Looted Cambodian art for sale by Douglas Latchford Image Credit:  US DOJ

In a case being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jessica Feinstein, in the Office’s Money Laundering and Transnational Criminal Enterprises Unit, prominent 88-year-old British art collector and dealer Douglas A.J. Latchford has been indicted in the US Federal Court of the Southern District of New York.  The charges against the Bangkok-based dealer include "wire fraud, smuggling, conspiracy and related charges pertaining to his trafficking in stolen and looted Cambodian antiquities."

Latchford in his home standing next to a Chola period (880 - 1279) Somaskanda from Tamil Nadu

For 50 years Latchford has been considered one of the world’s leading authorities on Asian Art, and at one point was believed to be the biggest single contributor to the National Museum of Cambodia, one of the very countries outlined in the indictment unsealed today at the US Federal Courthouse in Manhattan.  According to the prosecution, Latchford is believed to have been a major stakeholder, acting as a cross-border conduit in an multi-billion dollar cultural property network which trafficked in plundered artifacts from Southeast Asia to some of the most important galleries, auction houses, and museums in the western world charging him with conspiracy to smuggle, false import statements, wire fraud, and the illicit transport and sale of stolen cultural property.

According to the US indictment it is alleged that "from at least in or about 2000, up to and including at least in or about 2012, Latchford engaged in a fraudulent scheme to sell looted Cambodian antiquities on the international art market, including to dealers and buyers in the United States."

The statue of warrior Duryodhana, which once graced the cover of Sotheby’s Asia Week catalog was returned to Cambodia.  In situ, this warrior was one of two matching statues facing each other in a rendition of the great Hindu epic the Mahabharata.

Included in that list of fraudulent activity is involvement in the illicit removal and sale of the Angkorian sandstone statues stolen from Prasat Chen, the most northern sanctuary in the remote Koh Ker temple complex in Northern Cambodia.  Koh Ker (Khmer: ប្រាសាទកោះកេរ្ដិ៍) sits 120 kilometres northeast of Siem Reap and was briefly the capital of the Khmer kingdom from 928 to 944 CE.

In 2012, Latchford was already identified in a civil lawsuit, as a middleman in the trafficking of looted Khmer sculptures from “an organized looting network” and said to have conspired with the London auction house Spink & Son Ltd., to obtain false export permits for the sandstone temple antiquities.
Some of the incriminating evidence against the dealer related to charges against him include a brazenly written email sent on/about April 23, 2007, which leaves little to no  doubt about the dealer's level of direct involvement and knowledge in transnational criminal activity against cultural artifacts.  Attached to this email was a photograph of a freshly (and clandestinely) excavated standing Buddha statue, still covered in dirt.  In that email, Latchford is reported as having written "Hold on to your hat, just been offered this 56 cm Angkor Borei Buddha, just excavated, which looks fantastic. It’s still across the border, but WOW.”

It should be noted that by 1996, Cambodia had already enacted its overarching Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage, which criminalizes both the unauthorized excavation, looting, and unauthorized export of antiquities, defining "movable cultural property found by chance" to be public property. This law, known colloquially as "the 1996 Law" remains in effect and is the relevant governing law, supported by a number of decrees, sub-decrees, and regulations.  Cambodia further demonstrates its determination to protect its cultural heritage by being a signatory to the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (joined 1962); the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import (joined 1972); the World Heritage Convention (joined 1991); the Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (joined 2002), and the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (joined 2007).

As part of the present indictment Latchford is also alleged to have created "false letters of provenance and false invoices" misrepresenting the nature, age, country of origin, and/or the value  of an antiquity in order to conceal the illicit nature of the objects he brokered.  It should also be mentioned that he is also mentioned obliquely, though not directly named, as Co-Conspirator #1, in the criminal complaint filed by the Manhattan district attorney against Nancy Wiener, and several co-conspirators in December 2016.

Douglas Latchford at his home in Bangkok, Thailand

In that New York criminal complaint co-conspirator #1 (Latchford)

• allegedly is an antiquities dealer based in London and Bangkok
• allegedly entered into an agreement with Nancy Wiener to purchase and sell a looted Baphuon Shiva from Cambodia, dated to the 11th Century C.E
• allegedly shipped the Baphuon Shiva to London to be “cleaned, put together, and mounted.”
• allegedly sold Nancy Wiener a bronze Buddha sitting on a throne of Naga stolen from Thailand or Cambodia, dated to the 10th Century C.E.
• allegedly falsified provenance along with Nancy Wiener and Co-conspirator 2 for the bronze Buddha sitting on a throne of Naga stolen from Thailand or Cambodia, dated to the 10th Century C.E.
• allegedly is a male 
• allegedly admitted in email that he gave Co-Conspirator #2 bronze statues in exchange for false letters of provenance
• allegedly purchased the Krishna Dancing on Kaliya from Subhash Kapoor
• allegedly colluded with Nancy Wiener to create appraisal report for the Krishna Dancing on Kaliya 

Evidence collected in both cases illustrate a textbook formula of how looted antiquities are laundered onto the licit art market through poor controls and a lack of ethics and transparency among the major dealers working at the highest levels of the ancient art market.

Note: the charges contained in the US indictment are merely accusations and the defendant should be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.  For now Latchford, in purportedly poor health, remains at large in Bangkok, though it should be noted that the USA & Thailand signed an agreement on December 14, 1983 in which Article 2 permits extradition for any offense punishable under the laws of both States by imprisonment for more than one year.  By unsealing this indictment, it seems that the US intends to bring Latchford to the US, despite his reported ill health, to stand trial.

In conclusion, ARCA has elected to transcribe the entire SD/NY statement below, to make it searchable by future scholars conducting open source research on known/suspected traffickers.

----------


Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and Peter C. Fitzhugh, the Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Office of the Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”), announced today the unsealing of an indictment charging antiquities dealer DOUGLAS LATCHFORD, a/k/a “Pakpong Kriangsak”— with wire fraud, smuggling, conspiracy and related charges pertaining to his trafficking in stolen and looted Cambodian antiquities.  LATCHFORD remains at large, residing in Thailand.

U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said:  “As alleged, LATCHFORD built a career out of the smuggling and illicit sale of priceless Cambodian antiquities, often straight from archeological sites, in the international art market. This prosecution sends a clear message to the art market and to those who profit from the illegal trafficking of cultural treasures: the United States and the Southern District of New York will use every legal tool to stop the plundering of cultural heritage.”

HSI Special Agent in Charge Peter C. Fitzhugh said:  “The theft and trafficking of cultural property and priceless national treasures is a global concern. Historical artifacts are living sources of knowledge, objects of worships, and symbols of hope that must be safe guarded for future generations.  Through the investigative efforts of HSI special agents, three stolen artifacts from Cambodia and another from India, valued at a total of $750,000, were successfully recovered and will be returned to their rightful homeland.  In addition, an alleged major player in a multi-billion dollar cultural property transnational criminal network was identified and revealed.   Working hand in hand with our partners at the United States Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York, HSI will not waiver in its commitment to stopping the illicit distribution of cultural property, both domestically and abroad.”

According to the allegations in the Indictment unsealed today in Manhattan federal court:

Background on Looting of Cambodian Antiquities

From the mid-1960s until the early 1990s, Cambodia experienced continuous civil unrest and regular outbreaks of civil war.  During these times of extreme unrest, Cambodian archeological sites from the ancient Khmer Empire, such as Angkor Wat and Koh Ker, suffered serious damage and widespread looting. This looting was widely publicized and well-known to participants in the international art market.

