This Is A Robbery

Quinn: Hello and welcome back to Pictorial on Relay FM. I'm Quinn Rose, and I didn't go to art school, but I still love to learn about art and art theft. 

Betty: Hi, I'm Betty. I also didn't go to art school, but I also love learning about art. Also sometimes about crazy dramatic things that happened in the art world, which is what we're going to talk about today.

Quinn: For today's episode… As regular listeners know, we usually do a little thing where we take turns researching a topic and sharing it with the other person. This time we both watched the four-part Netflix documentary series “This is a Robbery," which is all about one of the most famous and notorious art thefts in history, which is the robbery of the Isabella Gardner Museum in Boston on March 18th, 1990. So the whole conversation we're about to have will have copious spoilers for the documentary. And by that, I mean, it has copious spoilers for real life. But I'll spoil the ending right now. They don't know where the art is and they don't know who took it. So there's not much to spoil past that.

Betty: I’m never really sure when it comes to like, real-world spoilers. I'm like, is it considered a spoiler to tell people how World War II ended? Cause you know, it’s history.

Quinn: I think if someone doesn't know that the boat sinks at the end of the movie Titanic, then maybe they have other problems in their life, you know?

Betty: Yeah. Now mind you, like, you know, obviously this is—well, I mean, for the art world, it is definitely, probably one of the most famous news events, but obviously it's not like something that everyone would know. But I do know that I did recommend my dad to watch this documentary because I really liked it. And he likes watching documentaries a lot too. And he did not like it because he didn't know the art wasn't found. And I guess to him, it's kind of anticlimactic because, you know, he's not familiar with the story. And he was like, oh, I want to know what happens to these. And he’s like, it doesn't explain it. I'm like, well, that's cause we don't know. And he’s like, but that's terrible. I’m like, that's real life. 

Quinn: I honestly didn't really know anything about this before I watched the documentary and they do, I think, an admirable job of unfolding the story in an interesting way, considering it doesn’t have a conclusion. Cause you want it to be at the last episode to them to be finding the art, establishing exactly who took it. None of that stuff happens because they literally just still don't know. And so I think I just knew like from this documentary, I was like, this is a documentary that does not have a climax like that, because I know that they don't find the art. And so like, what does it actually talk about in here? But the first episode starts with, the first episode is basically about the theft. And I'm going to say right now, I thought the first episode is pretty boring. I don't know. What did you think of just the first episode?

Betty: Yeah, I would say definitely it gets better in subsequent episodes. The first episode was probably the least interesting, but I guess you kind of need to establish a bit of a background. Or maybe, cause they did spend quite a bit establishing just the history of the Isabella Gardner Museum and how it came to be and things that don't have to do with the robbery, but it kind of sets the scene of what kind of place it is. And I think that's, there is some importance to that that is revealed later on, like why knowing about the history of it is, is kind of relevant. But yeah, I would say when you don't really know where it's going, you might just be like, where is this going?

Quinn: Yeah. I personally believe that this whole series probably could have been three slightly longer episodes instead of four episodes because I mean, the first episode is dedicated to the theft, but the theft itself—like this is not a story about like, how did they pull off this elaborate art heist? Heist itself, incredibly simple. The story is trying to figure out who did it and why, why is a big question, but they wanted to spend so much time on the actual heist itself. And like you said, like they go into the history of the museum and I think that that it’s great to have that background color, but especially when you don't know exactly where it's going yet, you're like, why are we spending so much time talking about how people like the Isabella Gardner Museum? Okay?

Betty: Exactly. And I think for me, I actually did know quite a bit of background about this theft or, and you know, what happened surrounding this event. Although this documentary did teach me a bunch of things I didn't know, but yeah, I've actually, I've actually been to the Isabella Gardner Museum at least like three times, I think. And the first time I went was probably like almost like 15 years ago when I was first in Boston. But I do remember one of the times I was there, I did take the theft tour. Like they have a, they have a tour that is just about the art theft. So you can take that tour and they give—they tell you what happened. They show you all the frames that are empty and tell you what used to be there. And then they tell you we still don't have it. And if you have any clues there, you can report what you know. But basically, we don't know where they are. So I think knowing in detail, really like what, what happened for me was probably a bit more helpful. Cause I kind of knew where, where it was going or kind of had an idea. One thing I didn't realize, or I think one thing that I was maybe under a false impression before seeing this documentary was I was under the impression that the museum, when the robbery happened, really just didn't care about security. And didn't think about it a lot and just was totally not thinking about it. And while it is true, their security was really bad. And this documentary really goes into how inadequate it was. They did actually show that a lot of people at the time were aware. They were like, we need to improve our security. This is really terrible. We need to do something about it. Like I was under the impression that nobody even thought this was a thing that they should do. When in fact a lot of people did, it's just that they didn't do anything about it, which is somehow kind of worse because it's like, you knew this is a problem. You just didn't do anything until, you know, everything went wrong.

