marzo 2017 - Daily Interesting News

Daily Interesting News Daily news about generic category, long form, long lenght articles, for all read fan. Miscellanous news, general news, amazing news, story, stories, long articles story, internet story.

ADS

Hot

Post Top Ad

giovedì 30 marzo 2017

Stealing Mona Lisa

03:49 0

The shocking theft of the Mona Lisa, in August 1911, appeared to have been solved 28 months later, when the painting was recovered. In an excerpt from their new book, the authors suggest that the audacious heist concealed a perfect—and far more lucrative—crime.


It was a Monday and the Louvre was closed. As was standard practice at the museum on that day of the week, only maintenance workers, cleaning staff, curators, and a few other employees roamed the cavernous halls of the building that was once the home of France’s kings but for centuries had been devoted to housing the nation’s art treasures.



Stealing Mona LisaAlso on VF.com: How Jacqueline Kennedy brought the Mona Lisa to America. Read “The Two First Ladies,” by Margaret Leslie Davis.
Photograph by Lewandowski/LeMage/Gattelet/Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Art Resource, N.Y.

Acquired through conquest, wealth, good taste, and plunder, those holdings were splendid and vast—so much so that the Louvre could lay claim to being the greatest repository of art in the world. With some 50 acres of gallery space, the collection was too immense for visitors to view in a day or even, some thought, in a lifetime. In the Salon Carré—the “square room”—alone could be seen two paintings by Leonardo da Vinci, three by Titian, two by Raphael, two by Correggio, one by Giorgione, three by Veronese, one by Tintoretto, and—representing non-Italians—one each by Rubens, Rembrandt, and Velázquez.


News. Hollywood. Style. Culture.
For more high-profile interviews, stunning photography, and thought-provoking features, subscribe now to Vanity Fair magazine.
But even in that collection of masterpieces, one painting stood out from the rest. As the Louvre’s maintenance director, a man named Picquet, passed through the Salon Carré during his rounds on the morning of August 21, 1911, he pointed out Leonardo’s Mona Lisa, telling a co-worker that it was the most valuable object in the museum. “They say it is worth a million and a half,” Picquet remarked, glancing at his watch as he left the room. The time was 7:20 a.m.

Shortly after Picquet departed the Salon Carré, a door to a storage closet opened and at least one man—for it would never be proved whether the thief worked alone—emerged. He had been in there since the previous day—Sunday, the museum’s busiest. Just before closing time, the thief had slipped inside the little closet so that he could emerge in the morning without the need to identify himself to a guard at the entrance.

There were many such small rooms and hidden alcoves within the ancient building; museum officials later confessed that no one knew how many. This particular room was normally used for storing easels, canvases, and art supplies for students who were engaged in copying the works of the old masters. The only firm anti-forgery requirement the museum imposed was that the reproductions could not be the same size as the original.

Emerging from the closet in a white artist’s smock, the intruder might have been mistaken for one of these copyists—or, perhaps, for a member of the museum’s maintenance staff, who also wore such smocks, in a practice intended to demonstrate that they were superior to other workers. If anyone noticed the thief, he would likely be taken for another of the regular museum employees.

As he entered the Salon Carré, the thief headed straight for the Mona Lisa. Lifting down the painting and carrying it into an enclosed stairwell nearby was no easy job. The painting itself weighs approximately 18 pounds, since Leonardo painted it not on canvas but on three slabs of wood, a fairly common practice during the Renaissance. A few months earlier, the museum’s directors had taken steps to physically protect the Mona Lisa by reinforcing it with a massive wooden brace and placing it inside a glass-fronted box, adding 150 pounds to its weight. The decorative Renaissance frame brought the total to nearly 200 pounds. However, only four sturdy hooks held it there, no more securely than if it had been hung in the house of a bourgeois Parisian. Museum officials would later explain that the paintings were fastened to the wall in this way to make it easy for guards to remove them in case of fire.

Once safely out of sight behind the closed door of the stairwell, the thief quickly stripped the painting of all its protective “garments”—the brace, the glass case, and the frame. Since the *Mona Lisa’*s close-grained wood, an inch and a half thick, made it impossible to roll up, he slipped the work underneath his smock. Measuring approximately 30 by 21 inches, it was small enough to avoid detection.

Though evidently familiar with the layout of the museum, the thief made one crucial mistake in his planning. At the bottom of the enclosed stairway that led down to the first floor of the Louvre was a locked door. The thief had obtained a key, but now it failed to work. Desperately, as he heard footsteps coming from above, he used a screwdriver to remove the doorknob.

Down the stairs came one of the Louvre’s plumbers, named Sauvet. Later, Sauvet—the only person to witness the thief inside the museum—testified that he had seen only one man, dressed as a museum employee. The man complained that the doorknob was missing. Apparently thinking that there was nothing strange about the situation, Sauvet produced a pliers to open the door. The plumber suggested that they leave it open in case anyone else should use the staircase. The thief agreed, and the two parted ways.

The door opened onto a courtyard, the Cour du Sphinx. From there the thief passed through another gallery, then entered the Cour Visconti, and—perhaps trying not to appear in a hurry—headed toward the main entrance of the museum. Few guards were on duty that day, and only one was assigned to that entrance. As luck would have it, the guard had left his post to fetch a bucket of water to clean the vestibule. He never saw the thief, or thieves, leave the building.

One passerby noticed a man on the sidewalk carrying a package wrapped in white cloth. The witness recalled noticing the man throw a shiny metal object into the ditch along the edge of the street. The passerby glanced at it—it was a doorknob.

Inside the museum, all was serene and would remain so for quite some time. At 8:35 a.m., Picquet passed through the Salon Carré again and noted that the painting was gone. He thought little of it at the time, since the museum’s photographers freely removed objects without notice and took them to a studio elsewhere in the building. Indeed, Picquet even remarked to his workers, “I guess the authorities have removed it because they thought we would steal it!”

If anyone else noticed during the rest of the day that there were four bare hooks where the Mona Lisa usually hung, they kept it to themselves. Incredibly, not until Tuesday, when the Louvre again opened its doors to the public, did anyone express concern over the fact that the world’s most famous painting was missing from its usual place. When an artist set up his easel in the Salon Carré and noticed that the centerpiece of his intended work was absent, he complained to a guard, who merely shrugged. Like Picquet the day before, the guard assumed the Mona Lisa had been removed to the photographers’ studio. But the artist persisted. How soon would it be returned?

The guard finally went to see a photographer, who denied having anything to do with the painting. Perhaps it had been taken by a curator for cleaning? No. Finally, the guard thought it wise to inform a superior. A search began and soon became frantic. The director of the museum was on vacation, so the unthinkable news filtered up to the acting head, Georges Bénédite: Elle est partie! She’s gone.

“Paris Has Been Startled”

Lisa Gherardini, who married Francesco del Giocondo of Florence at age 16, would have been in her mid-20s when she sat for her portrait with Leonardo da Vinci in 1503. Leonardo worked on the Mona Lisa—or La Joconde, as she is known in France—for four years, but like so many of his works, the painting was never completed. However, it had already achieved fame by the mid–16th century, owing to the innovations that had gone into its production—particularly in material, brush technique, and varnish—and its subject’s famously coy smile, which is said to be the result of musicians and clowns the artist kept on hand to prevent her from growing bored.

When Leonardo traveled to France around 1517, at the invitation of King Francis I, the Mona Lisa left Italy, it seemed, forever. The artist died only two years later, and by the middle of that century the painting—purchased for a considerable sum—had entered the collection of the French monarchy. Louis XIV gave the Mona Lisa a place of honor in his personal gallery at Versailles. But his successor, Louis XV, sent the painting to hang ignominiously in the office of the keeper of the royal buildings. However, in 1797, La Joconde was chosen as one of the works displayed in the nation’s new art museum, the Louvre, which is where she remained—save a brief stay in Napoleon’s bedroom—until someone carried her off in August 1911.


The Louvre, after the Mona Lisa was stolen, May 1912. From Mirrorpix.