Looted artifacts usually entered the international art market through an organized looting network.  Local looters, often working with local military personnel, would remove statues and architectural elements from their original locations, sometimes breaking and damaging the antiquities in the process of excavation and transportation. The antiquities would be transported to the Cambodia-Thailand border and transferred to Thai brokers, who would in turn transport them to dealers of Khmer artifacts located in Thailand, particularly Bangkok. These dealers would sell the artifacts to local or international customers, who would either retain the pieces or sell them on the international art market. Widespread looting of ancient Khmer and Cambodian antiquities continued into the 1990s.

The Scheme to Sell Looted Cambodian Antiquities

At all times relevant to this Indictment, DOUGLAS LATCHFORD, a/k/a “Pakpong Kriangsak,” the defendant, was a prominent collector and dealer in Southeast Asian art and antiquities, in particular, ancient Cambodian art. Starting in or about the early 1970s, LATCHFORD supplied major auction houses, art dealers, and museums around the world, including in the United States, with Cambodian antiquities from the ancient Khmer Empire. LATCHFORD, a dual citizen of Thailand and the United Kingdom, maintained residences in Bangkok and London.

From at least in or about 2000, up to and including at least in or about 2012, LATCHFORD engaged in a fraudulent scheme to sell looted Cambodian antiquities on the international art market, including to dealers and buyers in the United States. As part of that scheme, in order to conceal that LATCHFORD’s antiquities were the product of looting, unauthorized excavation, and illicit smuggling, and to encourage sales and increase the value of his merchandise, LATCHFORD created and caused the creation of false provenance for the antiquities he was selling. In the context of art and antiquities, provenance refers to records and other evidence documenting the origin and history of ownership of an object. In particular, LATCHFORD misrepresented the provenance of Cambodian antiquities in letters, emails, invoices, and other communications. As part of the scheme, LATCHFORD also falsified invoices and related shipping documents to facilitate the international shipment of the antiquities to dealers and buyers, and to avoid restrictions on the importation of Khmer antiquities into the United States.

Beginning in or about the early 1970s, LATCHFORD regularly supplied an auction house based in the United Kingdom (“Auction House-1”) with looted Khmer antiquities, including from the archeological site of Koh Ker in Cambodia. LATCHFORD conspired with representatives of Auction House-1 and others to conceal the real provenance of looted Khmer antiquities and to create false export licenses and documentation. Many of the antiquities that LATCHFORD consigned to Auction House-1 were eventually sold to museums and collectors in the United States.  In or about 2011, an auction house in New York (“Auction House-2”) offered for sale one of the Koh Ker statutes that LATCHFORD had originally supplied to Auction House-1, a stone guardian figure called the “Duryodhana.” During the course of preparing to sell the Duryodhana in or about 2010, Auction House-2 asked LATCHFORD and a scholar closely associated with LATCHFORD (the “Scholar”) to help trace the provenance of the Duryodhana back to the early 1970s. LATCHFORD falsely stated to Auction House-2 that he had the Duryodhana in London in 1970, and that he had consigned it with Auction House-1 in 1975; whereas in truth and in fact LATCHFORD had exported the Duryodhana from Cambodia in or about 1972. About a month later, LATCHFORD changed his story, telling Auction House-2, in substance and in part, that he had never owned the Duryodhana. Around the same time that LATCHFORD falsely denied owning the Duryodhana, the Scholar warned LATCHFORD in an email, “I think maybe you shouldn’t be known to have been associated with the Koh Ker Guardian figures[.] . . . Let’s fudge a little, and just put the blame squarely on [Auction House-1] .  .  .  .”

Over the course of his lengthy career, LATCHFORD continued to act as a conduit for recently looted Cambodian antiquities. LATCHFORD advertised purportedly newly discovered and excavated pieces for sale to trusted associates, including a Manhattan-based dealer in Southeast Asian art (the “Dealer”). For example, on or about August 12, 2005, LATCHFORD emailed the Dealer photographs of a bronze seated Buddha, visibly covered in earth. Latchford explained that the photographs showed the statute “before cleaning” by a restorer, and “[w]hen it was found they took off most of the mud, or as it was, a sandy soil, it was found near Sra Srang, the lake in front of Banteay Kedi, right in the Angkor [Wat] Complex.”  Similarly, on or about March 13, 2006, LATCHFORD sent the Dealer an email labeled “PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL -------- FOR YOUR EYES ONLY.” The email contained a photograph of a bronze head. LATCHFORD explained that the head “was recently found around the site of the Angkor Borei group in the N E of Cambodia, in the Preah Vihar area. They are looking for the body, no luck so far, all they have found last week were two land mines !! What price would you be interested in buying it at? let me know as I will have to bargain for it.”  On or about April 23, 2007, LATCHFORD sent the Dealer another email, attaching a photograph of a standing Buddha statute that appears to be covered in dirt. LATCHFORD wrote, “Hold on to your hat, just been offered this 56 cm Angkor Borei Buddha, just excavated, which looks fantastic. It’s still across the border, but WOW.”

In order to facilitate the sale and international transportation of the antiquities to buyers and to conceal that the antiquities were looted, LATCHFORD, created false letters of provenance and false invoices, including letters of provenance purporting to have been drafted by a particular art collector (the “False Collector”). For example, in or about 2000, LATCHFORD sold a 12th Century stone Khmer sculpture to a museum in Colorado (the “Colorado Museum”). LATCHFORD informed the Colorado Museum that he had purchased the piece from the False Collector in June 1999, and provided the Colorado Museum with a letter of provenance purportedly from the False Collector as part of the sale.  However, LATCHFORD also supplied the Colorado Museum with records indicating that the statute was transported from LATCHFORD’s residence in Bangkok to London in 1994, long before he claimed to have purchased it from the False Collector.  The False Collector died in or about 2001. Thereafter, LATCHFORD continued to provide numerous provenance letters purportedly provided by the False Collector, while claiming, falsely, that the False Collector was still alive.

On other occasions, LATCHFORD directed third parties to create false provenance documents and false invoices for him.  For example, in or about September 2005, LATCHFORD sold the Dealer a 12th Century Angkor Wat-style standing Buddha statue for $90,000. LATCHFORD told the Dealer that the Buddha “needs to be cleaned, as there is surface corrosion and earth still on it,” indicia of recent excavation. LATCHFORD arranged to ship the Buddha from Bangkok to an “antique consultant/collector” in Singapore (the “Singapore Collector”), and from Singapore to the Dealer’s gallery in Manhattan. LATCHFORD instructed the Singapore Collector to “re-invoice[]” the Buddha on the Collector’s letterhead, “mentioning it has been in your collection for the past 12 years.” The Singapore Collector followed LATCHFORD’s instructions, creating a new, false invoice and letter of provenance stating that the Buddha had been in the Singapore Collector’s private collection in Singapore for the last 12 years, omitting any mention of LATCHFORD, and falsely describing the statute as a “17th C. Bronze Standing Figure from Laos.” The Singapore Collector then shipped the Buddha with the false invoice and false provenance to the Dealer in Manhattan.