Quinn: Real “woulda coulda shoulda” situation. To run through the basics of the actual theft… I will say my primary takeaway from this entire documentary? That it was pretty easy to do crime in 1990.

Betty: Exactly.

Quinn: Which there will be so many examples throughout this episode of just like, wow. It was a lot easier to do crime back then. It really was very simple. Two guys, dressed as Boston police officers, buzz on the door of the museum at like one in the morning. There's this guy named Richard Abath, who was the security guard on duty. There were two guards on duty and he was one of them. He was at the desk. He's not supposed to let anyone in. He does let them in. He thinks that they are police officers. They start talking to him and then they say, hey, you look familiar. We think there's a warrant for your arrest. Get out from behind the desk. They handcuff him. And then apparently he says that they very dramatically say, “this is a robbery,” which I guess if you have that opportunity, you should take it to be as dramatic as possible. But they, they handcuff and they duct tape Richard Abath at the other guard on duty, tape them, like their heads as well and put them in the basement. And then they spend a remarkable 81 minutes in this museum. They were not worried about anything. They had no fear of God nor man, they're wandering around this museum. They're actually not. They spend most of the time in one or two rooms. And they take objects primarily from these two rooms. There is one painting that is stolen from another room that becomes a piece of interest later on, but we'll get to details of that in a moment, but basically they get a bunch of paintings, like they tear and cut a lot of them out of their frames which was pretty horrible. Mostly paintings, they also take a Chinese vase which was the oldest object out of the museum that they took. And a few of them were quite valuable, especially one that they talk about a lot is Rembrandt's The Storm of the Sea of Galilee, which as they say so many times in this documentary, is Rembrandt's only seascape.

Betty: They really emphasized that one.

Quinn: Yeah. So they literally they're in this museum for 81 minutes. Apparently they check on the guards a few times, making sure they're doing okay down there in the basement. And then they wander on out and literally no one ever catches them.

Betty: Yeah. And it wasn't until the next morning when the other shift guards showed up to relieve the night guards of duty that they realized something was wrong because no one was opening the doors. So by the time they even realized a crime happened, it was the next morning. It was like, I don't know, like many hours after the incident.

Quinn: The only reason they even know a lot of things about this is because they were setting off proximity alarms everywhere in the museum. But they worried about them because they were confident and somehow knew that this wasn't going to alert the police or anything. And they had already tied up the only two guards who were there and they took the paper record of the proximity alarms and like motion sensors. But there was a hard drive copy of that on the computer they didn't take. And then they took the VCR tape from the museum. So there was no, so they thought they took all the evidence of them, of any record of what they had done or looked like or anything they did mostly, but there was this one hard drive record, so they could track where they actually stepped in the museum, but without any video footage of it or anything. And of course back then, you know, you don't have DNA testing and all this stuff that we have now. And so once you get out of the building and there's no footage of you, it's like, well, we'll never catch these guys. 

Betty: There was a lot of things in yet in this event that it was shocking, but it wasn't shocking, but it was just really interesting. Cause you know, I’ve watched a lot of CSI. And I just remember, like, after the first episode going into the second episode, I'm like, okay, did they dust for fingerprints? Did they take samples? They didn't do any of that. It seemed like, I know like at the time DNA testing wasn't a thing. But it really just seemed like at the time, there was no protocol for what to do. Like I think they said the Boston Police Department, what happened was they were touching everything and moving things around. So they really, they disturbed the scene already. So I guess it wasn't really a point in getting fingerprints. I don't know, but it just seemed like they didn't do anything that you would typically see in a CSI episode.

