa Franks and her followers have robbed me of that. It can happen to you or anyone else.
Bruce Hochman of the virtual Salvador Dali Gallery in California is another defendant. He has spent years defaming me by telephone to anyone who has called him. His attacks have been just as baseless and rabid as FAR's, but they have not been posted on-line. They still constitute a mugging.
Does this mean that I will go to court planning to get back at FAR, Franks and Hochman and hurt them in return? Certainly not. That is not my job. That is not who I have ever been. As an expert witness, it is of the utmost importance that I go to court not as an advocate, but rather as a professional with expert information and opinions that will help the jury do their job of finding what the facts are. I am there to educate the jury, not to help my client (Park West Gallery) win. I am an advocate only for the truth, my opinions, and the process I have followed to arrive at them.
In my many assignments as an expert witness for Federal and state law enforcement and regulatory agencies, private individuals and other clients, I have always testified only to the truth and, since they knew that's what I would do when they hired me, it has worked to their advantage and they have won the cases. If justice prevails in the upcoming trials, my client will win the cases, partly because I have truths to share with the juries and they will do their job well.
If a person has integrity, nothing else matters
If a person does not have integrity, nothing else matters
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
NEWS AND NASTINESS
NEWS AND NASTINESS
Fine Art Registry Rants Out Of Control
It seems as if Fine Art Registry is even more anxious for the Federal Court trial (in which they are defendants) to get started than I am. My motivation is that I am tired of waiting for some truth and sanity to enter the debate about the Salvador Dali art market. As an independent third-party witness, I am looking forward to testifying and sharing the enormous amount of experience and information that I have. I'll even be returning from Mexico a week early to prepare for the March 15 trial date.
Fine Art Registry, and their unbalanced CEO Theresa Franks, apparently cannot wait for the trial and they are doing everything possible to try the case on the Internet through long, ranting postings that bear very little relationship to truth. The reason for this is quite easily explained.
Fine Art Registry and Theresa Franks, to say nothing of Bruce Hochman, another defendant, are terrified of what this trial will do to them. The FAR website and blog have been used by Franks to post as much poison as possible because they are not restrained in the same way they will be in court.
You will remember that following my deposition in the case, they filed a lawsuit against me in an attempt to scare me off. It was dismissed, but did me a great deal of harm because FAR made such extreme efforts to post the news of my being sued everywhere they could think of. Their press release was picked up by lots of newsletters and blogs and appeared over and over. Funny that they have not posted or advertised the news that the suit was dismissed. Remember, "If a person does not have integrity, nothing else matters".
Am I The Founder Of The Chinese Appraisal Profession?
In 1991 I was a guest lecturer at the National Gallery of Art in Beijing, China. My topic was an introduction to the appraisal of personal property. My thesis was that the Peoples Republic did not have a process for valuing personal property, but the economy was moving in a direction that would create the need very soon. I discussed how it is done, who does it, how they are trained and how their work product can be used.
At the end of my lecture I said, "My professional society and I are available to provide help in the development of valuation professionals. Just let us know if we can help." Immediately I was approached by a young woman from the Ministry of Culture who expressed great enthusiasm for us discussing the topic further. Over the next two years we carried on a lively correspondence and even met in New York.
My initiating the discussion did not lead to my teaching appraisal courses in China, but a great many of my colleagues in the American Society of Appraisers have done so since. This is especially interesting now that we are seeing Chinese buyers as major players in international art auctions. For some time, Chinese buyers have outbid others at Hong Kong auctions and are now starting to do so in New York, London and Paris. China is leading the global recovery in the art and antique markets. Obviously, the need for personal property appraisers in China is on the increase.
Another Dali Crook Is Taken Down...Finally
Michael Zabrin, a 57 year old long-time player in the market in fake Salvador Dali prints, has finally been convicted in Federal Court in Chicago. He was one of seven people (including appraiser Jerry Bengis) charged in March, 2008 with trading in fake works attributed to Picasso, Roy Lichtenstein, Dali, Chagall and Miro. He was the first one convicted and charges against the others are pending.
When I was retained as an expert witness by numerous Federal and state regulatory and law enforcement agencies in the late 1980s, I stumbled across Zabrin over and over again. He was the source of great quantities of the fakes that were at the core of case after case.
In the recent action, Zabrin admitted to making 280 sales of fraudulent art on eBay. When prints were returned as "not right", he would wait a few months and then resell them. He pleaded guilty to fraud in excess of $1 million, but not over $2.5 million.