As part of the scheme to sell looted Cambodian antiquities in the United States, from at least in or about 2005 up to and including in or about 2011, LATCHFORD supplied false information to the United States Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) regarding the antiquities he imported into the United States for resale. In particular, LATCHFORD’s false invoices misstated the nature, age, country of origin, and/or value of the Cambodian antiquities. LATCHFORD misrepresented the country of origin and the age of the goods in particular in order to conceal that they were looted antiquities, and to avoid an embargo on the importation into the United States of Khmer antiquities exported from Cambodia after 1999. Frequently, LATCHFORD listed the “country of origin” as “Great Britain” or “Laos,” rather than Cambodia, and often described the objects as “figures” from the 17th or 18th century.

*                      *                      *

Image Credit: Rahul Nangare,  Indian Revenue Service Diplomat, First Secretary High Commission of India, London

On August 15, the High Commissioner of India in London accepted the return of two objects looted from India.  The first was a 1st Century BCE - 1st Century CE carved limestone railing, which experts believe may have possibly been stolen from the Buddhist complex at Vaddamānu in the south Indian state of Andhra Pradesh.  The second item, was a 17th century Indian bronze figure depicting the Krishna as Balakrishna, standing on a lotus base.  The Hindu deity is naked except for his jeweled ornaments, dancing with his right leg raised, holding a ball of butter in his right hand.  This statue is believed to have been taken from the area of Tamil Nadu, the Indian state located in the extreme south of the subcontinent.

Both objects were voluntarily relinquished by an unnamed collector said to have purchased the objects via an also unnamed individual, long implicated in illicit trafficking. This unnamed dealer is presumed to be Subhash Kapoor.

For the uninitiated, Vaddamānu in Andhra Pradesh’s Guntur district might not ring any bells.  But for S. Vijay Kumar, a Singapore-based Indian trafficking expert and co-founder of the India Pride Project, the area is of considerable historic importance and one subject to looting.  ARCA has also noted that excavations in the area have yielded railing pillars, carved in limestone ('Palnad marble), similar to the one that has just been restituted.  One example of such is pictured here. These objects, along with cross-bars, copings, and other architectural elements were used in ancient Vihara and Stupa, some which date as far back as the Mauryan Empire (322 BCE - 185 BCE).  At Buddhist sites such as these, carved stone railings, sometimes square in plan, but more often circular, were used to define the confines of religious sites and could also have been used as decoration to delineate an external processional path.

Both of these recently restituted pieces came to the attention of U.S. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) when the London-based collector who possessed them contacted the agency wanting to voluntarily surrender the objects to their rightful home.  The pieces are believed to have been purchased the objects via Subhash Kapoor, a disgraced ancient art dealer arrested in Europe and later extradited.  Kapoor is currently in Indian custody in the high security block of Tiruchirapalli Central Prison in the South Indian state of Tamil Nadu.  There he awaits trial on criminal cases for illegally exporting idols and artefacts from plundered temples.

On 08 July 2019, the Manhattan District Attorney's office followed suit with the Indian government and filed their own formal criminal charges against Kapoor and seven other co-conspirators.  In the court's documentation,  the well organized smuggling ring is believed to have smuggled $145 USD million worth of objects out of India and in to market countries in an operation believed to have lasted for as long as thirty years. Arrest warrants have been issued for all eight defendants on a total of 213 Counts, ranging from grand larceny to criminal possession of stolen property.  


Subhash Kapoor himself is listed in a total of 86 Counts in the recent New York charging document.  His charges include Grand Larceny in the First Degree (1 Count), Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the First Degree (16 Counts), Grand Larceny in the Second Degree (13 Counts), Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Second Degree (50 Counts), Grand Larceny in the Third Degree (1 Count) Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Third Degree (3 Counts), Conspiracy in the Fourth Degree (1 Count) and one Count of Scheme and Defraud in the First Degree.

Before Kapoor's arrest on 30 October 2011 at Frankfurt International Airport for the charges he faces in India and his subsequent extradition from Germany to India on 14 July 2012, the influential dealer was widely feted in New York art circles.  In connection with his business, he maintained contacts around the globe, in Afghanistan, Cambodia, Bangkok, Bangladesh, Dubai, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, with several of his associates implicated in shipping and selling stolen objects supplied with fake provenance to hide their illicit origin. At the height of his operation, Kapoor personally visited Tamil Nadu frequently which underscores the intimacy of the collector-dealer-smuggler-looter network as it relates to these cases.

Reflective of and similar to the recent restitution, Kapoor's name has already been tied to looted antiquities from Andhra Pradesh, the zone where the limestone railing returned via the UK originates from.  In 2016, a 3rd century CE stone panel, illegally exported from India, originating from the Satavahana-era Buddhist Complex of Chandavaram. was also returned to India by the National Gallery of Australia.  In that instance, the museum stated that it had been duped into purchasing the carving from Kapoor’s Art of the Past gallery for $595,000 USD in 2005 after the dealer provided themuseum with falsified provenance documentation indicating that the object had left the country of origin before the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.  That object was later clearly identified as having been stolen from the Chandavaram site museum in 2001.

Terracotta Rattle in the form of a Yaksha  Metropolitan Museum Accession Number: 1990.309

Likely as a result of the increased pressure by grassroots organizations such as India Pride Project and law enforcement and prosecutors pressing formal charges against actors in the US, UK and India, two museums in the United States are finally taking action in evaluating the ethics of retaining prized antiquities within their collections, which are likely tied to Kapoor's illegal activities. According to an article in the New York Times, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, has at least 15 antiquities known to be directly or indirectly associated with Subhash Kapoor which have been acquired after 1990.

The first, the terracotta rattle pictured at left in the form of yakshas (male nature spirit), dates to the 1st Century BCE Shunga period, comes from the archaeological site of Chandraketugarh in the Indian state of West Bengal. It is documented in the Met's collection with no other provenance aside from a passing mention that it was purchased from Kapoor's now shuttered Madison Avenue gallery, Art of the Past.

At the time of Kapoor's arrest in Europe, the Met's management and curatorial staff showed little interest whatsoever in reviewing the legitimacy of the Kapoor linked pieces within their collection.  This despite the spartan provenance which accompanied many of his objects and the fact that it has been proven in other instances that the network falsified provenance documentation.

Now, perhaps in hindsight, and in the wake of recent embarrassing seizures, including an Egyptian mummiform coffin, inscribed in the name of Nedjemankh, an Italian Bell-Krater by Python and a Lebanese marble head of a bull it seems that the Met has finally decided it might be prudent to rethink its stance on some of its art acquisitions from India.

Image Credit:  S. Vijay Kumar Via Twitter 8 February 2019

Likewise on 20 August 2019 it was finally announced that the Los Angeles County Museum of Art had come round to deaccessioning its own contested Buddha.  First identified by India Pride Project in February 2018 and related to the same theft as the restituted Nalanda Buddha identified at Maastricht's TEFAF in 2018, LACMA had, until recently, resisted acknowledging that the bronze in their collection was stolen 58 years ago.  This despite the fact that the bronze was matched via an image India Pride Project had obtained of 14 objects stolen from the Nalanda Archaeological Museum of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in Nalanda, Bihar, India in 1961.  Despite this overwhelming evidence, it took almost a year and a half of pressuring the museum,  pursuing India’s claim, for LACMA to decide to deaccession the stolen bonze.

All too often, even when faced with proof of illicit origin, museums weigh the rarity or price of their acquisition above the ethical responsibility of voluntarily restituting objects found to have passed through the illicit market.  When they do, they overlook the cumulative cultural cost of lost art to poorer and more vulnerable source countries such as, in this case, India.  It is critical to remember that each and every object stolen or looted, whether or not the statute of limitations has expired, presents a loss to the source nation's cultural patrimony, and when there are many objects plundered, as can be seen within this one trafficking network, each of these losses has a cumulative negative effect.

