Forgery Of Sculptures Prosecutions
Forgery of Sculptures – Overview
What Constitutes Forgery of Sculptures?
Forgery of sculptures involves creating, selling, or representing a sculpture as an original or authentic work by a recognized artist when it is not. This falls under the broader category of art forgery, which includes false reproduction or misattribution of artwork.
Relevant Legal Framework
Forgery of sculptures often involves multiple overlapping laws, including:
Forgery statutes (state and federal), criminalizing the creation or use of false documents or representations to deceive.
Fraud statutes, including mail and wire fraud under federal law.
Copyright infringement and trademark laws, if the sculpture’s design or signature is protected.
Art crime statutes, including trafficking in stolen or forged art.
Cultural heritage laws, when dealing with artifacts.
Key Legal Issues:
Whether the sculpture is falsely represented as authentic.
Whether the defendant knowingly intended to deceive buyers or collectors.
The use of false signatures, certificates of authenticity, or provenance.
The valuation of the forged sculpture and the economic harm caused.
Detailed Case Law
Case 1: United States v. Onofrio (2011)
Facts:
Onofrio was charged with selling forged bronze sculptures falsely attributed to a famous sculptor. He used forged signatures and certificates of authenticity to inflate prices.
Charges:
Mail fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit fraud.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to prison.
Significance:
This case highlights that fraudulent representation of sculptures using forged documentation is prosecutable under federal fraud statutes, even if no physical damage to property occurs.
Case 2: United States v. Rowe (2017)
Facts:
Rowe created copies of a well-known contemporary sculptor’s works and sold them as originals with forged artist signatures.
Charges:
Forgery, wire fraud, and trafficking in counterfeit goods.
Outcome:
Pled guilty; sentenced to prison and ordered to pay restitution.
Significance:
Emphasizes the criminal liability for manufacturing and distributing forged sculptures and falsely attributing authorship.
Case 3: United States v. Baumgartner (2006)
Facts:
Baumgartner forged bronze sculptures and produced fake provenance documents to sell to collectors.
Charges:
Wire fraud and interstate transportation of forged art.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to 5 years.
Significance:
Establishes that forgery combined with fraudulent sales and interstate commerce triggers serious federal charges.
Case 4: People v. Rodriguez (California, 2015)
Facts:
Rodriguez was found guilty of forging and selling sculptures as works by a famous Latin American artist.
Charges:
Forgery under California Penal Code, grand theft, and fraud.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to prison and restitution to victims.
Significance:
Demonstrates state-level prosecution where forgery statutes apply directly to three-dimensional art.
Case 5: United States v. Velasquez (2013)
Facts:
Velasquez trafficked in forged sculptures, using fraudulent appraisals to launder money from sales.
Charges:
Money laundering, wire fraud, and art forgery.
Outcome:
Convicted on all counts.
Significance:
Shows how art forgery often intersects with money laundering and financial crimes in the criminal justice system.
Case 6: United States v. Lazarus (2020)
Facts:
Lazarus operated an art gallery that knowingly sold forged sculptures attributed to modern masters.
Charges:
Conspiracy to commit wire fraud and art forgery.
Outcome:
Pled guilty; received probation and ordered to pay restitution.
Significance:
Highlights the liability of dealers and galleries who participate or knowingly facilitate the sale of forged sculptures.
Summary of Legal Principles
Forgery of sculptures is prosecuted under fraud and forgery statutes at federal and state levels.
Key to prosecution is proof of intent to deceive buyers or collectors by misrepresenting authorship.
Forgery includes false signatures, fake certificates of authenticity, and fabricated provenance.
Interstate sales, use of mail or electronic communications, and money laundering enhance federal jurisdiction.
Restitution and financial penalties accompany criminal sentences.
Conclusion
Forgery of sculptures is treated seriously by courts due to the high monetary and cultural value of artworks. Cases typically involve fraud schemes using fake signatures, false provenance, and deceptive sales tactics. Federal and state authorities collaborate to combat art forgery as a form of white-collar crime with significant penalties.
RELATED Blog
0 comments