Paris during the Belle Époque—the “beautiful time” between the late 19th century and the outbreak of World War I—had become an international center for painting, dance, music, theater, and publishing. The construction of Gustav Eiffel’s tower for the 1889 world’s fair had made it the “city of light”—both literally and metaphorically. The city could boast many of the world’s foremost medical and scientific institutions of the day, and Europe’s most modern manufacturing facilities. The face of the future, many believed, could be seen in Parisian leadership in such brand-new fields as motion pictures, automobile manufacturing, and aviation.

This made the disappearance of France’s most treasured artwork all the more unbearable. In the days and weeks immediately following the theft, anyone carrying a package received attention—including, at one point, a young Spanish artist named Pablo Picasso, who, four years earlier, had purchased several small Iberian stone heads that were filched from the Louvre by the secretary of avant-garde writer Guillaume Apollinaire. (Apollinaire spent a few days in jail, but Picasso had the last laugh—he used the Iberian heads as models for his Demoiselles d’Avignon.) Police at checkpoints on roads leading out of the capital examined the contents of every wagon, automobile, and truck. Fearing that the thief would try to flee the country, customs inspectors opened and examined the baggage of everyone leaving on ships or trains. Ships that departed during the day that had elapsed between the theft and its discovery were searched when they reached their overseas destinations. After the German liner Kaiser Wilhelm II docked at a pier across the Hudson River from New York City in late August, detectives combed every stateroom and piece of luggage for the masterpiece.

In the following days, from Manchester to São Paulo, the crime became front-page news. The Times of London declared, “Paris has been startled.” The Washington Post claimed, “The art world was thrown into consternation.” But perhaps The New York Times most accurately conveyed the enormity of the heist when it asserted that the crime “has caused such a sensation that Parisians for the time being have forgotten the rumors of war.” Nowhere, however, did the media cry out louder than in France itself. “What audacious criminal, what mystifier, what maniac collector, what insane lover, has committed this abduction?” asked Paris’s leading picture magazine, L’Illustration, which offered a reward of 40,000 francs to anyone who would deliver the painting to its office. Soon the Paris-Journal, its rival, offered 50,000 francs, and a bidding war was on.

The theft continued to inspire newspaper stories for weeks; any report on the case, no matter how trivial, found its way into print. One of the most popular conspiracy theories suggested that a rich American had masterminded the theft. The favorite candidate was banking scion J. Pierpont Morgan, known for his avid, not to say avaricious, collecting habits, which frequently took him through Europe on buying sprees. When Morgan arrived the following spring in the spa town of Aix-les-Bains for his annual visit, the Mona Lisa had still not been found. Paris newspapers reported that two mysterious men had come to offer to sell him the Mona Lisa. Morgan indignantly denied the account, and when a French reporter came to interview him, the American wore in his buttonhole the rosette that marked him as a commander of the Legion of Honor—France’s highest decoration. He had recently been awarded it, causing some French newspapers to speculate that he had earned the decoration by offering “a million dollars and no questions asked” for the return of the Mona Lisa to the Louvre.

Early in September, after a brief closing, the Louvre was once again opened to the public, and an even greater number of visitors than usual came to gape at the four hooks on the wall that marked the place where La Joconde once hung. One tourist, an aspiring writer named Franz Kafka, visiting the Louvre on a trip to Paris in late 1911, noted in his diary “the excitement and the knots of people, as if the Mona Lisa had just been stolen.” Some even began to place bouquets of flowers beneath the spot where the painting once resided.

What everyone wanted to know—and speculated on endlessly—was where the thief could have gone with what was probably the most recognizable artwork in the world. But the only clues were a fingerprint and the doorknob, which had been recovered by the police from the gutter outside the museum. The plumber who had opened the stairway door was asked to look at hundreds of photographs of museum employees, past and present. Every sighting or rumor about the painting’s whereabouts had to be checked out—and they came in from places as distant as Italy, Germany, Britain, Poland, Russia, the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Japan. But by December, as the trail grew cold, the police had to shift their attention to another spectacular case. A gang of anarchist bank robbers had begun to terrorize Paris, audaciously fleeing their crimes in the first recorded use of a getaway car.

“Our Party Coming from Milan Will Be Here with Object Tomorrow”

A year after the Mona Lisa vanished, the officials of the Louvre were forced to confront the unthinkable: that she would never return. The blank space on the wall of the Salon Carré had been filled with a colored reproduction of the painting. Even that had begun to fade and curl, and many people now averted their eyes as they passed it, as if to avoid the reminder of a tragic death. So, on one December day in 1912, patrons discovered another painting hanging there: also a portrait, but of a man, Baldassare Castiglione, by Raphael.

Occasionally, stories appeared about sightings of the Mona Lisa, including one alleging that London art dealer Henry J. Duveen had been offered the painting. Duveen, however, avoided involvement by pretending that the proposal had been a joke. But another international dealer, Alfredo Geri, in Florence, was astonished by a letter he received in November 1913, more than two years after the painting had vanished. The sender, who signed himself “Leonard,” claimed to have the Mona Lisa in his possession.

Leonard said he was an Italian who had been “suddenly seized with the desire to return to [his] country at least one of the many treasures which, especially in the Napoleonic era, had been stolen from Italy.” (The fact that the Mona Lisa had come to France more than two centuries before Napoleon was born didn’t seem to dim the thief’s patriotism.) He also mentioned that, although he was not setting a specific price, he himself was not a wealthy man and would not refuse compensation if his native country were to reward him. Geri glanced at the return address. It was a post-office box in Paris.

Despite his suspicions, Geri took the letter to Giovanni Poggi, director of Florence’s Uffizi Gallery. Poggi had photographs from the Louvre that detailed certain marks that were on the back of the original panel; no forger could be aware of these. At Poggi’s suggestion, Geri invited the seller to Florence, but Leonard proved to be an elusive figure. More than once, he set a date for his arrival and then sent a letter canceling the meeting. Geri came to assume that it was all a hoax, until on December 9 he received a telegram from Leonard saying that he was in Milan and would be in Florence on the following day. The news was inconvenient, since Poggi had gone on a trip to Bologna. Geri sent Poggi an urgent telegram: our party coming from milan will be here with object tomorrow. need you here. please respond. geri. Poggi wired back that he could not arrive by the following day, but would be in Florence the day after that, a Thursday.

Geri prepared to stall. When a thin young man wearing a suit and tie, with a handsome mustache, arrived at the dealer’s gallery the next day, Geri showed him into his office and pulled down the blinds. Eagerly, he asked him where he was holding the painting. Leonard replied that it was in the hotel where he was staying. When questioned about the authenticity of the painting, Leonard replied, according to Geri’s account, “We are dealing with the real Mona Lisa. I have good reason to be sure.” Leonard coolly declared that he was certain because he had taken the painting from the Louvre himself. Had he worked alone?, Geri asked. Leonard seemed to be hiding something. According to Geri, he “was not too clear on that point. He seemed to say yes, but didn’t quite do so, [but his answer was] more ‘yes’ than ‘no.’”

Nevertheless, the discussion got down to the reward. According to Geri, the thief boldly asked for 500,000 lire. That was the equivalent of $100,000 and quite a fortune, though some newspapers had estimated the painting’s value at roughly five million dollars. Geri, holding his breath, thought that he had better agree, so he said, “That’s fine. That’s not too high.” They made a plan to meet the following day.

The next afternoon, after arriving 15 minutes late, Leonard was introduced to Poggi. To Geri’s relief, the two men “shook hands enthusiastically, Leonard saying how glad he was to be able to shake the hand of the man to whom was entrusted the artistic patrimony of Florence.” As the three of them left the gallery, “Poggi and I were nervous,” Geri recalled. “Leonard, by contrast, seemed indifferent.”