Those working in the black market bank of the fact that many sculptures stolen from small villages are less likely to be reported to the police, and if they are reported, that not much is achieved because little documentation is made outlining the details surrounding the theft or the object itself making it difficult to determine the actors involved.  Thankfully illicit antiquities researchers, and now more often key prosecutors, like those in New York, are willing to consider the evidence collected by diligent researchers and scholars, as well as reviewing the historic records of civil servants, even retired ones, in order to access overlooked details like old photographs and museum records which can sometimes help determine in determining if the provenance provided to contested pieces is fact or fiction.

By:  Lynda Albertson

This autumn ARCA will begin working on a project to create a repository art crime related case documentation on criminal and civil proceedings relevant to researchers in the field. While national and international bodies and jurisdictional court systems offer the most comprehensive and up to date information to be found within the public domain on individual cases and the laws as they apply to those cases, researchers may find that they prefer to use other sources for reasons of functionality or comparative analysis. This is particularly true for art crime researchers looking to conduct searches in which they will be comparing cases or laws from multiple jurisdictions or nations. While this repository is at its preliminary stages, we hope that its growing list of public record documents will be of use to professionals and students interested in the study of art crime and its prosecution. Some cases which have preliminary public domain documentation include the following:

United States of America 

New York 

Lynda and William Beierwaltes v. Directorate General of Antiquities of the Lebanese Republic

Republic of Turkey v. Christie’s INC. and Michael Steinhardt

The People of the State of New York -against- Nancy Wiener

United States District Court Eastern District of New York x Approximately Four Hundred Fifty Ancient Cuneiform Tablets; and Approximately Three Thousand Ancient Clay Bullae

United States of America v. Frederick Schultz

In ARCA's December 25th blog post ARCA published the criminal complaint filed in Manhattan Criminal Court, signed by Special Agent Brenton Easter of the Department of Homeland Security, which indicated the charges presented against New York art dealer Nancy Wiener through her gallery Nancy Wiener Gallery.

Today we have thought to publish the sentencing guidelines should this defendant be convicted of the charges as well as a bit of distilled information about the individuals mentioned in the body of the New York criminal complaint. 

In New York State, Criminal Conspiracy is punishable by law when one acts, agrees, or performs with intent to commit a crime. Depending on the crime committed, a conspiracy charge could be prosecuted either as a NY State crime or as a United States Federal crime.  In this case, a criminal complaint has been brought against Nancy Wiener for:

Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in First Degree – NY Panel Law 165.54

A person is found guilty of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree when he knowingly possesses stolen property, with intent to benefit himself or a person other than an owner thereof or to impede the recovery by an owner, and when the value of the stolen property exceeds $1,000,000. 

The pending case against New York art dealer Nancy Wiener the New York Penal Law 165.54  would be classified as a “B” non-violent felony.  As a potential first time offender, Wiener faces a minimum of one to three years in prison and a maximum of eight and one third to twenty-five years. Probation and community service are not options.

Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in Second Degree – NY Penal Law 165.52

A person is found guilty of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree when he knowingly possesses stolen property, with intent to benefit himself or a person other than an owner thereof or to impede the recovery by an owner, and when the value of the stolen property exceeds $50,000.

The pending case against New York art dealer Nancy Wiener the New York Penal Law 165.52 would be classified as a “C” non-violent felony. As a potential first time offender, Wiener faces no minimum sentence but faces as much as five to fifteen years in prison. Alternate sentences include probation, probation coupled with jail, community service, fines, and a conditional discharge.

There are four legal presumptions associated with New York Penal Law 165.55, the following are the two relevant ones in this case:

Conspiracy in the fourth degree – NY Penal Law 105.10(1)

A person is guilty of conspiracy in the fourth degree when, with intent that conduct constituting:

  1. a class B or class C felony be performed, he or she agrees with one or more persons to engage in or cause the performance of such conduct; 

The pending case against New York art dealer Nancy Wiener the New York Penal Law 105.10(1) would be classified as an “E” non-violent felony.  Punishment ranges for this offense range from no jail with probation to up to four years in state prison.

Conspiracy is relatively easy for prosecutors to prove because New York law does not require exact proof of language used in an agreement to commit a crime, and only requires the testimony of one party.  As seen in the complaint we published yesterday, there appears to be sufficient testimony to make this conspiracy charge stick.

Difference between a Criminal Complaint and a Criminal Indictment

A criminal complaint lists the charges that the prosecuting attorney will file against a person. It typically describes the nature of the offense and consists simply of a signed affidavit by the accuser.

A criminal indictment would be a written document, usually presented before a grand jury who decides if the charges warrant further action.  Criminal complaints require sworn testimony given under oath for the courts to move forward with the case.

UPDATE: Checking records at the New York State Unified Court System for this case, it now appears that this defendant has been indicted on Conspiracy in the fourth degree.    The defendant has entered a "Not Guilty" plea and has been released on her own recognisance.  Her next court appearance has been scheduled for February 28, 2017.

Who are the players mentioned in the antiquities looting network outlined in the criminal complaint?

From the content of the criminal complaint issued by New York prosecutors we get a preliminary outline of the pertinent facts alleged in the case that will then be presented in court should Ms. Wiener's case move on to trial.   The portrait painted by prosecutors illustrates what looks to be a complex network of looters, middlemen, and antiquities dealers that suggests the mentioned players have benefited financially from the trade in illicit antiquities for a number of years.

Here is a distilled summary of the key persons mentioned within the criminal complaint

Informant #1 - According to the criminal complaint this cooperating individual is a dealer in illegal antiquities known to the District Attorney. In the complaint Informant #1

• allegedly implicated Co-Conspirator #1 in the purchase and sale of the Baphuon Shiva from Cambodia.
• allegedly reported that Nancy Wiener had removed all records of where, when, from whom, and for how much each antiquity was acquired
• allegedly reported that Nancy Wiener later told informant #1 that the records no longer existed. 
• allegedly provided information on the Sharod Singh connection with the looted red sandstone relief (“Red Sandstone Couple”), from India, dated to the 1st–2nd Century C.E., 
• allegedly provided information on the Vaman Ghiya connection with the a stolen mottled red sandstone relief depicting a Bacchanalian scene, dated to the 2nd Century C.E., 
• allegedly implicated Co-Conspirator #5 in the sale to Doris Wiener of a silver-inlaid gilt-bronze figure of Avalokiteshvara from Northeastern India or Western Tibet (China), dated to 10th-11th C.E.,
• allegedly reported seeing objects procured by Co-Conspirator #6 the purchased by Nancy Wiener in New York unrestored, unmounted, and/or without bases - classic signs of looting. 

