4 ms·

Yeah if I were in a similar position in a future scenario and I found this story and it ended with public shaming and prison etc, then I'd just burn the thing i

by hwers 5y ago

Yeah if I were in a similar position in a future scenario and I found this story and it ended with public shaming and prison etc, then I'd just burn the thing instead of trying to return it.

krisoft 5y ago
> if I were in a similar position in a future scenario As in if you stole an invaluable cultural artefact? How often does that happen with you? How would it even happen once? > and I found this story and it ended with public shaming and prison You don't have to look at the end of this story. Thieves when caught end up punished. If there is some innocent explanation, then people don't end up in prison. But it is better be a very good one. > then I'd just burn the thing instead of trying to return it. And that makes you a terrible human being. Thank you for letting me know.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  It is entirely possible to find oneself implicated after the fact in an act one did not commit but did not speak up about, and then to feel more implicated through fear-paralysis inaction over a long period of time (through the guilt of not speaking up). This is why for example when the British police run public cold case campaigns they often stress that people might seek to come forward because "allegiances change" -- careful code that hints at leniency while seeking help from former co-inmates who have fallen out with the offender, spouses or abused partners leaving husbands, children escaping the control of malignant parents, etc., or people who have simply survived the now dead offender and are no longer terrified to speak. I would wager that many stolen objects are quietly destroyed by those who inherit them, rather than confront the difficulties returning them would involve.
- II2II 5y ago
  The problem with innocent explanations is that they are usually impossible to prove. The problem with valuable artifacts, where there is both an incentive and history of theft, is that there is a tendency to presume guilt. Even if the innocent explanation is proven true in the end, the lives of those involved would probably be a living nightmare until it is resolved. Academic institutions are full of people who want to live a quiet life or build a reputation for the right reasons. They are full of people who come and go, most of which wouldn't know what they are looking at or whether it belonged there or not. Libraries and archives are among the few places that will properly inventory and catalogue what they have, and even the Cambridge University Libraries performed several searches to verify an error was not made on their end since it does happen. It may be unlikely, but I think that it is possible that the process for handling these materials failed somewhere and it took twenty years for someone to come across them. Their desire to drop them anonymously may have been for any number of reasons. Regardless of their reasons, I don't think that doing the right thing should be punished. I could also understand why someone would rather burn something than deal with a slow and possibly misdirected justice system.
  - krisoft 5y ago
    > I don't think that doing the right thing should be punished. I don't say that doing the right thing should be punished. I think the circumstances should be investigated and if it looks like someone did stole it that person or persons should be punished. > It may be unlikely, but I think that it is possible that the process for handling these materials failed somewhere and it took twenty years for someone to come across them. Sure and that is the innocent explanation. Are you saying that we shouldn't even investigate because there is a chance that it might be something innocent? Because that is what the original comment is asking about. > I could also understand why someone would rather burn something than deal with a slow and possibly misdirected justice system. I also can understand it. It still a terrible thing to do, and anyone who would do it I would consider a bad person.
miniwark 5y ago
Unfortunately this has effectively happened in the past. Artwork destroyed, not by the thief itself but by the mothers. By Artwork i mean Brueghel the Younger, Matisse, Monet, Picasso & Watteau. It was the case with Stéphane Breitweiser and Radu Dogaru mothers. The thieves were still caught but a part of history is definitely lost... So in the end it was more public shaming than just stilling! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%A9phane_Breitwieser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%A9phane_Breitwieser https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/jul/17/dutch-art-heist-paintings-burned https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/jul/17/dutch-a...
- rob74 5y ago
  I was aware of the Radu Dogaru case, but not of Stéphane Breitwieser. And unfortunately the time he ultimately served (26 months, and 18 months for his mother - for stealing 239 artworks, of which 60 are still unaccounted for and presumed destroyed) does not really serve as an effective deterrent for future art thieves...

by hwers 5y ago

Yeah if I were in a similar position in a future scenario and I found this story and it ended with public shaming and prison etc, then I'd just burn the thing instead of trying to return it.

krisoft 5y ago

> if I were in a similar position in a future scenario As in if you stole an invaluable cultural artefact? How often does that happen with you? How would it even happen once? > and I found this story and it ended with public shaming and prison You don't have to look at the end of this story. Thieves when caught end up punished. If there is some innocent explanation, then people don't end up in prison. But it is better be a very good one. > then I'd just burn the thing instead of trying to return it. And that makes you a terrible human being. Thank you for letting me know.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
It is entirely possible to find oneself implicated after the fact in an act one did not commit but did not speak up about, and then to feel more implicated through fear-paralysis inaction over a long period of time (through the guilt of not speaking up). This is why for example when the British police run public cold case campaigns they often stress that people might seek to come forward because "allegiances change" -- careful code that hints at leniency while seeking help from former co-inmates who have fallen out with the offender, spouses or abused partners leaving husbands, children escaping the control of malignant parents, etc., or people who have simply survived the now dead offender and are no longer terrified to speak. I would wager that many stolen objects are quietly destroyed by those who inherit them, rather than confront the difficulties returning them would involve.
II2II 5y ago
The problem with innocent explanations is that they are usually impossible to prove. The problem with valuable artifacts, where there is both an incentive and history of theft, is that there is a tendency to presume guilt. Even if the innocent explanation is proven true in the end, the lives of those involved would probably be a living nightmare until it is resolved. Academic institutions are full of people who want to live a quiet life or build a reputation for the right reasons. They are full of people who come and go, most of which wouldn't know what they are looking at or whether it belonged there or not. Libraries and archives are among the few places that will properly inventory and catalogue what they have, and even the Cambridge University Libraries performed several searches to verify an error was not made on their end since it does happen. It may be unlikely, but I think that it is possible that the process for handling these materials failed somewhere and it took twenty years for someone to come across them. Their desire to drop them anonymously may have been for any number of reasons. Regardless of their reasons, I don't think that doing the right thing should be punished. I could also understand why someone would rather burn something than deal with a slow and possibly misdirected justice system.
- krisoft 5y ago
  > I don't think that doing the right thing should be punished. I don't say that doing the right thing should be punished. I think the circumstances should be investigated and if it looks like someone did stole it that person or persons should be punished. > It may be unlikely, but I think that it is possible that the process for handling these materials failed somewhere and it took twenty years for someone to come across them. Sure and that is the innocent explanation. Are you saying that we shouldn't even investigate because there is a chance that it might be something innocent? Because that is what the original comment is asking about. > I could also understand why someone would rather burn something than deal with a slow and possibly misdirected justice system. I also can understand it. It still a terrible thing to do, and anyone who would do it I would consider a bad person.

miniwark 5y ago

Unfortunately this has effectively happened in the past. Artwork destroyed, not by the thief itself but by the mothers. By Artwork i mean Brueghel the Younger, Matisse, Monet, Picasso & Watteau. It was the case with Stéphane Breitweiser and Radu Dogaru mothers. The thieves were still caught but a part of history is definitely lost... So in the end it was more public shaming than just stilling! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%A9phane_Breitwieser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%A9phane_Breitwieser https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/jul/17/dutch-art-heist-paintings-burned https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/jul/17/dutch-a...

rob74 5y ago
I was aware of the Radu Dogaru case, but not of Stéphane Breitwieser. And unfortunately the time he ultimately served (26 months, and 18 months for his mother - for stealing 239 artworks, of which 60 are still unaccounted for and presumed destroyed) does not really serve as an effective deterrent for future art thieves...