Mug shots of Vincenzo Perugia, the man accused of taking the Mona Lisa. From Rue des Archives/The Granger Collection.
Leonard took them to the Hotel Tripoli-Italia, on the Via de’ Panzani, only a few blocks from the Duomo. Leonard’s small room was on the third floor. Inside, he took from under the bed a small trunk made of white wood. When he opened the lid, Geri was dismayed. It was filled with “wretched objects: broken shoes, a mangled hat, a pair of pliers, plastering tools, a smock, some paint brushes, and even a mandolin.” Calmly, Leonard removed these one by one and tossed them onto the floor. Surely, Geri thought, this was not where the Mona Lisa had been hidden for the past 28 months. He peered inside but saw nothing more.

Then Leonard lifted what had seemed to be the bottom of the trunk. Underneath was an object wrapped in red silk. Leonard took it to the bed and removed the covering. “To our astonished eyes,” Geri recalled, “the divine Mona Lisa appeared, intact and marvelously preserved.” They carried the painting to a window, where it took Poggi little time to determine its authenticity. Even the Louvre’s catalogue number and stamp on the back checked out.


Perugia’s hotel in Florence. From Roger-Viollet/The Image Works.
Geri’s heart was pounding, but he forced himself to remain calm. He and Poggi explained that the painting had to be transported to the Uffizi Gallery for further tests. The painting was re-wrapped in the red silk, and the three men went downstairs. As they were passing through the lobby, however, the concierge stopped them. Suspiciously, he pointed to the package and asked what it was. He obviously thought it was the hotel’s property, but Geri and Poggi, showing their credentials, vouched for Leonard, and the concierge let them pass.

At the Uffizi, Poggi compared sections of the painting with close-up photographs that had been taken at the Louvre. There was a small vertical crack in the upper-left-hand part of the panel, matching the one in the photos. Most telling of all was the pattern of craquelure, cracks in the paint that had appeared as the surface dried and aged. A forger could make craquelure appear on a freshly painted object, but no one could duplicate the exact pattern of the original. There could be no further doubt, Poggi concluded: the Mona Lisa had been recovered.

Poggi and Geri then explained to Leonard that it would be best to leave the painting at the Uffizi. They would have to get further instructions from the government; they themselves could not authorize the payment he deserved.

The Uffizi was an awesome setting, and Leonard must have felt overwhelmed by their arguments. How could he doubt two men of such standing and integrity? He did mention that he was finding it a bit expensive to stay in Florence. Yes, they understood. He would be well rewarded, and soon. They shook his hand warmly and congratulated him on his patriotism. As soon as he left, Geri and Poggi notified the authorities. Not long after Leonard returned to his hotel room, he answered a knock at the door and found two policemen there to arrest him. He was, they said, quite astonished.

When a reporter telephoned a curator of the Louvre to tell him the news, the Frenchman, in the middle of his dinner, said it was impossible and hung up. The following day, December 12, 1913, the museum issued a cautious statement: “The curators of the Louvre … wish to say nothing until they have seen the painting.” But when the Italian government made an official announcement confirming Poggi’s assessment, on December 13, the French ambassador made calls on the prime minister and foreign minister of Italy to offer his government’s gratitude. After disagreement within the Italian Parliament about whether the painting should be returned, the minister of public education put the argument to rest. “The Mona Lisa will be delivered to the French Ambassador with a solemnity worthy of Leonardo da Vinci and a spirit of happiness worthy of Mona Lisa’s smile,” he announced. “Although the masterpiece is dear to all Italians as one of the best productions of the genius of their race, we will willingly return it to its foster country … as a pledge of friendship and brotherhood between the two great Latin nations.”

After a triumphal tour through Italy, on January 4, 1914, the Mona Lisa resumed its old place on the wall of the Salon Carré. It had been gone for two years and four and a half months. In the next two days, more than 100,000 people filed past, welcoming back one of Paris’s most famous icons.

The Patriot

The young thief known as Leonard had been born Vincenzo Perugia, in 1881, in a village near Lake Como, in Italy. Having moved to France as a young man, the aspiring artist settled for work as a housepainter. Perugia had very briefly worked at the Louvre, from October 1910 to January 1911, and, it was discovered, even claimed to have helped craft the protective box that encased the Mona Lisa. By the time he stood trial for his crime, in Florence in June 1914, the thief’s hopes of receiving a reward for returning the painting to his native country had been finally dashed.

Alfredo Geri, on the other hand, collected the 25,000 francs that had been offered by Les Amis du Louvre, a society of wealthy art-lovers, for information leading to the return of the painting. The grateful French government also bestowed upon him the Legion of Honor, as well as the title “officier de l’instruction publique.” Geri showed what were perhaps his true colors when he promptly turned around and sued the French government for 10 percent of the value of the Mona Lisa. His contention was based on a Gallic tradition that gave the finder of lost property a reward of one-tenth the value of the object. In the end, a court decided that the painting was beyond price and that Geri had only acted as an honest citizen should. He received no further reward.

Perugia, meanwhile, was growing depressed in jail. Guards reported that he occasionally wept. But by the time his trial began, on June 4, he was again calm and self-possessed, insisting that he had acted as a patriot. Since there was no question of guilt, the legal proceedings functioned more like an inquest intended to establish the truth, if such a thing were possible. Three judges presided in a large room in Florence’s stunning Romanesque Palazzo Vecchio, which had been remodeled to provide space for journalists from around the world. (The French government never attempted to extradite Perugia.) The designer of the room had placed on a cushion, in the middle of a semicircle, a massive silver hemisphere that symbolized justice. A cynical journalist remarked that it would not be prudent to allow the defendant to sit too close to this artistic treasure.

Perugia, now 32 years old, was handcuffed when he entered the courtroom at nine a.m. Nattily dressed in a suit and tie, he smiled graciously at the photographers. Like everyone else, the chief judge was curious to learn how this apparently humble man could have carried out such an audacious crime. Could Perugia describe what happened on August 21, 1911, when he stole the Mona Lisa? Somewhat eagerly, Perugia asked if he could also explain why he had committed the crime, but the chief judge told him that he must do that later. For now, he wanted a description of the act itself.

Perugia offered an abbreviated version that contradicted both his account to Geri and the Paris Prefecture of Police’s reconstruction of the crime. He claimed to have entered the Louvre through the front door early that Monday, wandered through various rooms, taken the Mona Lisa from its place on the wall, and left the same way. A judge pointed out that, during the pre-trial interrogations, Perugia had admitted trying to force the door at the bottom of the little stairwell that led to the Cour du Sphinx. Perugia had no answer for this, and the judge did not press him for one.

It is difficult to understand why Perugia changed his story, or even why he did not tell the full truth about how he had entered and left the museum, given the fact that he freely confessed to the crime itself. Perhaps he was afraid of implicating others, but certainly the motive that he had concocted for himself—that he was a patriot reclaiming one of Italy’s treasures—would have sounded better if he had been the sole actor in this drama.

When Perugia was asked why he had stolen the Mona Lisa, he responded that all the Italian paintings in the Louvre were stolen works, taken from their rightful home—Italy. When asked how he knew this, he said that when he had worked at the Louvre he had found documents that proved it. He remembered in particular a book with prints that showed “a cart, pulled by two oxen; it was loaded with paintings, statues, other works of art. Things that were leaving Italy and going to France.”

Was that when he decided to steal the Mona Lisa? Not exactly, Perugia replied. First he considered the paintings of Raphael, Correggio, Giorgione, and other great masters. “But I decided on the Mona Lisa, which was the smallest painting and the easiest to transport.”

“So there was no chance,” asked the court, “that you decided on it because it was the most valuable painting?”


The Mona Lisa on display in the Uffizi Gallery, in Florence, December 1913. Museum director Giovanni Poggi (right) inspects the painting. From Roger-Viollet/The Image Works.
“No, sir, I never acted with that in mind. I only desired that this masterpiece would be put in its place of honor here in Florence.”

A judge then interrupted to play one of the prosecution’s trump cards: “Is it true,” he asked, “that you tried to sell the Mona Lisa in England?”

Accounts of the trial say that this was one of the few moments when Perugia lost his composure. He glared around the courtroom, clenching his fists as if to do battle with his accusers.

“Me? I offered to sell the Mona Lisa to the English? Who says so? It’s false!”

The chief judge pointed out that “it is you yourself who said so, during one of your examinations which I have right here in front of me.”