Informant #2 - According to the criminal complaint this cooperating individual is another dealer in looted antiquities known to the District Attorney.  In the complaint Informant #2

• allegedly provided information on the Naga Buddha
• allegedly implicated Nancy Wiener in the purchase of Seated Buddha #1 from trafficker Vaman Ghiya
• allegedly implicated Nancy Wiener in the purchase of Seated Buddha #2 from trafficker Vaman Ghiya
• allegedly implicated Subpash Kapoor in the purchase and smuggling of the stolen Krishna Dancing on Kaliya (cobra) from Tamil Nadu, India, dating from the Chola Period (11th-12th Century)
• allegedly implicated Co-Conspirator #4 in the handling and restoration of the stolen Krishna Dancing on Kaliya (cobra) from Tamil Nadu, India, dating from the Chola Period (11th-12th Century)
• allegedly implicated Co-Conspirator #1 in the purchase of the stolen Krishna Dancing on Kaliya (cobra) from Tamil Nadu, India, dating from the Chola Period (11th-12th Century)
• allegedly implicated Co-Conspirator #5 as being an antiquities smuggler of Tibetan descent based in Nepal and Hong Kong who was in frequent email contact with Defendant about illicit pieces from Nepal. 
• allegedly implicated Co-Conspirator #6 and his father as being suppliers of illicit cultural property from primarily Afghanistan and Pakistan.
• allegedly provided information on false provenance provided for Christie's sale created for pieces that passed between Nancy Wiener and Co-Conspirator #6 

Informant #3 - According to the criminal complaint this cooperating individual is another dealer in looted antiquities known to the District Attorney.  In the complaint Informant #3

Co-conspirator #1 - According to the criminal complaint co-conspirator #1

Co-conspirator #2 - According to the criminal complaint co-conspirator #2

Co-conspirator #3 - According to the criminal complaint co-conspirator #3

Co-conspirator #4, - According to the criminal complaint co-conspirator #4

Co-conspirator #5 - According to the criminal complaint co-conspirator #5

Co-conspirator #6 - According to the criminal complaint co-conspirator #6

Other individuals who are mentioned in the complaint

Vaman Ghiya - According to the criminal complaint, seized documents and statements made by informant #2 implicate Weiner in the purchase of the Seated Buddha #1 from Vaman Ghiya, someone who was listed as a long-time supplier from India who often used "Shantoo" to sell his looted antiquities. According to seized documents and informant #1, Doris Wiener was allegedly implicated in buying a stolen mottled red sandstone relief depicting a Bacchanalian scene from Ghiya that Wiener then allegedly falsely claiming that her mother had acquired from a private collection in London.

Ghiya is a known antiquities smuggler who allegedly confessed to selling 10,000 objects of Indian art via Sotheby’s—subject of a BBC sting operation.  Convicted in 2008 and sentenced to life imprisonment, the conviction was quashed on appeal because of procedural irregularities during the police prosecution.

According to a 2007 New Yorker article... "The police found no sculptures in Ghiya’s home. But, in the days that followed, Shrivastava’s men raided half a dozen properties that Ghiya owned around Jaipur, his farm outside the city, and various godowns, or storage facilities, in Mathura and Delhi. They discovered antique paintings, swords and shields, marble panels, stone pillars, three hundred and forty-eight pieces of sculpture, and a dismantled Mogul pavilion the size of a small house."

Ranjeet Kanwar - According to the criminal complaint and statements by a former employee of Kapoor, “Shantoo” is the alleged nickname of Ranjeet Kanwar, one of Subhash Kapoor's alleged main suppliers of stolen antiquities from India.  His name appears on a computer disk file folder that contained three pictures of looted Seated Buddha #1 found at the Sofia Bros. Storage, in New York County, a storage facility rented by Subhash Kapoor.

Om Sharma - According to the criminal complaint, seized emails, and statements by informants #1 and #2, it is alleged that Om Sharma is a supplier of illicit antiquities from India.  Wiener allegedly bought the stolen red sandstone figure depicting a Jain goddess from Sharma in 2009. The complaint also states that in August 2010, “Victor” had allegedly emailed Doris and Nancy Wiener separately to offer one of the Apsara Marbles, attaching pictures of the dirty, unrestored sculpture on the ground with what appeared to be cut marks. According to statements from informants #1 and #2, “Victor” is the alleged email pseudonym for Om and Badal Sharma.

Sharod Singh - According to the criminal complaint, informants #1 and #2, it is alleged that Sharod Singh is a supplier of illicit antiquities from India. According to emails and records provided by informant #1, Doris Wiener allegedly purchased a looted red sandstone relief (“Red Sandstone Couple”) from this individual in 2002 and the allegedly smuggled it into the US via Kurt Anderson, Inc., a corporation owned by her.

The authorities have stated that they executed more than 50 search warrants as part of this investigation.

Update:  15 August 2020:

NB: As details in parallel cases have been released publically by the courts several of the alleged co-conspirators have been identified publically.

Co-Conspirator #1 = Douglas Latchford
Co-Conspirator #2 = Emma Bunker
Co-Conspirator #3 = Neil Perry Smith. 

This 12-page complaint filed in Manhattan Criminal Court, signed by Special Agent Brenton Easter of the Department of Homeland Security, lays out the charges against New York art dealer Nancy Wiener through her gallery Nancy Wiener Gallery.

The complaint is a textbook formula of how looted antiquities are laundered onto the licit art market through poor controls and a lack of ethics and transparency among the major players in the art market. 

The transcription below is the html version of the Court's PDF file version located here.

NOTE:

ARCA has elected to transcribe the document to make it searchable by future scholars conducting open source research on known traffickers.

Update:  15 August 2020:

NB: As details in parallel cases have been released publically by the courts several of the alleged co-conspirators have been identified publically.

Co-Conspirator #1 = Douglas Latchford
Co-Conspirator #2 = Emma Bunker
Co-Conspirator #3 = Neil Perry Smith. 

Page 1 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

Special Agent Brenton Easter, Shield 3014 of the Department of HomelandSecurity Investigations, states as follows: 

The defendant is charged with: 

1 PL 165.54 Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the First Degree (defendant #1: 1 count) 

2 PL 165.52 Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Second Degree (defendant #1: 1 count) 

3 PL 105.10(1) Conspiracy in the Fourth Degree (defendant #1: 1 count) 

At the times and places described below in the County and State of New York, the defendant knowingly possessed stolen property with a value in excess of one million dollars with intent to benefit a person other than an owner of the property and to impede recovery by an owner thereof; the defendant knowingly possessed stolen property with a value in excess of 50,000 dollars with intent to benefit a person than an owner of the property and to impede recovery by an owner thereof; the defendant, with intent that conduct constituting a class B or C felony be performed, agreed with one or more persons to engage in and cause the performance of such conduct. 

The factual basis for these charges are as follows: 

Deponent, a Special Agent with DHS-HSI, states that since approximately 2007, he has been assigned to a squad responsible for investigating, among other things, money laundering, smuggling of contraband, art fraud, and the interstate sale and transportation of stolen cultural property. As a Special Agent, Deponent has led or joined teams of agents and officers in the execution of judicially-authorized search and arrest warrants seeking the arrest of individuals and recovery of property and evidence in connection with illegal importations and exportations, and with the interstate and foreign transportation and sale of stolen goods. 

Deponent states that, based on participation in this and other investigations, he is familiar

Page 2 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

with the facts and circumstances of this investigation through the following: personal participation; discussions with agents in DHS-HSI and other foreign and domestic law enforcement agencies; interviews of witnesses, including cooperating witnesses that he has worked with on this and other cases; and records and reports relating to, or generated from, this investigation. No attempt has been made to set forth the complete details of this investigation that include tens of thousands of emails, documents, and photographs recovered pursuant to more than fifty judicially authorized search warrants. Statements andfacts listed have been summarized for the specific purposes of this complaint. 

CONSPIRACY. Between at least 1999 and 2016, with intent that conduct constituting the crimes of Grand Larceny in the First and Second Degrees and Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the First and Second Degrees be performed, the Defendant utilized her business, Nancy Wiener Gallery, 49 East 74th Street, New York County, to buy, smuggle, launder, and sell millions of dollars’ worth of antiquities stolen from Afghanistan, Cambodia, China, India, Pakistan, and Thailand. 

A. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS OF THE CONSPIRACY. Defendant and her co-conspirators have trafficked in illegal antiquities for decades. Transporting looted cultural property from the site of the theft to the ultimate buyer through intermediary countries in order to hide the true country of origin, Defendant used a laundering process that included restoration services to hide damage from illegal excavations, straw purchases at auction houses to create sham ownership histories, and the creation of false provenance to predate international laws of patrimony prohibiting the exportation of looted antiquities. 

B. OVERT ACTS. 

1. BAPHUON SHIVA. According to documents provided by informant #1, a dealer in illegal antiquities known to the District Attorney, there was an agreement between Defendant and an antiquities dealer based in London and Bangkok (“Co-Conspirator #1.”) to purchase and sell a Baphuon Shiva from Cambodia, dated to the 11th Century C.E., 39.5 inches high, depicting Shiva standing, and valued at $578,500. Exhibit A. 

Baphuon Shiva, Cambodia

According to emails seized pursuant to search warrants, Defendant and Co-Conspirator #1 bought the Baphuon Shiva in September 2008 “direct from a supplier, and not through a

Page 3 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

dealer” for $250,000. According to informants #1 and #2 (another dealer in looted antiquities known to the District Attorney), buying from a “supplier” is an indication of a looted antiquity. Co-Conspirator #1 then shipped the Baphuon Shiva to London to be “cleaned, put together, and mounted.” In my experience, and according to informants #1 and #2, looted antiquities need to be “cleaned” of tell-tale dirt and debris; “put together,” because stolen statues are often cut up into smaller pieces-called “orphans”-for ease of smuggling; and “mounted,” because stolen statues and reliefs are, often cut from their original pedestal or wall. 

According to seized documents, Defendant then consigned the Baphuon Shiva to Sotheby's New York, for its 2011 sale of “Indian and Southeast Asian Works of Art.” In May 2010, a Sotheby’s employee noted that the Baphuon Shiva had “cracks and joins dressed up with paint splatters to mask repairs.” In my experience, and according to informants #1 and #2, because shovels and picks are frequently used during the clandestine theft of antiquities, such damage is often a sign of looting. According to seized emails, Defendant told Sotheby's the statue had been purchased from antiquities dealer Spink & Son around 1968, but that she had no written proof. In my experience, and according to informants #1 and #2, misrepresenting the true provenance of an antiquity is essential for selling stolen items in the market, because false provenance prevents the items from being easily traced and enables ownership records to be falsified to predate the patrimony laws of the antiquity’s country of origin. Sotheby’s sold the Baphuon Shiva as lot 29 from its showroom at 1334 York Avenue, New York County on March 24, 2011, for $578,500. 

2. NAGA BUDDHA. In November 2011, Co-Conspirator #1 sold Defendant for $500,000 a stolen bronze Buddha from Thailand or Cambodia, dated to the 10th Century C.E., 17.75 inches high, depicting Buddha sitting on a throne of Naga (snake), with a market value of $1,500,000. Exhibit B. According to informant #2, the Naga Buddha came from the Khmer Empire-present-day Cambodia and parts of Thailand.

Buddha sitting on a Naga (snake) throne

According to seized emails, Defendant had earlier begun falsifying the Naga Buddha's provenance with Co-Conspirator #1 and Co-Conspirator #2 (who works as a research consultant for an American museum) by arranging for a photograph of the Naga Buddha to be published in a 2011 book. In my experience, and according to informants #1 and #2, publishing a photograph of a looted antiquity is a common laundering practice. In another

Page 4 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

email, Co-Conspirator #2 wrote that she had “changed” the provenance “a bit,” asking Co-Conspirator #1 if the changes were “okay.” Co-Conspirator #1 then emailed Defendant, seeking her approval. In another email, Co-Conspirator #1 told Defendant that he typically gave Co-Conspirator #2 bronze statues in exchange for false letters of provenance. 

In January 2016, Defendant shipped the Naga Buddha to a New York-based restorer (“Co-Conspirator #3”) for restoration, stating its value to be $850,000. In February 2016, Co-Conspirator #3 emailed Defendant a bill for the restoration, noting that the Naga Buddha appeared to have been struck by an agricultural tool, resulting in a jagged break - a sign of looting. Defendant displayed the Naga Buddha for sale for $1,500,000 in the Nancy Wiener Gallery until Deponent seized it pursuant to a warrant in March 2016. 

3. TWO SEATED BUDDHAS. In 1999, Defendant possessed, through her gallery, a stolen sandstone seated Buddha, from India, dated to the 1st-3rd Century C.E., 33 inches high and valued at $500,000 (“Seated Buddha #1"). Exhibit C. In 2000, Defendant sold the statue to Singapore’s Asian Civilisations Museum (“Singapore”) without any statement of provenance. Years later, when Singapore requested provenance, Defendant first claimed that Seated Buddha #1 had belonged to an unnamed European collection for at least 35 to 40 years, but then stated that the owner's father had acquired the piece in India. According to seized emails, Defendant then provided a third version: that the piece had belonged to Ian Donaldson, who purchased it when posted to Vietnam between 1964 and 1966. 

Pursuant to a search warrant executed at Sofia Bros. Storage, in New York County, a storage facility rented by separately charged defendant Subhash Kapoor (“Kapoor”) for his business, Art of the Past, Deponent discovered an unlabeled computer disc containing a folder titled “Shantoo.” According to a former employee of Kapoor, “Shantoo” is the nickname of Ranjeet Kanwar, one of Kapoor's main suppliers of stolen antiquities from India. The disc contained three pictures of Seated Buddha #1; in one, dated “92 11 8,” the statue appearsstill wet as it lay on a dirty floor in front of a makeshift black backdrop. Exhibit D. According to informant #2 and seized documents, Defendant purchased Seated Buddha #1 from Vaman Ghiya, a long-time supplier from India who often used Shantoo to sell his looted antiquities. 

According to informant #2 and seized documents, Defendant also acquired a second stolen

Page 5 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

seated Buddha (“Seated Buddha #2”) from Ghiya, possessing it through her gallery until she sold it to the National Gallery of Australia (“Australia”), in Canberra, Australia, in 2007 for $1,080,000. Exhibit E. In May 2006, Defendant told an employee of the NGA that she had purchased Seated Buddha #2 in 2000, “but knew of it several years prior to that,” and that “[i]t was originally purchased in Hong Kong by an Englishman posted there between1964-66.” When asked for proof, Defendant again used the name Ian Donaldson. Thus, for Australia, she claimed Ian Donaldson had been posted to Hong Kong between 1964-66, despite the fact that she told Singapore Ian Donaldson “was posted to Vietnam.” between 1964–66. 

4. KRISHNA. Pursuant to a search warrant executed at Kapoor's gallery at 1242 Madison Ave, in New York County, Deponent discovered a computer with an e-file entitled “travel.” A subfolder entitled “05 10 India” contained pictures of cultural property Kapoor purchased in India in October 2005 and later smuggled to New York. Some of these pictures depict Krishna Dancing on Kaliya (cobra) from Tamil Nadu, India, dating from the Chola Period (11th-12th Century). Exhibits F-G. In the pictures, the statue was still encrusted with dirt - in my experience, and according to informants #1 and #2, this indicates recent looting. 

