February 6, 2008
New Woes Over Stolen Warhol
Everyone is abuzz about the latest art world scandal, and here's what is known about the life of the Warhol painting at the center of the controversy.
1981: Andy Warhol creates a number of his "Dollar Sign" pieces, using the same theme with different colors and sizes. Medium: polymer paint and silkscreen ink on canvas.The NY Times is painting Beltrez darker than most papers, mentioning his hard-knock life, unemployed status, and recent rehab stint. Apparently Christie's was suspicious when he brought the Warhol in, saying there was "something about this particular art lover."February 14th, 1998: One of the two "Dollar Sign" pieces measuring at 16 by 20 inches is reported stolen from the Martin Lawrence Gallery in SoHo.
Mid-1990s: Brooklynite Jason Beltrez purchases a "Dollar Sign" for $180 at an open-air market in New Jersey, claiming he didn't know it was a Warhol.
February 2006: One "Dollar Sign" is sold for $4.5 million in London.
September 2007: Beltrez brings his Warhol to Christie's after a friend tells him it might be by "the Campbell's Soup guy."
Christie's accepted the painting and contacted the Art Loss Register immediately. The databank of lost and stolen art confirmed it was legit, and now Martin Lawrence Gallery is suing Beltrez, who in turn has gotten himself a lawyer. Beltrez says he's an honest man and is employing the law of the street: "finders keepers, losers weepers." For that, we sort of hope he wins. The law seems to be against him though (experts say the law protects the gallery), and there are some unfortunate coincidences that aren't going to make it easy for him to win. For one, Beltrez was raised near the gallery the Warhol was stolen from, and records show he was still at that address at the time.
No criminal charges have been filed yet but the NYPD is still investigating. Mr. Beltrez speaks out saying, “This country is only fair for people lined in green. I know I’m the good guy.” He also told The NY Post, "This is a civil case, not a criminal case. They're trying to smear me. It's a classic case of a conglomerate trying to screw the little guy." For now Christie's, who say they are a disinterested third party at this point, is holding the painting as the question of ownership goes to the courts.
Our favorite "finders keepers, losers weepers" story about stolen artwork involves the Manhattan woman who found a valuable piece of artwork on the street.
|
I would give it back. It feels like the right thing to do even if it was bought fair and square.
SENIOR MOMENT
The new Mormon leader's eighty.
Sounds uncool
Except to old folks who are gloating,
Seniors rule!
The people that had the painting stolen should give him a reward, and be happy to have their painting back.
if he honestly picked it up at a flea market for a buck eighty, more power to him. i wish i could have such luck!
the guy who plays shananay has a gallery???
This junkie claims to have purchased the painting at a flea market in the mid 1990s and yet the painted was stolen from the Martin Lawrence Gallery in February of 1998. His story doesn't add up.
On top of that, how many people buy paintings at flea markets for $180? Don't flea markets usually specialize in Elvis paintings on velvet for $20? With a story so full of holes, this guy deserves to lose.
My name is Arianna Beltrez, and I am one of Jason Beltrez's children. I am writing because I am thoroughly disgusted with the way my father is being depicted in recent articles and online postings. My father is a living, breathing, human being just like any other. He has a family, friends just like the next individual..just like you do. He does not deserve to be publicly degraded and called a "jobless patsy." Yes, my father is currently unemployed. He is also a homeowner, he also pays his taxes, and he always looks for the welfare of his children and family. Jason Beltrez is a great man, he is kind and caring and a great dad. Why are people so quick to judge him? All he did was buy a painting. How was he to know of its sordid history? Why is everyone so eager to drag him down when what they should be doing is trying to seek out the guy who actually stole it? Its very sad to see that people who have never had the privelage of meeting my dad would be so quick to speak so ill of him. If my father did in fact know that the painting was stolen, why on earth would he have taken it to Christies??? And by the way, it is protocal for auction houses such as Christies to check anything that they come accross against the Art Loss Register. They didn't do so because my dad seemed "weird" or "not normal" to them. And as far as Chris Marinello's comment that my dad is "not your typical Andy Warhol cosigner," I am truly sorry that my father is not a white man wearing an Armani suit Mr. Marinello. I am not trying to offend anyone with what I am saying. All I am trying to do is defend my father from what I feel is some of the ugliest, most disgusting commentary I've ever read in life. Why wouldn't anyone get all of the facts and double check them before tearing an innocent man down? My father is not a junkie, nor has he ever run a prostitution ring. I am thoroughly disgusted with the NY Time's article. They need to check their facts before printing lies or they will get hit with a lawsuit and have to print a retraction.
Also, the idea that he'd part with $180 for some anonymous painting is kind of suspect. In the suit I'd want proof that the purchase was in character.
In Clarence, NY, there is a flea market, where antiques, jewelry, and the odd piece of art, sell for higher prices than $20 paintings on black velvet, of roses, Elvis, or dogs playing poker. That painting would fit in there, and very likely, find a buyer.
Nothing Andy Warhol ever did, is to my taste, so I'd never pay more than a buck eighty for anything he did. But there's my taste, and other people's taste, so what the hay.
I hope this guy gets some big bucks for this painting. Arianna, more power to your dad!
[8] Whatever his defense, the problem is that he now knows it's stolen. That means he can be charged with criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree. I am not a lawyer, but if I recall correctly, the legitimate owner of a work can demand its return according to New York law.
What bullshit
No person on this earth ever paid $180 dollars for a paiting at a flea market in th 80's - never happened - not in a million years.
He thought that enought time had passed after the theft - he is wrong.