Unable to deny that, Perugia claimed, “Duveen didn’t take me seriously. I protest against this lie that I would have wanted to sell the painting to London. I wanted to take it back to Italy, and to return it to Italy, and that is what I did.”

“Nevertheless,” said one of the judges, “your unselfishness wasn’t total—you did expect some benefit from restoration.”

“Ah benefit, benefit,” Perugia responded—“certainly something better than what happened to me here.”

That drew a laugh from the spectators. The next day, the chief judge announced a sentence for Perugia of one year and fifteen days. As he was led out of the courtroom, he was heard to say, “It could have been worse.”

It actually got better. The following month, Perugia’s attorneys presented arguments for an appeal. This time, the court was more lenient, reducing the sentence to seven months. Perugia had already been incarcerated nine days longer than that since his arrest, so he was released. A crowd had gathered to greet him as he left the courthouse. Someone asked him where he would go now, and he said he would return to the hotel where he had left his belongings. When he did, however, he found that the establishment’s name had changed. No longer was it the Tripoli-Italia; now it was the Hotel La Gioconda—and it was too fancy to admit a convicted criminal. Perugia’s lawyers had to vouch for him before the staff would give him a room.

But most spectators had already moved on. Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria had recently been assassinated in his touring car in the streets of Sarajevo. Soon the nations of Europe would be at war, and Perugia’s crime—and the ensuing hysteria—would seem rather trivial by comparison.

The Mastermind

In January 1914, months before Perugia’s trial began, a veteran American newspaperman named Karl Decker was on assignment in Casablanca. While having a drink with an elegant confidence man who went by the name Eduardo, he overheard an interesting story that would shed new light on the disappearance of the Mona Lisa. Eduardo had many aliases, but to his associates he was known as the Marqués de Valfierno or the “Marquis of the Vale of Hell.” With a white mustache and wavy white hair, he looked the part. He had, wrote Decker, “a distinction that would have taken him past any royal-palace gate in Europe.”

Decker had crossed paths with Valfierno in a number of exotic places, and the two had developed a friendship. After the police arrested Vincenzo Perugia, Valfierno commented casually to Decker that Perugia was “that simp who helped us get the Mona Lisa.” When Decker pressed him for details, Valfierno offered to confide his version of the events as long as the journalist promised not to publish them until he gave permission, or died. It was the latter event that allowed Decker to reveal what he had been told, nearly 20 years later, in 1932, in The Saturday Evening Post.

After years of success selling fake artworks, Valfierno moved his operation from Buenos Aires to Paris, where, he said, “thousands of Corots, Millets, even Titians and Murillos, were being sold in the city every year, all of them fakes.” He added people to his organization, including a well-connected American whom he refused to name. Valfierno was selective in choosing those he wished to fleece, concentrating on wealthy Americans who could pay highly for “masterpieces” that had supposedly been stolen from the Louvre.

But Valfierno and his gang never took anything from the Louvre. “We didn’t have to,” he said. “We sold our cleverly executed copies, and … sent [the buyers] forged documents [that] told of the mysterious disappearance from the Louvre of some gem of painting or world-envied objet d’art.… The documents always stated that in order to avoid scandal a copy had been temporarily substituted by the museum authorities.”

Eventually, Valfierno peddled the ultimate prize: the Mona Lisa itself, in June 1910. Not the genuine painting, but a forged copy, along with forged official papers that convinced the buyer (an American millionaire) that, in order to cover the theft, Louvre officials had hung a replica in the Salon Carré. The buyer, unfortunately, had been a little too free in bragging about his new acquisition, which prompted the newspaper Le Cri de Paris to publish an article—a year before the actual theft—stating that the Mona Lisa had been stolen.

Still, it had been a disturbing experience, one that Valfierno was determined to avoid a second time: “The next trip, we decided, there must be no chance for recriminations. We would steal—actually steal—the Louvre Mona Lisa and assure the buyer beyond any possibility of misunderstanding that the picture delivered to him was the true, the authentic original.”

Valfierno never intended to sell the real painting. “The original would be as awkward as a hot stove,” he told Decker. The plan would be to create a copy and ship it overseas before stealing the original. “The customs would pass it without a thought, copies being commonplace and the original still being in the Louvre.” After the Mona Lisa had been stolen, the imitation could be taken out and sold to a buyer who was convinced he was getting the missing masterpiece.

“We began our selling campaign,” recalled Valfierno, “and the first deal went through so easily that the thought ‘Why stop with one?’ naturally arose. There was no limit in theory to the fish we might hook.” Valfierno stopped with six American millionaires. “Six were as many as we could both land and keep hot,” he told Decker. The forger then carefully produced the six copies, which were sent to America and kept waiting for the proper time to be delivered. Valfierno said that an antique bed, made of Italian walnut, “seasoned by time to the identical quality of that on which the Mona Lisa was painted” provided the panels that the forger painted on.

Now came what Valfierno thought was the easy part: “Stealing the Mona Lisa was as simple as boiling an egg in a kitchenette,” he told Decker. “Our success depended upon one thing—the fact that a workman in a white blouse in the Louvre is as free from suspicion as an unlaid egg.” Recruiting someone—Perugia—who actually had worked in the Louvre was helpful because he knew the secret rooms and staircases that employees used.

Perugia did not act alone, Valfierno said. He had two accomplices who were needed to lift the painting, with its heavy protective container and frame, from the wall and carry it to a place where the frame could be removed. Valfierno did not name them either.

The one hitch in the plan was that Perugia had failed to test the duplicate key Valfierno ordered to be made for the door at the bottom of the staircase. At the moment he needed it, the key failed to turn the lock. While he was removing the doorknob, the trio heard footsteps from above, and Perugia’s two accomplices hid themselves. The plumber appeared but, seeing only one man in a white smock, had no reason to be suspicious. He opened the door and went on his way, soon followed by Perugia and the other two thieves. At the vestibule, the guard stationed there had temporarily abandoned his post.

An automobile waited for the thieves and took them to Valfierno’s headquarters, where the gang celebrated “the most magnificent single theft in the history of the world.” Now the six copies that had been sent to the United States could be delivered to the purchasers. Because each of the six collectors thought he was receiving stolen merchandise, he could not publicize his acquisition—or even complain should he suspect it wasn’t the genuine article.

Perugia was paid well for his part in the scheme. However, he squandered the money on the Riviera, and then, knowing where Valfierno had hidden the real Mona Lisa, stole it a second time. “The poor fool had some nutty notion of selling it,” Valfierno told Decker. “He had never realized that selling it, in the first place, was the real achievement, requiring an organization and a finesse that was a million miles beyond his capabilities.”

What about the copies?, Decker wanted to know. Someday, speculated Valfierno, all of them would reappear. “Without those, there are already thirty Mona Lisas in the world,” he said. “Every now and then a new one pops up. I merely added to the gross total.”

Characteristically, perhaps, reports of the date of Perugia’s death vary. It is known, however, that he died in France—an odd end point for a man who had once so vehemently asserted his Italian patriotism. Whatever secrets he knew about the theft were carried to the grave. The Decker account is the sole source for the existence of Valfierno and this version of the theft of the Mona Lisa. There is no external confirmation for it, yet it has frequently been assumed to be true by authors writing about the case. If indeed it is true, Valfierno had carried out the perfect crime.
Read More

Brexit heartlands: pro-leave Havering – a photo essay

03:47 0

Brexit heartlands: pro-leave Havering – a photo essay


The London borough saw one of the biggest leave votes in Britain last June and Romford is the biggest town in the borough. Photojournalist Sean Smith and Lisa O’Carroll met some of the people behind the politicsThe London borough saw one of the biggest leave votes in Britain last June and Romford is the biggest town in the borough. Photojournalist Sean Smith and Lisa O’Carroll met some of the people behind the politics


Havering – sandwiched between Essex and London – was one of the strongest pro-Brexit boroughs in the country, with 69.7% voting to leave the EU.