According to informant #2, Kapoor purchased the Krishna in India and smuggled it to NewYork hidden in a shipment of legal handicrafts - in my experience, this is a common practice to evade U.S. Customs. According to a document recovered from Kapoor's computer, Kapoor sent the statue in June 2006 to a U.K. -based restorer (“Co-Conspirator #4”) for restoration to hide the signs of looting. According to informant #2 and seized emails, Co-Conspirator #1 - who frequently used Co-Conspirator #4 to clean and restore stolen cultural property - saw the Krishna during restoration and bought it. Another document on Kapoor's computer records the sale to Co-Conspirator #1 for “650,000.00” on “30-Aug.” 

According to seized emails, in June 2011, Co-Conspirator #1 emailed Defendant pre- and post-restoration pictures of the stolen Krishna, and requested that Defendant prepare an appraisal to assist in the future sale of the statue. According to a document on her computer, “Asian treasures Final v4,” Defendant provided an appraisal for $3,500,000. 

4. DORIS WIENER COLLECTION. According to documents on Defendant’s computer, upon Doris Wiener's death in April 2011, antiquities that had been owned by Doris Wiener

Page 6 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

Gallery in New York County were transferred to the estate of Doris Wiener, of which Defendant was co-executor. According to informant #1, Defendant removed all records of where, when, from whom, and for how much each piece was acquired (filling multiple file cabinets) and later told informant #1 that the records no longer existed. 

According to seized emails, Defendant contacted Sotheby's New York to sell the collection, but could not provide documentation that the antiquities had been removed from their countries of origin prior to each country’s patrimony laws. According to Tess Davis, an expert in the laws of patrimony, those years are 1980 for Afghanistan, 1900 for Cambodia, 1982 for China, 1972 for India, 1956 for Nepal, 1975 for Pakistan, and 1961 for Thailand. 

According to seized emails, Defendant instead consigned the collection to Christie's New York, because their policy requires only that an antiquity have been out of its country of origin prior to 2000 (or 1999 for Cambodia), regardless of that country’s patrimony law. In November 2011, Christie's requested provenance information for the “top 20 lots” of the sale, and Defendant provided a document, “Provenance and Country of Origin Details,” that contained false provenance. According to that document, of the 380 lots in the collection, ten came from Spink & Son (an antiquities dealer Defendant had falsely listed as provenance for other stolen antiquities); and four were originally owned by Doris Wiener (who had consigned them for auction to Sotheby’s or Christie's and then reacquired them - in my experience, and according to informants #1 and #2, this type of straw purchase is a common laundering tactic to create a false ownership history). Of the remaining 366 lots, eight were listed with an ownership history prior to Doris Wiener. Six of those eight listed Sotheby’s or Christie's, one listed a “member of the Diplomatic Corps,” and one listed an actual name. For the 380 lots, then, Defendant provided the name of an owner prior to Doris Wiener (other than Spink & Son) for one lot. Christie's offered all 380 lots for sale from its showroom at 20 Rockefeller Plaza, New York County, on March 20, 2012, resulting in a total sale of $12,796,437. 

This portion of the conspiracy utilized the following trafficking networks: 

a. OM SHARMA NETWORK. According to seized emails and informants #1 and #2, Om Sharma is a supplier of illicit antiquities from India. Beginning in 2008, Doris Wiener had a series of email exchanges with Sharma about buying a stolen red sandstone figure, from

Page 7 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

India, dated to the 12th Century C.E., 26 inches high, depicting a Jain goddess, and valued at $74,500. According to these emails, Doris Wiener had seen the Jain Goddess still wet and pre-restoration-signs of looting. Exhibits H-J. She bought the statue in 2009, wiring the money to Hong Kong, and smuggled the piece to her New York gallery. 

This Jain Goddess was one of the pieces consigned by Defendant to Christie's (lot 48) for its sale of March 20, 2012. According to seized emails, Defendant falsely claimed to Christie's that the Jain Goddess had been in a private collection in London dating back to the 1980s, before her mother acquired it in New York in 2009. It sold for $74,500. 

b. SHAROD SINGH NETWORK. According to informants #1 and #2, Sharod Singh is a supplier of illicit antiquities from India. According to emails and records provided by informant #1, Doris Wiener in 2002 bought a looted red sandstone relief (“Red Sandstone Couple”), from India, dated to the 1st–2nd Century C.E., and valued at $150,000. Exhibit K. Doris Wiener then smuggled the relief into the United States via Kurt Anderson, Inc., a corporation owned by her to facilitate the importation of looted antiquities. Her 2007 Kurt Anderson account ledger lists a red sandstone couple as line #49, “Sharod Singh Seated Stones (3) Partnership with Nancy, S1044-S1047, $150,000.00.” 

This Red Sandstone Couple was one of the pieces Defendant consigned to Christie's (lot 22) for its sale of March 20, 2012. According to seized emails, Defendant first told Christie's that her mother had acquired the relief “in London in the late 1990’s.” During a recorded conversation after the sale, Defendant admitted using a surrogate to purchase the statue for herself at auction—a tactic often used to launder the statue and later sell it at a higher price as a previously “published” piece. According to recovered documents, and to complete the laundering process, Defendant then changed the provenance to “the 1970s,” and received a certificate from the Art Loss Register. In March of 2016, informant #3, another dealer in illegal antiquities, saw the Red Sandstone Couple at the Nancy Wiener Gallery. Defendant offered the relief for sale, using a third provenance: that it had been in her mother's collection since 1992. As proof of its legitimacy, Defendant noted its publication in a catalogue as part of her mother's estate sale at Christie's in 2012. 

According to seized documents, Defendant also consigned to Christie's four other pieces from her mother's collection that had come from the Singh Network (lots 23, 24, 47, and

Page 8 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

67). In total, three of these five pieces sold at Christie's on March 20, 2012, for $70,000.00. 

c. VAMAN GHIYA NETWORK. In August 1992, Defendant sent a fax document to the supplier Vaman Ghiya (listed above), requesting that he “[p]lease call Nancy Wiener at the Hotel Storchen in Zurich immediately.” That same year, according to seized documents and informant #1, Doris Wiener bought a stolen mottled red sandstone relief depicting a Bacchanalian scene, dated to the 2nd Century C.E., 25 1/2 inches high, and valued at $180,000, from Ghiya in India. Exhibit L. This relief was consigned by Defendant to Christie's (lot 20) for its sale of March 20, 2012. According to seized documents, Defendant falsely claimed that her mother had acquired it from a private collection in London. 