I'm anxious to see how defendant Jerry Bengis of Coral Springs, Florida fares in court. I have a long history with him as a bad player and once, when I was about to testify in a trial, he tried to subvert my testimony because it would harm his niece and her insurance fraud scheme. Another time, he threatened to have his wife Brenda (a lawyer) sue me.
One nice thing about being an expert in the art of a Master whose works are the subject of never-ending fraud is that I have guaranteed job security.
Fine Art Registry Rants Out Of Control
It seems as if Fine Art Registry is even more anxious for the Federal Court trial (in which they are defendants) to get started than I am. My motivation is that I am tired of waiting for some truth and sanity to enter the debate about the Salvador Dali art market. As an independent third-party witness, I am looking forward to testifying and sharing the enormous amount of experience and information that I have. I'll even be returning from Mexico a week early to prepare for the March 15 trial date.
Fine Art Registry, and their unbalanced CEO Theresa Franks, apparently cannot wait for the trial and they are doing everything possible to try the case on the Internet through long, ranting postings that bear very little relationship to truth. The reason for this is quite easily explained.
Fine Art Registry and Theresa Franks, to say nothing of Bruce Hochman, another defendant, are terrified of what this trial will do to them. The FAR website and blog have been used by Franks to post as much poison as possible because they are not restrained in the same way they will be in court.
You will remember that following my deposition in the case, they filed a lawsuit against me in an attempt to scare me off. It was dismissed, but did me a great deal of harm because FAR made such extreme efforts to post the news of my being sued everywhere they could think of. Their press release was picked up by lots of newsletters and blogs and appeared over and over. Funny that they have not posted or advertised the news that the suit was dismissed. Remember, "If a person does not have integrity, nothing else matters".
Am I The Founder Of The Chinese Appraisal Profession?
In 1991 I was a guest lecturer at the National Gallery of Art in Beijing, China. My topic was an introduction to the appraisal of personal property. My thesis was that the Peoples Republic did not have a process for valuing personal property, but the economy was moving in a direction that would create the need very soon. I discussed how it is done, who does it, how they are trained and how their work product can be used.
At the end of my lecture I said, "My professional society and I are available to provide help in the development of valuation professionals. Just let us know if we can help." Immediately I was approached by a young woman from the Ministry of Culture who expressed great enthusiasm for us discussing the topic further. Over the next two years we carried on a lively correspondence and even met in New York.
My initiating the discussion did not lead to my teaching appraisal courses in China, but a great many of my colleagues in the American Society of Appraisers have done so since. This is especially interesting now that we are seeing Chinese buyers as major players in international art auctions. For some time, Chinese buyers have outbid others at Hong Kong auctions and are now starting to do so in New York, London and Paris. China is leading the global recovery in the art and antique markets. Obviously, the need for personal property appraisers in China is on the increase.
Another Dali Crook Is Taken Down...Finally
Michael Zabrin, a 57 year old long-time player in the market in fake Salvador Dali prints, has finally been convicted in Federal Court in Chicago. He was one of seven people (including appraiser Jerry Bengis) charged in March, 2008 with trading in fake works attributed to Picasso, Roy Lichtenstein, Dali, Chagall and Miro. He was the first one convicted and charges against the others are pending.
When I was retained as an expert witness by numerous Federal and state regulatory and law enforcement agencies in the late 1980s, I stumbled across Zabrin over and over again. He was the source of great quantities of the fakes that were at the core of case after case.
In the recent action, Zabrin admitted to making 280 sales of fraudulent art on eBay. When prints were returned as "not right", he would wait a few months and then resell them. He pleaded guilty to fraud in excess of $1 million, but not over $2.5 million.
I'm anxious to see how defendant Jerry Bengis of Coral Springs, Florida fares in court. I have a long history with him as a bad player and once, when I was about to testify in a trial, he tried to subvert my testimony because it would harm his niece and her insurance fraud scheme. Another time, he threatened to have his wife Brenda (a lawyer) sue me.
One nice thing about being an expert in the art of a Master whose works are the subject of never-ending fraud is that I have guaranteed job security.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
REVIEWING THE FIELD SCATALOG AGAIN
REVIEWING THE FIELD SCATALOG AGAIN
What an arduous process this has been. I have long used the name "scatalog" for Albert Field's Official Catalog of the Graphic Works of Salvador Dali because I knew it to be massively flawed. My copy has corrections written in on almost every page and now I am close to completing the painful process of reviewing it from cover to cover. Aaaaarrrgh!