Its population has remained relatively constant between the two past censuses in 2001 and 2011, with a 6% increase in residents compared with a 14% London average, but the population of the main town, Romford, has shot up by 21%, reflecting a glut of new apartment blocks attracting families squeezed out of the London market.

Two other things stand out from the censuses: it has an older population than average for the capital and is one of the two least diverse boroughs in London (the other being Bromley). But in the 10 years between both censuses the make-up of the population has changed, with the minority ethnic population having more than doubled.

Is that one of the reasons why the borough opted so emphatically to exit the EU?

We go to Romford to find out.

Social club
 Members enjoying the music of Larry and the Streamers, who play classic songs from the 1960s
Romford United Services and Social Club was set up in 1921 by the ex-servicemen of Romford, who were in the armed forces during the first world war. The present site was opened following the second world war.

Hillary and Paul Webster, line dance teacher and DJs - Voted: remain, leave

 Hillary Webster and her husband Paul
Married couple Paul and Hillary Webster had what she describes as “a massive fallout” over the referendum after he voted remain and she voted Brexit.

“I think I’ve made a terrible mistake. I’m deeply regretting my decision. I don’t think I was given the correct information. Given another chance in another referendum I’d vote in now,” says Hillary, 61, a line dance teacher at Romford United Services and Social Club.

“I thought we had good reasons for going out. We had a better chance for the future. We weren’t making much of being in Europe. My mother used to say, ‘A pot has to stand on its own base,’ and Britain wasn’t standing on its own base.”

I think I’ve made a terrible mistake. I’m deeply regretting my decision
Hillary Webster
Paul, 59, is more sure-footed: “I didn’t believe the propaganda being put forward by the pro-Brexiters. I didn’t believe them on the amount of money we were sending to Europe. One of the most preposterous things they said was we’d be opening the floodgates to Turkey and there’d be 40 million more in the country. I also felt we’d be more united in our fight against terrorism if we stayed in Europe.”

Nine months down the line, she says she wishes she had listened to her husband. “I think I just went along with the idea of coming out. I thought it would mean new horizons in industry if we were to start all over again. I didn’t think we’d end up with the pound so weak. Nobody said, ‘Be careful, if you vote out, sterling will become instantly weak.’ I’m frightened I made a terrible mistake.”

Snooker club
 The Romford Snooker Club, famous as the club where Steve Davies started his career
The Romford Snooker Club is famous as the club where Steve Davis started his career. We met some friends playing there

Tom Binder, firefighter, 24 - Voted: leave

Binder was born into a Romford family with a history of public service. His brother is a paramedic and both his grandparents on one side were in the police.

I’m a bit nervous about article 50 now being implemented
Tom Binder
He voted Conservative in the last election and in favour of leaving the EU. “My main reason was the point they made in their manifesto about the money we pay into Europe going to be put back into the health service, but straight away after the referendum they said they didn’t actually say that.

“I voted that way because I thought it was going into the public services. I’m a bit nervous about article 50 now being implemented. Does it mean more cuts to the public services? They said they were putting £350m into the NHS. Now we know they were lying. I think I should have voted remain instead, but at the moment I do have faith.”

 Geologist Daniel Jobson with his friend Tom Binder
Binder’s friend, Daniel Jobson, 25, a geologist, also from Romford – Voted: remain

I think a lot of people, especially the media, jumped the gun and said the country would suffer
Daniel Jobson
“At the end of the day there was nothing wrong with the EU, the country wasn’t in tatters. I feel that everybody, especially in this area, voted leave because there weren’t compelling reasons put to stay.”

Does he still think he made the right decision? “I think a lot of people, especially the media, jumped the gun and said the country would suffer. But nine months down the line nothing has happened and it will take a long time before anyone knows what the impact will be. I may have regrets in two years’ time, or I may not have regrets in two years time. Right now, it’s way too early to say.”

Friday night
 Outside the clubs and pubs in Romford on Saturday night
Romford has a night-time economy that is almost as significant as the daytime economy, which is larger than in any other metropolitan centre in Greater London, with more than 100,000 sq ft of bars and pubs.

 Police making an arrest
Police making an arrest
Controlling the huge numbers of people out on the town who might be drunk and getting into fights is no small task for the local police force.

 A young man who had been asked to leave the centre earlier in the evening later found uncouncious after getting in a fight and hitting his head on the pavement
 A man who had been asked to leave the centre earlier in the evening
Police found this young man, who had been asked to leave the centre earlier in the evening, unconscious after getting into a fight and hitting his head on the pavement.

 Back at the police station doing paper work
 A busker on the streets
Back at the police station, there is a lot of paperwork to be done. Right, a busker on the streets
 Police officers moving on homeless men from a shopping centre
PC Pete Kirk has been with the police for 12 years and Michael Price for two years. They have been asked by a shopping centre security guard to move on two homeless men.

The allotments
 Pete Ward at the allotment with Ken Foley. Both voted to leave the EU
We met members of the Hornchurch and District Allotments and Gardening Society. The society has been established for more than 60 years. The society now has 15 sites and almost 700 members.


The stories you need to read, in one handy email
 Read more
Ken Foley, 76, retired - Voted: leave but wavering

Ken Foley (above with Pete Ward) has a plot as large as a mini-farm, tilled and rotovated for the season. He has put 400 runner bean seeds in, with sweetcorn, onions, beetroot, carrots, potatoes all ready to go.

Born and bred in Mile End, east London, Foley worked for Barclays Bank for 20 years as security in hostels it used to house staff hired from northern England.

“I voted to come out, but I’m wavering now, I don’t know if I did the right thing. I think we could come out worse. I thought it would be OK, we’d still have access to the free market, and now we might not. I think it’s going to be very hard.

Kawa Amin, doctor - Voted: remain

 Dr Kawa Amin who grew up in Baghdad but is Kurdish
Kawa Amin, a consultant geriatrician at Queen’s hospital, Romford, came to Britain from Baghdad three years before Saddam Hussein was toppled. Three months ago he landed himself two plots in the local allotment off Fontayne Avenue. He had not gardened before, but luckily he inherited fig, apple and plum trees.

He voted to remain. “I think most of the doctors I work with prefer to stay in, but some of the nurses voted to stay out because of the competition from workers from Italy and Spain. They thought they were competing with them and taking their jobs.”

Having grown up in a dictatorship, Amin is sanguine about the future. “Britain is a very strong constitutional country. Democracy is very deep-rooted.”

I think Europe itself will need Britain. Even if Britain is out, they will find some way to keep Britain close
Kawa Amin
Jim Hamilton, 72, retired software executive - Voted: leave

 Jim Hamilton
Hamilton intended to vote remain, largely to protect his pension. He changed his mind in the last week during a car journey across London that took four hours. 

He has voted Labour for most of his life, but 12 years ago switched to the Conservatives. “I started to lean very much towards Ukip in the last few years,” he says. “We can’t let more and more people in here. It just doesn’t work. The infrastructure isn’t there,” he says.

I don’t think Hammond and May are the right quality of people to do this
Jim Hamilton
“I’m glad I voted Brexit. I think it’s going to be very contentious. One of the things that our Westminster politicians are going to have to do now is make a decision because Brussels does that now. I don’t think they [Hammond and May] are the right quality of people to do this. It’s been easy for them because they’ve been able to say, ‘Oh, Brussels won’t let us do this, Brussels won’t let us do that.’”

He says life has not got better as the country has prospered and he blames politicians. “All the talk was about the future being paperless, how we’d all be able to retire at 50 because we’d be able to afford to and machines would be doing most of the work. Well, now we’re talking about people not being able to retire at 65, young people barely able to get by or scrape enough together to get a home.”

Dot Spendiff, 55, full-time carer - Voted: remain

 Dot Spendiff
Although her family is from Havering and she moved back two years ago, Spendiff considers herself a blow-in. She spent most of her life in Stratford, east London, and says she still sometimes feels as if Havering is stuck in the 1950s. In Stratford, she helped run the estate as it was a co-op.

“I lived with people from all over the world. I’m used to mixing with different types of people. It’s a bit of a shock coming back here,” she says, telling me she heard a council worker use the phrase “darkie”.