According to seized emails and documents, Defendant consigned to Christie's five other pieces from her mother's collection that had come from the Ghiya Network (lots 20, 21, 27, 45, 49, 55). For two of the consigned statues (lot 49 - Exhibit M and lot 55 - Exhibit O), there were pictures in the Shantoo (Ranjeet Kanwar) file on Kapoor's computer showing the pieces still in situ. Exhibits N and P.  Five of these six pieces sold at Christie's on March 20, 2012, for $478,750.

d. THE HIMALAYAN NETWORK. According to seized documents and informant #2, Co-Conspirator #5 is an antiquities smuggler of Tibetan descent based in Nepal and Hong Kong who was in frequent email contact with Defendant about illicit pieces from Nepal. According to informant #1, in 2002, Co-Conspirator #5 sold Doris Wiener a silver-inlaid gilt bronze figure of Avalokiteshvara from Northeastern India or Western Tibet (China), dated to 10th-11th C.E., and valued at $812,500. Exhibit Q. This Avalokiteshvara was one of the pieces consigned by Defendant to Christie's (lot 87) for its sale of March 20, 2012. According to seized emails, Defendant falsely claimed to Christie's that her mother had acquired the relief from a “private collection, Europe, early 1990’s.” During a recorded conversation in March 2016, Co-Conspirator #5 was asked if the provenance in the Christie's catalogue provided by Defendant for the “Silver-inlaid Gilt Bronze Figure of Avalokiteshvara,” was accurate. Co-Conspirator #5 laughed and said defendant knew that he had acquired the statue from Tibet and sold it to Doris Wiener. This statue sold at Christie's on March 20, 2012, for $812,500. 

e. THE GANDHARAN NETWORK. According to informant #2, Co-Conspirator #6 and

Page 9 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

his father are suppliers of illicit cultural property from primarily Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to several recorded conversations, Co-Conspirator #6 has been shipping large quantities of newly dug-up, stolen antiquities from Afghanistan and Pakistan to Thailand, often via Hong Kong, and then to dealers from around the world for more than a decade. 

According to seized sales invoices, Doris Wiener purchased 14 stolen antiquities in January 2011 from Co-Conspirator #6, including a gray schist relief Buddha receiving a golden bowl, a gray schist relief Buddha receiving the sheaf of grass, a gray schist relief Buddha and the devotees, all dated to 2nd-3rd Century, all between 17–20 inches high, all from Afghanistanor Pakistan, and valued at a total of $32,000. Exhibits R-T. According to informant #1, who saw the artifacts upon their arrival in New York from Asia, they were unrestored, unmounted and/or without bases - classic signs of looting. These reliefs were consigned by Defendant to Christie's (lots 1, 2, 3) for its sale of March 20, 2012.

According to seized documents, Defendant consigned to Christie's six other pieces that had come from Co-Conspirator #6 or his father (lots 5, 7, 14, 16, 18, and 38) for the sale. For six of the nine pieces, Defendant falsely claimed that her mother had acquired the pieces from a “Private Collector, Thailand, mid-1980s or earlier” (lots 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 18). According to informant #2, that provenance was false because the “private collector” was Co-Conspirator #6, who in the mid-1980s was a child living in Pakistan and England. According to seized documents, for two of the three remaining pieces, Christie's altered the provenance, changing Defendant’s “by late 1990s” to “by late 1980s” for lot 14 and changing “2011” to“by 1996” for lot 7. On March 20, 2012, eight of these nine pieces sold at Christie's for $196,500. 

CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THE FIRST DEGREE: NAGA BUDDHA. As noted above, in November 2011, Co-Conspirator #1 sold to Defendant for $500,000 a stolen bronze Buddha depicting Buddha sitting on a throne of Naga (snake), from Thailand or Cambodia, dated to the 10th Century C.E., 17.75 inches high. Exhibit B. Defendant displayed the Naga Buddha for sale for its market value of $1,500,000 in her gallery, until it was seized pursuant to a warrant in March 2016. 

CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THE SECOND DEGREE: THE APSARA MARBLES. From on or about September 2010 to on or about at least

Page 10 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

March 2016, Defendant possessed a stolen marble Apsara ceiling panel depicting a female figure (“Apsara Marble”), from India, dated to the 10th Century A.D., 44 inches tall, and valued at $500,000. According to theft reports prepared by the Archaeological Survey of India (“ASI”) and filed with Interpol, a total of six celestial marble statutes were stolen from the ceiling of the Toos temple in India between November 2009 and September 2010. Exhibits U-V. According to seized emails, in September and October 2010, Defendant received several emails about the theft of the Apsara Marbles as well as pictures of the stolen statues. A month earlier, in August 2010, “Victor” had emailed Doris and Nancy Wiener separately to offer one of the Apsara Marbles, attaching pictures of the dirty, unrestored sculpture on the ground with what appeared to be cut marks. Exhibit W. According to informants #1 and #2, “Victor” is the email pseudonym for Om and Badal Sharma (see paragraph 5a above). According to a recorded conversation of a former employee of the Nancy Wiener Gallery, this Apsara Marble arrived at the Gallery around the same time as this string of emails, and then Defendant sent it to Co-Conspirator #3 for restoration. According to emails and documents seized from Defendant’s computer, she was still in possession of the Apsara Marble in March 2016. 

Tess Davis, a member of the New York State Bar and affiliate of the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research at the University of Glasgow, has conducted extensive field research on the illicit trade in Asian antiquities since 2004. 

Afghanistan. Ms. Davis is familiar with the cultural property laws of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, including the 1980 Law on Protection of Historical and Cultural Properties as modified in 2004, and the 1958 Code for the Protection of Antiquities. According to Ms. Davis, this legal regime protects cultural heritage, vesting its ownership in the state. 

Cambodia. Ms. Davis is familiar with Cambodian law governing cultural patrimony,including, inter alia, Arrété du Gouverneur Général de l'Indochine sur la conservation desmonuments et objets ayant un intérêt historique ou artistique du 9 mars 1900; Arrété relativeau classement, à la conservation et à la protection des monuments historiques des pays deprotectorat du 11 juillet 1925; 1968 Law on the Organization of Suppressing the Acts of Stealing, Receipt of Stolen Goods, and Destruction of Patrimony Relating to the National Heritage; 1992 Land Law; 1996 Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage; and 2001 Land Law. According to Ms. Davis, this legal regime protects cultural heritage, vesting its

Page 11 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

ownership in the state. 

China. Ms. Davis is familiar with the cultural property laws of the People's Republic of China, which includes the Tibet Autonomous Region, including the Law on Protection of Cultural Relics (of 19 November 1982 as revised on 29 June 1991 and 28 October 2002). According to Ms. Davis, this and the country’s broader legal regime protects cultural heritage, vesting ownership of immoveable and moveable “cultural relics” in the state. 

India. Ms. Davis is familiar with the cultural patrimony laws of India, including theAntiquities and Art Treasures Act of 1972, along with the Antiquities and Art Treasures Rules, 1973 (updated January 2012), and the Ancient and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958 (updated in 2010). According to Ms. Davis, this legal regime protects culturalheritage, vesting its ownership in the state. 

Nepal. Ms. Davis is familiar with the cultural property laws of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, including the Ancient Monuments Protection Act of 1956 as amended in1964, 1970, and 1994. According to Ms. Davis, this legal regime protects ancient monuments and archaeological objects, vesting its ownership in the state. 

Pakistan. Ms. Davis is familiar with the cultural property laws of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, including the 1975 Antiquities Act (as amended in 1992), and its predecessors the Antiquities Act of 1968 and Ancient Monuments Preservation Act of 1904. According to Ms. Davis, this legal regime protects archaeological sites and objects, vesting the ownership of undiscovered antiquities in the state. 

Thailand. Ms. Davis is familiar with the cultural property laws of the Kingdom of Thailand, including the 1961 Act on Ancient Monuments, Antiquities, Objects of Art, and National Museums (as amended in 1992). According to Ms. Davis, this legal regime protects archaeological sites and objects, vesting its ownership in the state.

Page 12 of 12 

CRIMINAL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FELONY 

-against- 

Nancy Wiener (F34), Defendant. 

Felony

ADA Matthew Bogdanos 

(212) 335-9323

False statements made in this written instrument are punishable as a class A misdemeanor pursuant to section 210.45 of the Penal Law, and as other crimes. 

Signed, Special Agent Brenton Easter 

Date December 21, 2016

Time: 11:40