Quinn: Yeah, at one point they said that the only thing that they could have gotten real good fingerprints off of was the duct tape that the guards were duct taped with. And then the duct tape disappeared out of evidence and they never found it again. The Boston police are so incompetent, it’s crazy.

Betty: I know. I was like, and then the FBI seemed like they also, at the time, didn't really have anybody with expertise that had to do with like an art heist. It seemed like—

Quinn: Oh yeah, they were also pretty incompetent.

Betty: They were sending people in that investigated bank robberies or the mafia. So they were accustomed to those types of crimes. And it seems like stealing paintings, either the people who were investigating either didn't take it seriously. Or they were just like, I have no idea what to do. This is not something I'm typically used to working with. And yeah, so, and I would assume if the FBI had no clue about what to do at the scene of an art crime, I can just see the Boston police department going, like looking at each other, going, I dunno.

Quinn: Absolute clownery. And that's basically the first episode, it’s basically everything that we just said of just going through this actual theft. The only other major thing that happens in the first episode is they introduce the best character in this whole documentary, Myles Connor. Have you ever heard of Myles Connor?

Betty: I haven’t, this is the first I've heard of him, but it seemed like, I guess he was pretty well-known.

Quinn: Yeah, I hadn't either, but he's apparently an incredibly successful art thief. They described him as a “legendary criminal” in Massachusetts, and they didn't tell this full story until later, but this story is so good. So he stole a ton of art over the years. And there was this one crucial thing that happened that a lot of their theories about this art heist actually hinge upon, which is he was caught for something. In order to reduce his sentence—like he's already caught by the FBI, okay. He's in trouble. He's facing jail time. He goes to the MFA, steals a Rembrandt, like gets chased down by guards and has to scare them away with a machine gun kind of level of stealing of Rembrandt off the wall, and uses the Rembrandt that he just stole to bargain it back for less jail time. What was happening in Boston in the seventies? They could just do anything.

Betty: It really seems just so bizarre because it movies like in, you know, Oceans 11, those types of movies, you have all these like sophisticated, you know, people going the sneaking into whatever it is with all these like gadgets and they're so, you know, planned out. Whereas in real life, I guess it's just a dude who walks into the MFA, takes a Rembrandt right off the walls starts running, shoots, hit the machine gun at the feet of the guards chasing him and like runs off in some getaway driver’s van. And it's just like, it seems like more like something that would happen in some comedy skit.

Quinn: I can't believe that story's real, but that actually ends up being a large part of this because the next three episodes of the documentary are basically all going into the different theories about who did this and why they did it. But mostly following the primary theory that it was related to the Italian Mafia in Boston and various people related to that. And one of the things that they think might have been a motivation for this—because a big part of it is you can't really sell the art very well after, because it's so famous and it's so known, everyone knows that it's stolen. And so it's really hard to sell this kind of thing. So either you're like an oligarch who just wants it for yourself, or maybe you’re a mobster who wants to use it as a bargaining chip if you get caught for any crimes, as demonstrated by Myles Connor, apparently literally works. You can just bargain back famous art in order to get reduced jail time for stuff.

Betty: That was actually one thing I wrote down, I literally wrote down “is this really a good idea?” Like when it came to the part about criminals using stolen paintings to barter for less jail time, because I'm like, it's almost giving them incentive to commit a crime. In my opinion. It's like, oh, you mean paintings can get us less jail time? Okay. Well then let's go steal some art, which is also a crime, but it seems like they continue to use this tactic, like whenever they interview or whenever they talk to Myles Connor or some of these other people that they suspected of being involved in this heist, they say things like, oh, if you give us information that leads to recovery of the painting, we’ll shave off your jail time. Or maybe even you can walk free or like all kinds of things. And so in the end they did talk about, there is somebody who probably did get less of a sentence because of giving some sort of information. I mean, we still don't have the paintings, and I'm just like, should we really let convicted murderers walk the streets just for, you know, giving back a painting they stole?

Quinn: It's very weird. I would think that I was misunderstanding it, except for they talked about this concept so many times that I was like, no, they really mean using the paintings or sometimes even potentially information about the paintings for this, which like, as you were saying, seems like to really just incentivize art theft.