“Havering has a got a very high population of elderly people, but it’s changing because people are coming out here because of the housing situation and some people find that a bit of a threat to be honest, but to me it’s normal.”

“I lived in France when I was 19 and I think it’s really educational to go out of your own country and see it from outside. I like the idea of being part of Europe. I’m glad I voted remain.”

Bingo
 Romford Mecca at the Mall bingo night
The 1930s art deco bingo hall in Hornchurch was taken over by Lidl in 2015, and Mecca bingo nights are now held at The Mall shopping centre in Romford. For many, such as Brenda Bargh, the bingo nights are a chance to socialise.

 Romford Mecca at the Mall Bingo night
It’s not generally a young crowd but bingo is fun for all
 Romford Mecca at the Mall Bingo
 Romford Mecca at the Mall Bingo
 Brenda Barge at the Mecca Bingo
Brenda Bargh, 76, retired - Voted: leave

In her broderie anglaise top, Brenda Bargh, 76, is all dressed up for bingo night. She’s been going to the Romford Mecca hall for 18 years.

“I come on Sundays, Mondays and Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays. Tuesday and Thursday I have to clean the house,” she jokes. “It’s not really about the money, it’s my social. The staff are lovely to me and you get to meet a lot of people, we have a laugh. On bingo days I jump out of bed and think, ‘Great, it’s bingo day.’ I don’t know what I’d do if it closed. I’d just sit and mope at home.”

She voted for Brexit because she sensed a decline in the town and its community cohesiveness.

Immigration? It is an issue for some people but not for me. What I don’t like is the people who do the muggings
Brenda Bargh
There’s “zero” in the historic market square now, she says, and the old brewery has been turned into a retail park. “Immigration? It is an issue for some people but not for me, everyone has been kind to me all my life. What I don’t like is the people who do the muggings.”

Market town
 Romford Saturday market
Romford has a large street market run by Havering council. Dave Davies, 57, has run a ladieswear stall in the historic market for the past 12 years and Brexit couldn’t come quick enough for him.

Dave Davies, market stallholder - Voted: leave

 Dave Davies who runs the ladieswear stall at the market
Davies voted Ukip in the general election and voted to exit the EU. Why? “I was fed up with everything really – all the different rules and regulations, immigration – I feel like we’re not in control of our own country,” he says, explaining that his anti-EU feelings hardened after 2004 when Poland joined the EU.

“When they came in it was just loads of people, legal and illegal, it started to get out of hand. The country’s over-populated. It’s too much overflow. I think it’s too late, I think the ones that are here are going to stay.”

I don’t think it’s going to make much that much difference for my generation, but hopefully for the younger generation
Dave Davies
 TJ’s South Side tattooing & Body Piercing. Terry Simpson working on Max ’s first tattoo having done on his birthday
Terry Simpson, 54, and John Norton, 57, tattooists - Voted: leave and leave

 Terry Simpson and John Norton
Simpson is confident Britain has made the right decision. He voted Ukip but says he is a “nationalist” and the party’s views are not strong enough for him. He voted to put a stop to the “open door” policy on immigration and blames Tony Blair for failing to put restrictions in place when the EU enlarged to include Poland in 2004.

“Immigrants have been coming to this country for thousands of years, it’s not about referring back to previous waves of immigration, to the Indians or the West Indians.

“This was just an open-door policy and the name of the people who wanted to come to the country and work and contribute is blackened by those who come and put nothing back, that’s not right, is it?”

His business partner, John, who voted Tory, says he voted out partly because of the European court of justice. “Take Abu Hamza,” he says, referring to theradical cleric who preached at Finsbury Park mosque, “it took us eight years to get him out because of the Human Rights Act.”.

He’s also angry at reports that Britain may have to pay an exit bill estimated up to €60bn (£52bn). “When you get divorced you split the assets 50/50. After 40 years of paying into the EU, Theresa May should be asking for a share of the assets back.”

For 2,000 years we didn’t need them. It’s only in the last 40 years we’ve had to be part of that stupid organisation.
John Norton
Read More

martedì 28 marzo 2017

‘Bro, I’m Going Rogue’: The Wall Street Informant Who Double-Crossed the FBI

23:48 0
‘Bro, I’m Going Rogue’: The Wall Street Informant Who Double-Crossed the FBI