Let's first look at the title. Albert Field loved telling the story about how he asked Dali if there was a catalog of his works and the Master replied, "No, there is no catalog. You will be the catalog." Field then got him to sign a letter asking people to cooperate with the effort. For the next fifty years he worked on assembling information. FIFTY YEARS. Don't you think in that time he would have gotten most of it right? Unfortunately for all of us the result is what I refer to in my book (in progress) Artful Dodgers: Fraud and Foolishness in the Art Market as "the tragedy of Albert Field".
Albert, a very quirky Ichabod Crane who could be very abrasive (but I liked him) postured as an archivist. An archivist is one who collects and preserves information. He also needs to evaluate that information and not just parrot what he is told (frequently by crooked publishers and dealers). Further, to write a catalog of the creations of a multi-faceted artist, one needs to be able to recognize various art mediums and techniques. Albert never did, so he gets them wrong more often that he gets them right. Even his attempts to describe the mediums are all mixed up and incomplete.
When I visited Albert in Astoria, New York--which I did a couple of times a year--he would show me his latest work on the catalog. I always suggested corrections and challenged his designations of originality. When he thought he had the project "completed", he made the biggest mistake of all. He published without the aid of an editor. It's quite obvious to anyone who uses the scatalog, for that's what resulted from his fifty years of work. The tragedy of Albert Field.
That tragedy now has a second generation in the person of Frank Hunter who depends on it and Albert's massively flawed files to give opinions of authenticity on prints attributed to Salvador Dali. Deposition testimony makes it clear that Hunter (formerly Hamburger) knows very, very little himself. He did assist in the writing of the scatalog by producing the indexes which are, themselves, totally screwed up and incomplete. Relying on such flawed information and not knowing much of anything himself, he's going to be in big trouble when he testifies in the upcoming trials in Federal and state court. Yes, they're still upcoming and he's a defendant.
The tragedy of Albert Field has been disseminated by Bruce Hochman who funded the publication of the scatalog because no other publisher would touch it. Albert told me with great rancor that he had never received a penny from Hochman.
Bruce continues to sell copies and represents it as THE authoritative source of information about Dali prints. In court it will be shown that this particular emperor is naked. Unfortunately, like the cyber lies posted about me by Fine Art Registry, this piece of scat will be around for a very long time and people will rely on it not knowing how flawed it is.
How "official" is it? Not very. Dali's "appointment of Field" does not carry with it very much actual involvement and the shameful result was never approved by Dali or any independent scholar, museum of Dali's art or by either foundation. Only my files, based on the examination of over 55,000 prints, can serve as a counterbalance to the harm done daily by Albert Field's scatalog, Frank Hunter and Bruce Hochman.
Need the REAL information from THE expert? 1-800-884-3254.
I send my very best wishes for the New Year--2010--when a lot of the mess in the Dali market will be clarified, even if it won't go away.
What an arduous process this has been. I have long used the name "scatalog" for Albert Field's Official Catalog of the Graphic Works of Salvador Dali because I knew it to be massively flawed. My copy has corrections written in on almost every page and now I am close to completing the painful process of reviewing it from cover to cover. Aaaaarrrgh!
Let's first look at the title. Albert Field loved telling the story about how he asked Dali if there was a catalog of his works and the Master replied, "No, there is no catalog. You will be the catalog." Field then got him to sign a letter asking people to cooperate with the effort. For the next fifty years he worked on assembling information. FIFTY YEARS. Don't you think in that time he would have gotten most of it right? Unfortunately for all of us the result is what I refer to in my book (in progress) Artful Dodgers: Fraud and Foolishness in the Art Market as "the tragedy of Albert Field".
Albert, a very quirky Ichabod Crane who could be very abrasive (but I liked him) postured as an archivist. An archivist is one who collects and preserves information. He also needs to evaluate that information and not just parrot what he is told (frequently by crooked publishers and dealers). Further, to write a catalog of the creations of a multi-faceted artist, one needs to be able to recognize various art mediums and techniques. Albert never did, so he gets them wrong more often that he gets them right. Even his attempts to describe the mediums are all mixed up and incomplete.
When I visited Albert in Astoria, New York--which I did a couple of times a year--he would show me his latest work on the catalog. I always suggested corrections and challenged his designations of originality. When he thought he had the project "completed", he made the biggest mistake of all. He published without the aid of an editor. It's quite obvious to anyone who uses the scatalog, for that's what resulted from his fifty years of work. The tragedy of Albert Field.