Betty: Yeah. So I think that they definitely, they did spend quite a bit over the next few episodes looking at all the different possibilities of who could have done it. But I think one of the problems is unfortunately, so many people could have done it. Like they were like, there's the Irish mob, there's the Italian mob. And then there's like multiple people. But one of the problems was also, I think by the time they got somebody who actually was an expert on this issue in the FBI, it was already like 20 years later or something. And by this time half of the people they think are having to do with this are dead.

Quinn: There's this little crew of—“a little crew.” These are all hardened criminals. But you know, there's this little crew of Italian mobsters that they talk about. They kind of establish at one point. And then as the story unfolds, they go through basically all of these people getting murdered mostly by mostly each other. Some of them died of natural causes, but a lot of them were killed by someone or other. Oh, and I didn't mention this before, but in case you're going, why don't they think the famous art thief did it? They do think he was potentially connected, especially like he had connections to the Mafia and they thought that maybe he helped out in some way or help store the art in some way, but he was physically in prison at the time. And so he has a pretty rock solid alibi of not being the actual thief in this case. The end of the documentary, the only ending they could have for this at all, is out of all of the people they suspected being involved with this at the beginning, only one of them is still alive. And in 2019 he was released from prison and he's still not talking—if he does know anything, he's still not talking. And so the trail is just totally cold. But yeah this is David Turner, who is one of the central figures of the documentary. And the whole thing is his sentence for a different crime was mysteriously shortened right around the time that there was a big sting on someone else that they thought was involved in the painting. Oh, this part was embarrassing. The FBI throws a little press conference. Well, this is even before that, the FBI basically announces internally and it, they basically tell everyone, well, we're going to find these paintings in this guy's house. And then they don't. And then later on, they throw a little press conference to say, we actually know who took the painting. And then the press goes, okay, who was it? And they go, well, we can't tell you, cause it's still an ongoing investigation. And they’re like, well, if you know, who did it, where are the paintings? And they go, we don't know. So I don't even know why they did that at all.

Betty: This documentary did not make the FBI seem competent at all. 

Quinn: Hard to make someone look competent under these circumstances.

Betty: It's true. But yeah, that part where they were doing a sting on someone's house, thinking it might be in that house, but… I was just so—I felt like I was feeling secondhand embarrassment from just watching, because what they did is before they even found anything, they were just going to this house that they were told that it could be, things could be hidden there. But they printed these big poster boards of the paintings saying something like “recovered” on them. And like, it's like they were, they were getting ready to throw a party, a celebration for something like for accomplishing whatever this is. And then they, they go into the house and they spent—I don't know if it was like hours or days. Like there were a lot of hidden compartments and rooms and stuff that could have hidden stuff, but there was just nothing there. And then of course they all had to be like, oh, okay. I guess we're going home now. And I'm just like, oh my goodness. But just to anybody, don't do that. Cause it's almost like, you know, you think you got a job and you're celebrating and then you're told, never mind, we hired someone else. Like that's like something that I feel like I can relate to. That's why I'm like, just don't celebrate too early.

Quinn: No one ever told the FBI not to count their chickens before they hatch. I feel like it's not really worth going into it a lot details on this stuff. I will say, despite my assertion that the first episode is kind of boring, I do think the next episodes are pretty exciting in terms of tracking down what they do know and all of these different mafia guys. There's just a really funny five minutes that they spend on the Irish mob and the potential connection to the IRA. There's like one guy in Scotland Yard who is convinced these paintings are in Ireland. It was like, no, they're not. 

Betty: They even interviewed a guy from the IRA and he was like, this is so stupid.

Quinn: Well, I mean, of course he would say that, but yeah. But that's the thing is but there are just so many, so many similar-name sounding Italian guys involved in this and their different stories, but one of the primary things of this is that no one ever talked. There was one guy who claimed that he had the paintings, but they can never prove it. And he couldn't produce real proof. And then no one else really ever claimed ever having the paintings except for little bits and pieces here and there, which is so interesting because they thought like, well, they probably took them to get leverage, but then people fully went to prison. Like people were dying and had no reason to lie anymore. Like all these things happened, which you would think like, this is the point in which they would confess and use it as a bargaining chip. And then they didn't. So it's like, uh oh, our theory is busted.