On the night he cut a deal with the FBI, Guy Gentile was on his way to a Connecticut casino for his cousin’s bachelor party. He’d jetted up from the Bahamas, where he was running an online stock brokerage that cleared a million dollars a year without much effort on his part. Then 36, he was a working-class kid who’d finagled his way into the dicier edges of finance, and he dressed the part, with neatly trimmed stubble, designer jeans, a silver Rolex, and sunglasses that hung from the collar of his tight T-shirt, just below a few tufts of chest hair.
Gentile was feeling edgy about traveling stateside. It was July 2012, and regulators had been making calls about a stock play he’d been involved with a few years earlier. He’d been part of a group that the FBI suspected had suckered investors out of more than $15 million by manipulating the market for shares in a Mexican gold mine and a natural gas project in Kentucky.
As Gentile’s plane landed in White Plains, N.Y., he saw the flashing lights of police cars on the tarmac, confirming his fears. Before passengers could disembark, uniformed men came on board. Gentile dialed his lawyer, but the men grabbed the phone out of his hands, handcuffed him, and marched him off the plane.
Soon, two FBI agents picked him up from an airport detention room and drove him to a neon-lit diner in Newark, N.J., near their office. They bought Gentile a bacon cheeseburger and a Diet Coke and told him he had two options: Either they could throw him in jail, seize his assets, and hand his case to a prosecutor with a 95 percent win rate, or he could help them catch a bigger fish—and maybe make his problems go away. Gentile didn’t need to think it over. Whatever you want, he said, I’ll do it.
Normally the identity of an FBI cooperator would be kept secret, but sometime last year, a website called Rogue Informant went live. It bore the tagline “They said he had ice flowing through his veins,” a picture of a man getting off a private jet, and no identifying information. A trader told me who was behind it.
When I called Gentile, it was as though he’d been waiting for me. He said he had an amazing story to tell, promising that it included celebrities and a government coverup. “Remember the movie American Hustle? It’s kind of like that, with way more dirt and twists and f---ed-up shit,” he said.
He told me that the information he’d gathered across three years had led to dozens of arrests and helped prevent hundreds of millions of dollars in potential fraud losses. That made sense, in a way. Most stock market scams are easy to spot but hard to prove—even promoters of the most dubious schemes can operate for years, taking advantage of legal loopholes, offshore hideouts, and anonymous shell corporations. Yet the Department of Justice often claims in its press releases that since fiscal 2009 it has “filed over 18,000 financial fraud cases against more than 25,000 defendants.” Gentile offered a rare chance to see how the FBI is making these cases—even though, if his website is any indication, something went dramatically wrong.
I met Gentile at his office in Carmel, N.Y., a quiet suburb about an hour’s drive north of Manhattan. It was one of the hottest days of the summer, but there was no air conditioning because he’d stopped paying his utility bills. Now 40, Gentile was about to turn the building over to his estranged wife in their divorce. His office was a shrine to rags-to-rich-douchebag movies. On one wall was a poster of Al Pacino as Scarface and another of Leonardo DiCaprio in The Wolf of Wall Street. DVDs of the latter and American Hustle were stacked on a side table. “The whole experience was very surreal. I felt like an actor in a movie,” Gentile said of his work with the FBI.
We decided to find someplace less broiling to talk. In his red SUV, he put on a techno version of the James Bond theme and puffed mint-infused smoke from a vape pen. A Make America Great Again hat lay on the dashboard. As we drove, he launched into his story.
Gentile is the son of Italian immigrants. His father ran a gardening business in Mount Vernon, N.Y., and his mother worked in a sprinkler-head factory. Gentile spent his summers pulling weeds and mowing lawns; when he was old enough, he started working nights at a pizzeria. (He met his future wife there, after she left him a note while he was out on a delivery, telling him he was cute.) He was an indifferent student, more interested in making money and spending it on his silver 1985 Monte Carlo, which he fitted with a nitrous-oxide injection system and drag-raced at a track in New Jersey. He considered becoming a police officer after graduating from high school, but instead took a job as a syrup quality-control inspector at a Coca-Cola plant.
He discovered day trading in 1997, not long after E*Trade began offering the service online. A flood of websites and message boards popped up to give investors advice. Even punk rock legend Joey Ramone was giving stock tips. Gentile started his own subscription service, called DayTraderPro. For $35 a month, investors could get tips (“Don’t attempt to buy the bottom or sell the top. Wait and see which way it’s going”) and watch a live feed of a “professional” investor’s trades. The advice was basically worthless, but Gentile got in the game early enough to attract a small following. His computer would ping every few minutes to announce a new subscriber, according to Arthur Quintero, a compliance consultant who worked with him at the time.
In 1998, Gentile quit his job at Coke. He created his own trading website, an E*Trade knockoff that collected fees for executing trades. His clients weren’t getting rich, but it didn’t hurt his bottom line: By 2009 that company and another trading firm he’d started were netting about $3.5 million combined. Gentile drove Ferraris and Lamborghinis, including a white convertible that a dealer told him had belonged to R. Kelly, and invested in a Miami reggae record label. He referred to his lifestyle as that of a “simple jet-setter.”
After the dot-com bubble burst, U.S. regulators began implementing rules to protect clueless investors from themselves, such as requiring that day traders have at least $25,000 to their names and banning funding accounts with credit cards. With the number of prospective clients declining, Gentile decided to move somewhere with fewer regulations. He set up shop in the Bahamas in November 2011. Brokers there don’t have to follow day-trading rules, and they can take American customers as long as they don’t advertise for them.
The loophole gave Gentile a steady stream of business, and the offshore brokerage basically ran itself. Bored and still daydreaming about a law enforcement career, he signed up to get an online associate degree in criminal justice from the University of Phoenix and registered as a freelance bail enforcement agent with the state of Connecticut. But before he had a chance to track down any fugitives, he boarded the flight to White Plains, and the FBI presented him with a better chance to live out his fantasies.
At the diner in Newark, the FBI accused Gentile of participating in a pump-and-dump con that’s as old as the stock market. Promoters take over a worthless shell company, announce that they’ve found a promising venture, and send out a glossy marketing brochure to thousands of potential suckers. Some investors are gullible enough to buy the whole story, while others suspect the con but think they can get in and out quickly enough to profit. Once the frenzy dies down, the stock is almost worthless and the promoters move on to their next scheme. The government had trading records showing that while Gentile was running his U.S. online brokerage, he’d promoted the Mexican gold mine and the Kentucky gas-drilling project, then dumped millions of shares at near-peak value.
Gentile maintains that he did nothing wrong. But rather than try his luck in court, he became one of the FBI’s 15,000 informants, or “confidential human sources,” as the bureau calls them. The FBI has been using this tactic against stockbrokers and fund managers since at least 1992, when it created its first squad dedicated to Wall Street crime after the case against junk-bond king Michael Milken brought securities fraud into the mainstream. Informants are crucial to these cases, because tape recordings demonstrating wrongdoing cut through the complexity of stock market schemes for juries. And unlike agents, informants don’t require warrants to elicit evidence. Turncoats have driven some of the FBI’s biggest Wall Street investigations, like the landmark insider-trading cases against Raj Rajaratnam and Steve Cohen’s SAC Capital Advisors.
The day Gentile was arrested, the FBI agents who nabbed him had their eye on a lawyer named Adam Gottbetter. A regular on the Manhattan charity circuit, with a $12 million condo on the Upper East Side and an office on Madison Avenue, Gottbetter was by all appearances a Wall Street aristocrat. He favored tailored suits and kept his curly hair slicked back, flew to the Hamptons on private jets, and played in a dad band at fundraisers for the elite all-girls Spence School. Gottbetter pitched himself as an expert at taking small companies public, but the FBI suspected that he actually specialized in arranging crooked stock deals.
The dozens of companies in regulatory filings that mention Gottbetter’s name generally show the same pattern: A long-dormant stock spikes, then drops toward zero. By my calculations, during the time Gottbetter was listed in the filings, the companies’ peak market value was $5 billion more than their collective worth now. The FBI had identified this pattern, but it needed Gentile to nail Gottbetter. The pair had worked together on the natural gas play starting in 2007. The agents wanted Gentile to get back in touch with Gottbetter and coax him into saying on tape that he’d committed a crime.
After the talk at the diner, Gentile spent the night in jail. The next day he and his lawyer sat down with an assistant U.S. attorney for New Jersey. Like most informants, Gentile didn’t get a deal in writing, but he says the prosecutor promised to consider dropping the charges if he cooperated in good faith.
Shortly after being released from jail, Gentile called Gottbetter to arrange a meeting. They decided on breakfast at the members-only Core Club in Manhattan. Gentile arrived with a recording device in the pocket of his jacket, but Gottbetter was careful about what he said and didn’t want to discuss the gas deal. Instead he was eager to get Gentile’s help with a new scheme.
The meeting was an adrenaline rush for Gentile. His FBI handlers seemed excited, too. They agreed to pursue Gottbetter’s plan, and at the same time Gentile offered to go after other crooks, to improve the odds he’d be let off the hook. He began strategizing with the lead agent, Kevin Bradley, a tall man with prematurely white hair—the source of his nickname, A.C., for Anderson Cooper. Gentile says the two of them spoke nearly every day on the phone and met regularly at Palisades Center, a mall in West Nyack, N.Y. Gentile’s handlers would identify suspicious traders and encourage him to set up meetings. He told them he’d need higher-tech gadgets to avoid detection, so they gave him a set of keys with a hidden recorder and realistic-looking Starbucks gift cards that recorded audio. He sometimes wore a white dress shirt with a button that concealed a tiny camera.
At first, Gentile had a habit of coming on too strong. Among his early targets was a broker I know. He burst out laughing when I told him Gentile was an informant. They’d met at a bar, he recalled, where Gentile spoke so openly about pump-and-dump schemes that the broker asked if he was a cop and walked out. “The Oscar definitely did not go to him,” the broker said.