That tragedy now has a second generation in the person of Frank Hunter who depends on it and Albert's massively flawed files to give opinions of authenticity on prints attributed to Salvador Dali. Deposition testimony makes it clear that Hunter (formerly Hamburger) knows very, very little himself. He did assist in the writing of the scatalog by producing the indexes which are, themselves, totally screwed up and incomplete. Relying on such flawed information and not knowing much of anything himself, he's going to be in big trouble when he testifies in the upcoming trials in Federal and state court. Yes, they're still upcoming and he's a defendant.
The tragedy of Albert Field has been disseminated by Bruce Hochman who funded the publication of the scatalog because no other publisher would touch it. Albert told me with great rancor that he had never received a penny from Hochman.
Bruce continues to sell copies and represents it as THE authoritative source of information about Dali prints. In court it will be shown that this particular emperor is naked. Unfortunately, like the cyber lies posted about me by Fine Art Registry, this piece of scat will be around for a very long time and people will rely on it not knowing how flawed it is.
How "official" is it? Not very. Dali's "appointment of Field" does not carry with it very much actual involvement and the shameful result was never approved by Dali or any independent scholar, museum of Dali's art or by either foundation. Only my files, based on the examination of over 55,000 prints, can serve as a counterbalance to the harm done daily by Albert Field's scatalog, Frank Hunter and Bruce Hochman.
Need the REAL information from THE expert? 1-800-884-3254.
I send my very best wishes for the New Year--2010--when a lot of the mess in the Dali market will be clarified, even if it won't go away.
Friday, December 4, 2009
IDIOTIC HARASSMENT SUIT DISMISSED
IDIOTIC HARASSMENT SUIT DISMISSED
The Federal Court judge assigned to hear Park West Galleries v. Bruce Hochman, The Salvador Dali Gallery, Global Fine Art Registry, Theresa Franks and David Phillips has dismissed the third party suit filed by Fine Art Registry (FAR) against me as part of the case. Well, duh! This was a lawsuit that mocked the concept of justice, wasted more Fine Art Registry money, failed to intimidate me and served only as a vehicle for Fine Art Registry to continue their cyber mugging of me.
Unfortunately, the dismissal was not based on the case's lack of merit or on the splendid motion we filed pointing out all of its deficiencies. It wasn't even dismissed because the FAR response to our motion was totally unresponsive. The case was dismissed because FAR was way out of line trying to pull it off when they did.
Could they sue me again? Sure, but they'd be very foolish to do so. The suit which was dismissed was an attempt to intimidate me because I'm the expert witness who will testify in the main court case. Theresa Franks and her Fine Art Registry recognize me as the gun that's going to take them out. How? Just by testifying to the truth.
The suit and its charges had no merit at all. A new filing wouldn't either, but it would absolutely cause me to go after FAR in every way possible in defence of my reputation and to fight back at the campaign of slander and defamation they have waged against me in order to reduce my effectiveness in court. I might even come to resemble the Junk Yard Dog (Franks) in my ferocious counter-attack. It would be VERY expensive for FAR and Terry and I have the resources to pursue them. Hopefully we can all get on with preparation for the upcoming trials. After all, a jury won't like hearing that the expert witness has been so relentlessly attacked by the defendant.
FAR made such an effort to publicise the filing of their lawsuit against me that it has been all over the web. More character assassination! I'll bet we'll see no effort by them to publicise that their suit was dismissed.
Oh, by the way, I heard from Bruce Hochman, another of the defendants, following my last blog posting in which I recounted publisher Ed Weston (deceased) telling me about Bruce purchasing a quantity of the fake prints from Center Art Gallery when they were auctioned off by the Government. Bruce wrote, "Another lie from Bernie." (He's always petty) "I can prove that I did not buy any of the fakes @ the Belmont CA auction." OK. So who'se lying--Bruce, Ed or me?
The Federal Court judge assigned to hear Park West Galleries v. Bruce Hochman, The Salvador Dali Gallery, Global Fine Art Registry, Theresa Franks and David Phillips has dismissed the third party suit filed by Fine Art Registry (FAR) against me as part of the case. Well, duh! This was a lawsuit that mocked the concept of justice, wasted more Fine Art Registry money, failed to intimidate me and served only as a vehicle for Fine Art Registry to continue their cyber mugging of me.
Unfortunately, the dismissal was not based on the case's lack of merit or on the splendid motion we filed pointing out all of its deficiencies. It wasn't even dismissed because the FAR response to our motion was totally unresponsive. The case was dismissed because FAR was way out of line trying to pull it off when they did.