Betty: Yeah, it is interesting. Although I think, I suspect that it might be because, cause I think I remember one of the, one of the people who they thought probably could give them the most information was a guy named Bobby Donati. And he was one of Myles Connor's friends. So they're like, you know, he's got this really good friend who's a famous art thief. And, you know, there was all these connections, but he was one of the people who was murdered in like 1991 and something like he was shot and stabbed like 20 times. And then they like cut his head off, threw him in the back of a trunk. And I'm like, you know what? Like people probably saw how he died and was like yeah, I don't think I want to go like that.

Quinn: Yeah. That's the thing, they suspect Bobby Donati was maybe with one of the people who was physically in the museum. Cause a lot of guys are like, oh, maybe they weren't there, but they were involved, and they felt like maybe he was one of the people was actually there. And he was brutally murdered. So, yeah, I wouldn't talk after that either. And there was the guy who was on his death bed and he thought he was going to die. And his lawyer was like, if you know anything about these paintings, you can go home and die and comfort with your wife instead of dying in prison. And he still was like, I don't know anything, man. So who knows. That guy didn't die by the way, which is so funny, it's such a funny turnaround. Like this man is on the verge of death. He's not making it through the night. And then he wakes up and he's like, I lived, b****. He lived for twenty more years.

Betty: So much for the doctor who's like I am certain, he is not going to live through the night. It's like, well, that doctor didn't know what he was talking about. But I do, yeah, I do think there were certain parts of this documentary that was important to, you know, as just like information to know. Because the director of the Gardner during this time and, you know, up until I think she was a director until like 2016, she did say some things that I think were really important. And so her name was Anne Holly. Of course it was devastating because she was only working for six months when this happened. I can just imagine.

Quinn: I feel so bad for her. 

Betty: Cause she's obviously like, I just started. And it did seem like she was hired on as someone who could hopefully help turn around the museum. Cause it did seem like the previous director really didn't care all that much. And was one of the people they raised security concerns to, and he didn't do anything. So, you know, unfortunately the new director, she didn't have a chance to do anything either. But one thing she did say that was I think really important is basically—she didn't say it in these words, but I'm paraphrasing her, but basically stealing art is dumb. And the reason is like, they're so fragile because it's one thing that they cut all these out of the frames, that’s horrible. They probably, or, well, I think at some point in the documentary, someone thinks they saw one. We weren't sure, we didn't know if that's real, but they saw that Rembrandt painting rolled up. And I remember like the interview with Anne Holly, she was just like, oh my God, that is devastating because rolling a painting that old, you're pretty much destroying them. Like the paint's going to crack and flake off. And basically, yeah. Any of these paintings that are in these institutions, you know, like the MFA or Gardner, they have to be constantly in the right humidity level, they have to like minimize light exposure. You have to make sure your boxes are acid free. And like all these things have to be maintained. And also you got to store them flat. So basically, unless the people who stole it are like expert conservationists, even if they found these paintings today, I'm not sure what conditions they would be in. Because it's been more than 30 years. But again, I'm hoping that the person who stole it, or at least they found someone who was an expert in storing art, because otherwise I don't even know if these works would have survived.

Quinn: Yeah, that's really sad. And something else that she says, one of the very first lines in the whole series is she says, “they're only works of art because you're interacting with them. They can't exist without you.” And in a documentary that's mostly about crime and not so much about the actual art. I thought that was such a beautiful way to really kick things off. Speaking philosophically about what art actually is, and you know, you take it from the walls and you're in real danger of hurting it severely, possibly past the point of ever being able to be restored, you’re taking it away from what it was designed to do and made for, which is to be seen and to invoke feelings in others. And you're just turning it into this manifestation of a bargaining chip or status symbol or whatever they were intended to be used for, or are maybe being used for today, and really taking the soul out of them. 