Gentile held passports for the U.S., the European Union, and Jamaica, which enriched his cover.
Photographer: Jeff Brown for Bloomberg Businessweek
But Gentile improved. He learned to play hard to get, waiting days to return calls and letting his targets do most of the talking. He developed a lure, telling them he’d created a trading algorithm that could swap shares back and forth among 32 accounts, at ever-higher prices, making it look like the stock was going up. The best part, he’d say, was that it was completely untraceable because he would run it through his offshore brokerage. Crooks loved the idea. “I was really just selling bullshit,” Gentile says. “I’d lie to them. I was a very good liar.” Sometimes he brought along an undercover FBI agent who pretended to be a financier; the aim was partly to ensure that, in the event of an arrest, someone other than Gentile could provide eyewitness testimony.
Most informants find the work scary. “Prison was a cakewalk compared to wearing a wire,” says Mark Whitacre, the Archer Daniels Midland Co. executive who became the subject of the book The Informant after helping expose an animal-feed additive price-fixing conspiracy. “I was almost delusional from the stress.” Not Gentile. Working undercover made him feel like an action hero. It fed into his love of intrigue, according to his ex-wife, Karen Barker-Gentile. “He did actually assume a new personality in which he imagined himself to be an FBI agent,” she says. He began calling his operation Wall Street Underground and developed a signature move, giving each target a hug at their last meeting before the FBI moved in.
The FBI agents encouraged this grandiosity, according to Gentile. He says they let him keep his Glock pistol; that Bradley, an avid cyclist, gave him the code name “Bianchi,” for the Italian racing bicycle; and that his handlers told him he was the best informant they’d ever worked with, more like an undercover agent than a cooperating witness. Gentile also kept running his Caribbean brokerage, traveling to and from the Bahamas.
As for Gottbetter, Gentile was gaining his trust. In August 2013, Gottbetter requested that they meet in the lounge at the White Plains airport. He flew in to tell Gentile about a deal centered on a shell company he and some other financiers controlled. Their plan was to use the company, which filings said grew mushrooms in El Salvador, to buy a bunch of cheap oil wells. Then they’d rename the company and hype it to investors.
The FBI’s problem was that nothing Gottbetter was describing was necessarily illegal. For the scheme to cross the line into fraud, Gentile would have to persuade Gottbetter to use his fake trading algorithm. “The government instructed me to criminalize the deal,” Gentile says. “I felt like I was tricking him.” (The FBI declined to comment on Gentile’s allegation and other facets of his account.)
Three months later, on a cold November night, Bradley and other FBI agents waited outside the Surrey, a hotel on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, where Gentile’s final meeting with Gottbetter was taking place. Gottbetter had with him a British man who was supposed to finance the company’s oil well investments. They spent hours talking over the plan, finally agreeing that Gentile would use his untraceable accounts to make it appear as though the stock price was going up. Gentile surreptitiously snapped a picture of the investor and sent it to the agents so they’d know whom to arrest.
As they said goodbye in the lobby, Gentile pulled the investor in for a hug and kissed him on the cheek. Gentile and Gottbetter left, and the agents went into the building and nabbed the investor. They later told Gentile that he’d gotten them the evidence they needed on Gottbetter, who eventually admitted to securities fraud, paid $5 million in fines, and served about a year in prison and a halfway house. (Through his lawyer, Gottbetter declined to comment for this article, “other than to say that he has taken responsibility for his conduct, which was aberrational.”)
The FBI’s primary target was out of commission, but Gentile was still on the hook: The bureau wanted him to continue informing on others. He began to wonder when he’d be able to stop and whether the agents were making empty promises. And he worried about how, if they reneged on the deal, he would prove he’d been a cooperator. Gentile decided to get proof of their arrangement by surreptitiously recording his handlers. “They taught me tapes don’t lie,” he says.
In February 2014, Bradley and his FBI boss told Gentile that internal investigators were auditing their spending on his operations. In two years they’d spent a few hundred thousand dollars on expenses, Gentile says, including about $15,000 for his travel. The agents told him that an investigator would be asking him some questions, and they wanted to go over what to say. They called a meeting at the Red Robin restaurant at Palisades Center. This time, Gentile brought a recording device of his own.
At the meeting, Bradley, his boss, and other agents praised Gentile’s work. Bradley said he’d fulfilled his agreement with the prosecutor. “Look at how you affected this space. How many people you shut down,” Bradley’s boss said, while the tape (which I later heard) rolled. “We never would have gotten near those people without you.” Gentile told the agents he wanted to work for the agency as a consultant one day, and they didn’t shoot the idea down.
A still from surveillance footage of Gentile (top), Bradley (bottom), and another FBI agent conferring in the Bahamas about the Milrud investigation.
The agents went through the questions Gentile might be asked by the internal investigator, telling him not to say much. They advised him to say he hadn’t directed any criminal activity. (“Of course I did,” Gentile says.) And they said not to mention his gun.
When the investigator called, Gentile stuck to the script. He still doesn’t know whether anything came of the inquiry. More important to him was that he had the agents on tape saying he’d held up his end of the deal. He also had what he thought was evidence of them acting unethically. Over the next year he recorded more than 100 other calls.
During that period, the agents were letting Gentile suggest his own targets. One was Nonko Trading, a rival brokerage; Gentile taped one of its employees admitting the firm had defrauded investors, and prosecutors arrested the owner. Another was a high-frequency trader named Alex Milrud. Gentile suggested the sting because, he says, Milrud once cheated him out of $70,000. Gentile lured Milrud to the Bahamas and persuaded him to show how he used puppet accounts in China to manipulate stocks. After Milrud was charged, in January 2015, the FBI issued a statement describing the alleged crime as “a sophisticated, international, groundbreaking market manipulation scheme.” Milrud pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing; through his lawyer, he denied ripping off Gentile and otherwise declined to comment.
By early 2015, Gentile was running out of targets. That June, his worst fear came true: Prosecutors told him he’d have to plead guilty to a felony stemming from the original charges against him. They said he wouldn’t serve any time in prison, but Gentile nevertheless felt betrayed. He’d delivered more than he promised, and he wanted the charges to disappear. “I kept saying no,” he says. “Sorry, that wasn’t the deal, we aren’t taking it.” Then he played what he thought was his trump card: “By the way, we also have these tapes.”
Instead of forcing the prosecutors to let him go, the threat appeared to anger them. The following spring, they rearrested him and charged him for his alleged participation in the original gold mine and natural gas pump-and-dump schemes. The charges carried a maximum prison term of 20 years, but Gentile doesn’t regret rejecting the government’s no-jail-time offer. “Only someone who’s crazy wouldn’t take the deal,” he says, “unless he lives his life by principles and integrity.”
Gentile was allowed to remain free on $500,000 bail. He told his friends he would beat the case and met up with a rapper he’d signed to his old Miami reggae label, to make a song about snitching. On the track, Gentile raps awkwardly over a wobbly beat from a drum machine: “The feds don’t know who they got, bro/ I’m going rogue.” He says he dated a Puerto Rican beauty pageant winner and a “hotter girl from Spanish class.” He binge-watched Billions, the Showtime series about a prosecutor out to get a hedge fund manager at all costs. “It’s like the story of my life,” he says.
For his 40th birthday last year, he threw a James Bond-themed party for 80 guests at a rented beach house in the Bahamas. Brent Mayson, one of his best friends, recalls that Gentile jumped onto a giant inflatable swan in the pool wearing a borrowed Armani jacket. “It’s spring break for him every day,” says Mayson, a real estate developer. “I think it’s kind of adorable. He’s living out his youth a little later.”
Gentile obsessed over old rulings that he was convinced illustrated flaws in the case against him. His lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the case, detailing Gentile’s time undercover and claiming he’d been promised he wouldn’t be charged if he was successful. In response, prosecutors acknowledged that Gentile had provided useful information, but they said no one had promised him he’d get off scot-free and that the charges were merited. “What made Gentile such an accomplished criminal explains why he was such a valuable cooperator—he was deeply enmeshed in the world of stock market manipulation,” the prosecutors wrote.
Gentile blames the prosecutors, not Bradley or his other handlers, for bringing the case against him. In December, Bradley came to the courtroom to watch a hearing in Gentile’s case. During a break, he told Gentile that the other agents sent their regards, and they spoke about getting a beer together once the case was resolved. Bradley wouldn’t discuss the allegations about the internal investigation, nor specific facets of Gentile’s story. “Some of it is fairy tale-ish,” he says, “but he’s got a decent head on his shoulders.”
A month after the hearing, Gentile was driving home from the gym when one of his lawyers called. The judge had tossed out the charges, saying the statute of limitations had expired. Gentile was so relieved he started crying. Then he posted a Wolf of Wall Street meme on Instagram with the caption “F--- YOU ALL.” A spokesman for the U.S. attorney in New Jersey declined to say whether the office will appeal the ruling or otherwise comment on the case. Gentile still faces a related civil lawsuit filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission, seeking his share of $17 million in proceeds from the alleged schemes. He says he believes he’ll prevail on the same statute-of-limitations grounds.
Gentile says he feels sorry for the people he informed on, and that some of them wouldn’t have committed crimes if he hadn’t talked them into it. But even if his targets wouldn’t have done something outright criminal, they were planning to cash in by hyping dubious stocks. Schemes like these cost investors billions of dollars every year. Gentile’s methods weren’t pretty, but without them, Gottbetter and the others would still be free to siphon people’s savings.
Gentile isn’t ready to give up the hustle. He says he intends to sue the government for damages and that one day he’d like to star in the movie of his life. His time undercover, he says, gave him the acting skills he needs. And the storyline will be straight off the posters on his office walls. “I’m going to build a billion-dollar company,” he says. “I’m going to get my own private jet, I’m going to drive a flashy car. And I’m going to make my license plate F---YOUDOJ.”
Read More

Post Top Ad