Could they sue me again? Sure, but they'd be very foolish to do so. The suit which was dismissed was an attempt to intimidate me because I'm the expert witness who will testify in the main court case. Theresa Franks and her Fine Art Registry recognize me as the gun that's going to take them out. How? Just by testifying to the truth.
The suit and its charges had no merit at all. A new filing wouldn't either, but it would absolutely cause me to go after FAR in every way possible in defence of my reputation and to fight back at the campaign of slander and defamation they have waged against me in order to reduce my effectiveness in court. I might even come to resemble the Junk Yard Dog (Franks) in my ferocious counter-attack. It would be VERY expensive for FAR and Terry and I have the resources to pursue them. Hopefully we can all get on with preparation for the upcoming trials. After all, a jury won't like hearing that the expert witness has been so relentlessly attacked by the defendant.
FAR made such an effort to publicise the filing of their lawsuit against me that it has been all over the web. More character assassination! I'll bet we'll see no effort by them to publicise that their suit was dismissed.
Oh, by the way, I heard from Bruce Hochman, another of the defendants, following my last blog posting in which I recounted publisher Ed Weston (deceased) telling me about Bruce purchasing a quantity of the fake prints from Center Art Gallery when they were auctioned off by the Government. Bruce wrote, "Another lie from Bernie." (He's always petty) "I can prove that I did not buy any of the fakes @ the Belmont CA auction." OK. So who'se lying--Bruce, Ed or me?
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
DALI FAKES ALWAYS FLOAT
DALI FAKES ALWAYS FLOAT
That's right. Fake artworks attributed to Salvador Dali are no different than any other fakes in the market--they never go away. Just like other odious material, they always float to the top and reappear downstream. Even when I have examined a work and written an extensive and detailed report demonstrating that the artwork was not created by Dali, the piece will be returned to its seller and then reappear in another gallery, online or in an auction. After all, dealers refer to the auction houses as "the dealer's dumpster".
At one point a reputable dealer sent me photographs of several drawings that he was considering buying. Good thing he did. All were created by a forger in Spain. He didn't buy them and, I am fairly sure, told the seller why he didn't. They showed up later in another collection that I was asked to appraise. By then, of course, the seller had gone south and all I could advise the victim (who had not taken the precaution of checking the pieces out prior to purchase) to do was talk to his tax advisor about filing an investment loss return with the IRS.
Usually when I see fake Dali prints that are owned by individuals, they say they're going to keep them and possibly file the tax return, but the gallery they purchased from is almost always long out of business. Hopefully it is one of the many that were closed by the Federal court cases in which I have testified as an expert. Sometimes, (seldom) a gallery has gone out of business just ahead of the law enforcement agents. Gala Editions, run by Jerry and Terry Yaker in Beverly Hills, is one such example. One gallery in Georgia changed its name and officers several times before it was finally closed down.
The most extraordinary case was that of Center Art Gallery-Hawaii. After the United States Attorney got a conviction and the president and vice-president went to jail, the US Postal Inspection Service asked the judge to permit the sale of the evidence used to convict Center and its officers. Judge Hyram Fong (one of the best) gave his permission and the Government held a public auction of over 12,000 prints attributed to Salvador Dali. Most were, as I had testified in court, fakes with forged signatures.
When the New York Times called to hear what I thought of the matter, I said, "This puts the Federal Government in the position of being an accessory to future art fraud--but I'm delighted because it gives me guaranteed job security." After that, Chief Postal Inspector Jack Ellis stopped taking my phone calls.
The postal agents stamped a "fake" notice on the back of each print, but since they were framed, the backing paper could be removed and the notice along with it. I have seen many of the fake prints in the market since. Publisher Ed Weston told me that he and Bruce Hochman were supposed to bid jointly (rather than against each other) and split their purchases. He said Bruce screwed him out of the prints and I suggested it was probably for the best. Of course, since Bruce's virtual gallery "sells only genuine Dali artworks," one has to wonder what happened to the fakes.
No dealer that I have ever heard of has destroyed a fake artwork and taken the loss. They seem always to find some other outlet or sucker. I would suggest that right now the rapidly expanding markets in China and the United Arab Emirates might be good places for fakes to resurface. Hopefully I'll be called upon to check them out. I'd be happy to return to both places again.