Betty: Yeah, I definitely, so I do think parts of the first episode was important and relevant is I think they, they were really—I was not around before this theft, so I don't really know what people are like what status the Gardner Museum was before this heist, but it just seemed like they were saying it wasn't really a place that a lot of people paid attention to. Most people in Boston probably didn't even know why it was important, but it was important. Because not only was it a museum with all kinds of, you know, really priceless artworks by these really renowned artists over the years, the actual building is kind of a work of art in itself. Like Isabella Gardner, she built this kind of a Venetian palace is how they described it. And it is like, if you get a chance to go there, it really is a great place to just tour the building. Cause it's yeah, it’s really beautiful. There's this interior courtyard that's just like a luscious garden. And it has—like every single room has its own theme. There's like a red room, a yellow room, a blue room. And then like a tapestry room. Like it's really nothing like some of these other museums, like the Museum of Fine Arts, which are also really cool places. But this is more like, I guess it's more like a boutique art place. Like it's really, it's got character and it's really interesting. So what is interesting is this heist, I think definitely did help to make this museum a lot more famous, not to say that the people are happy about it, but I do think, I guess maybe a silver lining of this is that people are a lot more aware of the Isabella Gardner Museum and it is definitely more famous now than it ever was most likely. And it definitely seems like they're paying attention to their security now.

Quinn: Yeah. It's like every time we talk about something terrible happening to an art piece, it's like, well, it made that art piece way more famous. But yeah, and I get the feeling that the entire point of this documentary is to bring more attention to this, because I mean, now there's a $10 million reward if you can give information that leads to the recovery of these works. I think especially that Rembrandt, they’re so obsessed with that Rembrandt. And so I don't know, I haven't read any interviews with the filmmakers or anything, but especially towards the end because they don't have a satisfying finale to end this with, in that we caught the bad guys, hooray You just kind of get this plea to, hey, do you know anything about these? Because if you ever see them, please tell us. Which I think is honestly really smart because I mean, I didn't know what any of these look like and now I do. So if I see them, I’ll know.

Betty: That’s true. Yeah. I mean, the other thing that is still an unanswered question is the pieces that they took, the 13 pieces they took, there is really no rhyme or reason, like on why those pieces specifically, like there's no real pattern. So it wasn't like they took the most expensive works. It wasn't like they took the most famous works or the biggest works or the smallest, or the most easily transportable. There were just some random things like taking a random Chinese vase or taking like one of the eagles that's like on top of a flag that nobody actually kind of really cared about. So it does seem oddly specific. So either these people were just like, we don't know anything and we're just going to randomly grab a bunch of things because [confused sound], or there was some really specific reason, but we just don’t know.

Quinn: Yeah. I kind of wonder, will we ever know?

Betty: Yeah. This is one of those mysteries where it may just never be. You know, at this point it's been so long yet, so many of these people are dead and we don't even know if the art pieces are still around, unfortunately, but, you know, hey, like what we were saying the other day—or not the other day, what we were saying a number of episodes ago when we were talking about the Tutu painting and how it turned up something like decades later, this might as well.

Quinn: Anything’s possible. One of the reporters said at some point, you get the generations or someone realizes like grandpa's painting is actually this such and such thing. And that's a real possibility. I wanted to ask before we get kind of into the end bit here. Did you have any favorite people or stories that stuck out to you from this that we haven't covered already? 

Betty: Yeah. I think some of the other things that I just found kind of interesting and also kind of hilarious was that they did, they did do some of the profiles on the, on the guards, like what was his name?

Quinn: Richard Abath.

Betty: Oh, Richard Abath. Yeah. So yeah, they did do some of the profiles on them and yeah, it seemed like again, they were, they weren't very experienced security guards, let's just say. And you know, like Richard Abath was kind of, he was like a DJ or something, or he was in a band and kind of was just smoking pot all the time and probably was high on the job as far as we know. And now, and so again, like I read that, I don’t think this was in the documentary, but apparently so again, because of the low funding for security, they only pay just slightly above minimum wage. So the people they hired were, you know, probably just students or people who were just looking for like a part-time job and not really all that serious. So it kind of makes sense. But I do like in the interview with Richard Abbott, like he did say, I am the only person who's not trying to figure out what happened, because I'm just happy to be alive. And it’s, I just found that like refreshing, cause it's like everyone in the documentary was like, oh my God, that's so interesting. Like where are these paintings and who did it? And the, you know, Richard Abath is just like, yeah, I don't really care. I'm just, I quit after that and I left.