That's right. Fake artworks attributed to Salvador Dali are no different than any other fakes in the market--they never go away. Just like other odious material, they always float to the top and reappear downstream. Even when I have examined a work and written an extensive and detailed report demonstrating that the artwork was not created by Dali, the piece will be returned to its seller and then reappear in another gallery, online or in an auction. After all, dealers refer to the auction houses as "the dealer's dumpster".
At one point a reputable dealer sent me photographs of several drawings that he was considering buying. Good thing he did. All were created by a forger in Spain. He didn't buy them and, I am fairly sure, told the seller why he didn't. They showed up later in another collection that I was asked to appraise. By then, of course, the seller had gone south and all I could advise the victim (who had not taken the precaution of checking the pieces out prior to purchase) to do was talk to his tax advisor about filing an investment loss return with the IRS.
Usually when I see fake Dali prints that are owned by individuals, they say they're going to keep them and possibly file the tax return, but the gallery they purchased from is almost always long out of business. Hopefully it is one of the many that were closed by the Federal court cases in which I have testified as an expert. Sometimes, (seldom) a gallery has gone out of business just ahead of the law enforcement agents. Gala Editions, run by Jerry and Terry Yaker in Beverly Hills, is one such example. One gallery in Georgia changed its name and officers several times before it was finally closed down.
The most extraordinary case was that of Center Art Gallery-Hawaii. After the United States Attorney got a conviction and the president and vice-president went to jail, the US Postal Inspection Service asked the judge to permit the sale of the evidence used to convict Center and its officers. Judge Hyram Fong (one of the best) gave his permission and the Government held a public auction of over 12,000 prints attributed to Salvador Dali. Most were, as I had testified in court, fakes with forged signatures.
When the New York Times called to hear what I thought of the matter, I said, "This puts the Federal Government in the position of being an accessory to future art fraud--but I'm delighted because it gives me guaranteed job security." After that, Chief Postal Inspector Jack Ellis stopped taking my phone calls.
The postal agents stamped a "fake" notice on the back of each print, but since they were framed, the backing paper could be removed and the notice along with it. I have seen many of the fake prints in the market since. Publisher Ed Weston told me that he and Bruce Hochman were supposed to bid jointly (rather than against each other) and split their purchases. He said Bruce screwed him out of the prints and I suggested it was probably for the best. Of course, since Bruce's virtual gallery "sells only genuine Dali artworks," one has to wonder what happened to the fakes.
No dealer that I have ever heard of has destroyed a fake artwork and taken the loss. They seem always to find some other outlet or sucker. I would suggest that right now the rapidly expanding markets in China and the United Arab Emirates might be good places for fakes to resurface. Hopefully I'll be called upon to check them out. I'd be happy to return to both places again.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
CAN'T SAY MUCH NOW
CAN'T SAY MUCH FOR NOW
It is frustrating these days to be in a position where it is best for me not to reveal too much information or address many topics that need to be revealed in the brightest sunshine possible. Why the restrictions and when will they be lifted?
As I have mentioned in many previous postings, there are a couple of trials which are currently scheduled for February in both state and Federal courts. I am an expert witness in each and have been deposed by opposing counsel. Now it is important to understand what this means.
It means that I have been retained by one side in a dispute to testify about topics in which I have demonstrated expertise and experience. My job is to educate the finder of fact and give information and perspectives that will assist in the determination of guilt and innocence. In other words, I provide information that helps the jury do its job.
It is my job to be a disinterested witness who can give credible opinions. I am not an advocate for the side that has hired me and will be paying my fees and expenses. That is the job of the attorneys. I am an advocate only for my opinions and the process I have used to arrive at them.
While I have served as an expert witness in a great many trials in state and federal courts, my clients have always won their cases. I don't win or lose cases. Why have they always won? It's because whichever side in a dispute hires me, is the one best served by the truth. In the upcoming cases in which Park West Gallery has hired me, I expect they will win because my testimony will be the truth about the authenticity of the Salvador Dali artworks they have sold. Those who claim otherwise will lose because the artworks are real and my testimony will be credible, whereas that of the opposing "experts" will not.
Frank Hunter who inherited the massively flawed Salvador Dali Archives and Nicholas Descharnes, who claims to have expertise because he is the son of Dali's last "secretary", will simply be outclassed by my experience and expertise. Further, I'll have the added credibility of being a trained, tested and accredited Senior Appraiser of fine art. What does this mean? It means that I practice in compliance with standards established by the American Society of Appraisers and The Appraisal Foundation and I am subject to a professional grievance procedure.
With these cases looming, I cannot now address a lot of topics that I'll be free to talk about afterwards. In addition, since I have been sued by one of the defendants in the Federal Court case (Fine Art Registry), I should say little at this time. The suit is totally bogus and will, I am confident, be dismissed. How stupid to think you can intimidate the opposing side's expert witness by filing a lawsuit based on made up charges that are based on no evidence!
I shall continue to keep you posted, however and will share lots of interesting and important information about Salvador Dali and his art because, after all, that's why most people read this blog.
I am very grateful to those who do follow these postings, with the exception of Bruce Hochman who harasses me almost every time I post. Please tell your friends about this site. If you are an appraiser, be sure to use my services whenever you are appraising a Dali artwork. I provide the most information you van find anywhere and I'm always happy to discuss and explain the anomalies that always arise when you are dealing with artworks attributed to Dali.
It is frustrating these days to be in a position where it is best for me not to reveal too much information or address many topics that need to be revealed in the brightest sunshine possible. Why the restrictions and when will they be lifted?
As I have mentioned in many previous postings, there are a couple of trials which are currently scheduled for February in both state and Federal courts. I am an expert witness in each and have been deposed by opposing counsel. Now it is important to understand what this means.
It means that I have been retained by one side in a dispute to testify about topics in which I have demonstrated expertise and experience. My job is to educate the finder of fact and give information and perspectives that will assist in the determination of guilt and innocence. In other words, I provide information that helps the jury do its job.
It is my job to be a disinterested witness who can give credible opinions. I am not an advocate for the side that has hired me and will be paying my fees and expenses. That is the job of the attorneys. I am an advocate only for my opinions and the process I have used to arrive at them.
While I have served as an expert witness in a great many trials in state and federal courts, my clients have always won their cases. I don't win or lose cases. Why have they always won? It's because whichever side in a dispute hires me, is the one best served by the truth. In the upcoming cases in which Park West Gallery has hired me, I expect they will win because my testimony will be the truth about the authenticity of the Salvador Dali artworks they have sold. Those who claim otherwise will lose because the artworks are real and my testimony will be credible, whereas that of the opposing "experts" will not.
Frank Hunter who inherited the massively flawed Salvador Dali Archives and Nicholas Descharnes, who claims to have expertise because he is the son of Dali's last "secretary", will simply be outclassed by my experience and expertise. Further, I'll have the added credibility of being a trained, tested and accredited Senior Appraiser of fine art. What does this mean? It means that I practice in compliance with standards established by the American Society of Appraisers and The Appraisal Foundation and I am subject to a professional grievance procedure.
With these cases looming, I cannot now address a lot of topics that I'll be free to talk about afterwards. In addition, since I have been sued by one of the defendants in the Federal Court case (Fine Art Registry), I should say little at this time. The suit is totally bogus and will, I am confident, be dismissed. How stupid to think you can intimidate the opposing side's expert witness by filing a lawsuit based on made up charges that are based on no evidence!
I shall continue to keep you posted, however and will share lots of interesting and important information about Salvador Dali and his art because, after all, that's why most people read this blog.
I am very grateful to those who do follow these postings, with the exception of Bruce Hochman who harasses me almost every time I post. Please tell your friends about this site. If you are an appraiser, be sure to use my services whenever you are appraising a Dali artwork. I provide the most information you van find anywhere and I'm always happy to discuss and explain the anomalies that always arise when you are dealing with artworks attributed to Dali.
Friday, November 6, 2009
THE MOST EXPERIENCED EXPERT
The upcoming trials which will examine portions of the Salvador Dali print market will also pit me against the so-called "experts" Nicholas Descharnes (Mini Me to Robert Descharnes) and Frank Hunter (Mini Me To Albert Field). Testimony will show that while those two men have very, very little actual personal eperience with Salvador Dali artworks, my record is full and rich.
In addition to examining and appraising over 55,000 prints attributed to Dali, I have had the experience listed below. This should demonstrate who the true expert is.