Quinn: Yeah. They talk about Richard Abath for a while because he was a person of interest at the case. Cause they were like, why did he buzz them in, was he in on it? Blah, blah, blah. And the conclusion seemed to be like, probably not like. Like he was just incompetent, sorry, he was possibly high. Like he just like wasn't that great of a security guard, possibly. And so he was never charged with anything or arrested, but they never talk at all about the fact that was probably really traumatic for him and for the other man who was there. They were tied up and left in a basement all night. That's so scary. And they were physically unharmed, but still like, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with this either. And then people think that you're in on it and they're hounding you. Oh my God, that poor man.

Betty: Yeah. And actually I felt so bad too for the other guard who apparently, it was his first time ever working a night shift because somebody else called in sick and he was covering for them. It was probably like, oh yeah, sure. I'll do a night shift. That sounds interesting. Never again.

Quinn: He brought a trombone to practice with in the night, and then he got kidnapped. Poor Randy.

Betty: That sucks. But I do feel bad for them, but you know, the good thing is, at least they weren't some of the people that were found in the back of a truck.

Quinn: Yeah. I'm glad that they were totally physically unharmed. The last person that I wanted to talk about from this documentary is my favorite person who was in it besides Myles Connor, who’s iconic. The sister-in-law of one of the people that they suspected being a thief.

Betty: Oh, yeah.

Quinn: There's a man, George Ricefelder, and they thought that he might've been one of the thieves or like part of the gang that was around this theft. And they interviewed, they got an on-camera interview with his sister-in-law Donna, who is my hero. She was so funny. And she tells a story that he called her and asked her to help him hang up a frame, like a framed piece of art. And she was like, George, this frame is feminine. It's froo-froo and girly. And it sucks. And also the picture that's in it is ugly. What the hell is this? And then later, when she’s questioned by the police or the FBI or whatever, because they think he's connected to this, or they're showing her the picture of all the paintings and she gets to the stolen Manet and she's like, uh oh, that's the painting I saw him hanging up on his wall. And then she was like, he couldn't have done this heist. He's so slow moving, like physically slow moving. And they were like, they were in there for 81 minutes. And she was like, oh, it could have been him, then. That was probably George.

Betty: I do love how she, yeah, they were, she realized it was the man a painting. And they were like, oh, so yeah, it was the Chez Tortoni as she's like, yeah, I call it the tortellini.

Quinn: Oh my God. She was so funny. And sadly, George also died very young. He died of an overdose in '91, like right as this investigation was very much still happening, but oh my God, I love her.

Betty: It does seem like they were in a lot of instances onto something or when they were doing the investigation, because most likely these people had something to do with it. You know, either they were there or they had the paintings at one point, but, you know, unfortunately, they're dead. So, and we don't know what else happened.

Quinn: Yeah. It's really hard to question people when they all keep dying. Well, much like this documentary series, we don't have a conclusion to this because we don't know where the paintings are.

Betty: It’s true. I will say that the tour of the stolen art is a really interesting tour, or just I don't know if they're doing tours still at the Gardner Museum these days, but just going there to see the empty frames. It's just a really interesting experience. I don't really think other places that have had work stolen, do that. Like put it really front and center on display. And the reason they had to do this really was because is one of Isabella Gardner’s, in her will, one of the stipulations is nothing can be changed, whether it's architecture or the arrangement or how the art’s positioned. So really they're just like, okay, well, if nothing can be changed, then these, these are just going to be empty frames. And what happened is like, yeah, it it's a constant reminder of what happened and yeah, it really is just a very beautiful museum to tour. So, you know, I think people should check it out.

Quinn:Yes, visit the museum. If you have any relatives who might be connected to the Mafia in the Northeast, maybe check out their houses, see if there's any paintings in the basement. Just an idea, just a fun family activity. But thanks so much everybody for listening to this episode of Pictorial, you can find our show notes at relay.fm/pictorial. You could find the documentary that we talked about on Netflix. And you can also follow us on Twitter or Instagram @PictorialPod. If you'd like, you could follow me on Instagram @aspiringrobotfm.

Betty: And you can follow me on Twitter @articulationsv. And I'm also on YouTube as ARTiculations and speaking of YouTube, we also have a YouTube channel Pictorial Podcasts, where we upload video versions of our audio episodes, usually a few weeks after the audio versions. So for this one, you can look at some stolen art as we talk about them.

Quinn: Thanks for listening, art enthusiasts!