BERNARD EWELL CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR DALÍ ACTIVITIES
1987 – Meetings with A. Reynolds and Eleanor Morse
1987 – Appraised collection of The Salvador Dalí Museum
1987 – Worked on 60 Minutes telecast with Mike Wallace
1987 – New Mexico v. Cavens and Shelby Fine Art - Expert Witness
1988 – FTC v. Austin Galleries - Expert Witness
1988 – FTC v. Magui Publishing - Expert Witness
1988 – FTC v. Federal Sterling Galleries - Expert Witness
1988 – US Navy v. Patrician Galleries - Expert Witness
1988 – US Air Force v. Artco Group, Inc. - Expert Witness
1989 – California v. Upstairs Gallery - Expert Witness
1990 – US v. Michael Zabrin - Expert Witness
1990 – Wisconsin v. Philips A. Koss et al. - Expert Witness
1992 – Publication of Lee Catterall’s The Great Dalí Art Fraud… (numerous references to me)
1993 – Appraised collection of The Salvador Dalí Museum
1993 – House v. Merrimack Fire Insurance Co., Broward County, Fla. - Expert Witness
1993 – Rock v. Burrows, Wayne County, Michigan - Expert Witness
1993 – Wynner v. Fire Insurance Exchange - Expert Witness
1996 – Marine Office of Am. V. Joan Wilcox dba Universal Fine Arts - Expert Witness
1998 – Visit to Albaretto Collection, Turin, Italy
1998 – Visit to Pierre Argillet at Chateau Vaux-le-Penil, Malun, France
1998 – Appraised the collection of The Salvador Dalí Museum
1990 – U.S. v. Center Art Galleries-Hawaii - Expert Witness
2002 – Visit to Fundacio Gala-Salvador Dalí, Figures, Spain
2002 – Visit to Casa Dalí and Castle of Pubol, Cadaques, Spain
2004 – Visit to Fundacio Gala-Salvador Dalí, Figures, Spain
2004 – Visit to Casa Dalí and Castle of Pubol, Cadaques, Spain
2004 – Visits to private Dalí collections in Catalonia
2004 – Persistence and Memory Centennial seminar at The Salvador Dalí Museum
2004 – Dali: 100 Years exhibition, San Francisco (Bruce Hochman's sale)
2005 – Dali Centennial Exhibition, Philadelphia Museum
2007 – Dalí and Film exhibition, Los Angeles County Museum
2008 – Visit to Albaretto Collection, Turin, Italy
In addition to examining and appraising over 55,000 prints attributed to Dali, I have had the experience listed below. This should demonstrate who the true expert is.
BERNARD EWELL CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR DALÍ ACTIVITIES
1987 – Meetings with A. Reynolds and Eleanor Morse
1987 – Appraised collection of The Salvador Dalí Museum
1987 – Worked on 60 Minutes telecast with Mike Wallace
1987 – New Mexico v. Cavens and Shelby Fine Art - Expert Witness
1988 – FTC v. Austin Galleries - Expert Witness
1988 – FTC v. Magui Publishing - Expert Witness
1988 – FTC v. Federal Sterling Galleries - Expert Witness
1988 – US Navy v. Patrician Galleries - Expert Witness
1988 – US Air Force v. Artco Group, Inc. - Expert Witness
1989 – California v. Upstairs Gallery - Expert Witness
1990 – US v. Michael Zabrin - Expert Witness
1990 – Wisconsin v. Philips A. Koss et al. - Expert Witness
1992 – Publication of Lee Catterall’s The Great Dalí Art Fraud… (numerous references to me)
1993 – Appraised collection of The Salvador Dalí Museum
1993 – House v. Merrimack Fire Insurance Co., Broward County, Fla. - Expert Witness
1993 – Rock v. Burrows, Wayne County, Michigan - Expert Witness
1993 – Wynner v. Fire Insurance Exchange - Expert Witness
1996 – Marine Office of Am. V. Joan Wilcox dba Universal Fine Arts - Expert Witness
1998 – Visit to Albaretto Collection, Turin, Italy
1998 – Visit to Pierre Argillet at Chateau Vaux-le-Penil, Malun, France
1998 – Appraised the collection of The Salvador Dalí Museum
1990 – U.S. v. Center Art Galleries-Hawaii - Expert Witness
2002 – Visit to Fundacio Gala-Salvador Dalí, Figures, Spain
2002 – Visit to Casa Dalí and Castle of Pubol, Cadaques, Spain
2004 – Visit to Fundacio Gala-Salvador Dalí, Figures, Spain
2004 – Visit to Casa Dalí and Castle of Pubol, Cadaques, Spain
2004 – Visits to private Dalí collections in Catalonia
2004 – Persistence and Memory Centennial seminar at The Salvador Dalí Museum
2004 – Dali: 100 Years exhibition, San Francisco (Bruce Hochman's sale)
2005 – Dali Centennial Exhibition, Philadelphia Museum
2007 – Dalí and Film exhibition, Los Angeles County Museum
2008 – Visit to Albaretto Collection, Turin, Italy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
