Mock Trial Case Indiana 2015-16

8/19/2019 Mock Trial Case Indiana 2015-16

1/80

1

2015-16 CASE MATERIALS

Copyright © 2015. All rights reserved. Permission to duplicate portions of this case for non-

profit, educational purposes is hereby granted, provided acknowledgment is given to the Indiana Bar

Foundation.


2/80

2

(Page intentionally left blank)


3/80

3

INTRODUCTION

On behalf of Indiana Bar Foundation, we welcome your participation in the 2015-2016 Mock

Trial competition. This year’s mock trial case takes us into the colorful world of the art market and the

darker shadows of art forgeries when the authenticity of a painting purchased at a charity art auction is

questioned. Art forgery often involves intrigue and deception, and a forgery case necessarily involvesexperts and connoisseurs, and someone who has been duped by an ingenuous, sometimes charming,

trickster. In this case, the plaintiff claims that an auction company sold a forged painting and either knew

it to be forged at the time of the sale or failed to perform the necessary due diligence to confirm the

authenticity of the painting. The defendant auction company contends that the painting sold to the

plaintiff was not a forgery, and that the defendant performed sufficient due diligence for authenticating

the painting. The defendant also alleges that the plaintiff failed to perform any due diligence and

therefore is negligent if the painting is a forgery.

Students – Through participation you will experience what it is like to prepare for and present a

case before a judge. Working with your team and coaches, you will learn to evaluate information and

respond quickly. As you prepare, you will sharpen public speaking and presentation skills. The greatestbenefit is the opportunity to learn how the legal system works. By studying and understanding

courtroom procedure, you should become more comfortable with federal and state laws as part of the

legal system. Your interaction with some of Indiana’s finest attorneys and judges will give you a glimpse

of the different interpretations of trial procedure and different approaches of individuals in the legal

arena.

Teacher Coach, Attorney Coach, or Judge – We strongly encourage you to focus on the goal of

participation by students rather than stressing competition while preparing for the competition. Your

contributions of time and talent are making many experiential educational opportunities available

annually to many Indiana students. Your participation is an essential key element to the success of this

program. You can be proud of the impact you have made on the lives of these students.

Good Luck and Have Fun!

Copyright © 2015. All rights reserved. Permission to duplicate portions of this case for non-

profit, educational purposes is hereby granted, provided acknowledgment is given to the Indiana Bar

Foundation.


4/80

4



5/80

5

CASE BACKGROUND

The wealthiest and most elite citizens of Indiana gathered together on a beautiful September

evening in 2013 for one of the most publicized events of the year. The exclusive list of VIP guests arrived

with much fanfare and media attention for the prestigious gala and fundraising event for the Caring

Hearts Children's Hospital Foundation. Plaintiff Val Hughes, a recent multi-million dollar lottery winner,

attended the charity art auction to purchase a collectible work of art as an investment whilesimultaneously supporting the Foundation's goal to provide funds for pediatric cardiology equipment

and services for the children of Indiana.

At the art auction, Hughes was the successful bidder for a highly collectible E. Colline oil

painting. Lou/Lu Ting, d/b/a Charity Operations Network, the Defendant Auctioneer, purportedly

represented that the painting was authentic and came with a Certificate of Authenticity. When the

painting was in the process of some restoration work by Chris Cross, Hughes was notified that the

painting was a fake.

Was the painting purchased by Hughes at the art auction a fake? Was there a misrepresentation

of the painting's authenticity and provenance? Did the Defendant perform sufficient due diligence todetermine the authenticity of the painting? Did the Plaintiff exercise due diligence before purchasing the

painting? And, who can be trusted in this myriad of personalities and egos?

Plaintiff’s Witnesses:

Val Hughes - Plaintiff and Purchaser

Chris Cross – Art Restorer, Expert Witness, and Former Forger

Hunter O’Klooz – FBI Agent and Art Fraud and Forgery Investigator

Defendant’s Witnesses:

Lou/Lu Ting – Defendant, Auctioneer and Owner of Charity Operations Network Doane Orr– Estate Representative of Painting’s Original Owner

Cassidy (“Cass”) Dowt- Appraiser, Expert Witness, and Former Museum Curator

Exhibits:

1.

Charity Auction Catalogue

2. Painting

3. Sales Receipt

4. Certificate of Authenticity

5. Appraisal

6. Charity Operations Network Website Excerpts

7.

Notes from Auction 8. Curriculum Vitae of Cassidy Doubt

The Case Background is not to be used as evidence in the case, but rather is provided for background

purposes only. This case is a work of fiction. The names and events described herein are intended to be fictional.

Any similarity or resemblance of any character to an actual person or entity should be regarded as only fictional for

purposes of this mock trial exercise.


6/80

6



7/80

7

STATE OF INDIANA )

) SS: IN THE MARION CIRCUIT COURT

MARION COUNTY )

VAL HUGHES )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO.: 49C01-1410-CT-0777

)

LOU/LU TING d/b/a CHARITY OPERATIONS )

NETWORK )

)

Defendant. )

COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Val Hughes, by counsel, files this Complaint against the Defendant, Lou/Lu Ting,

and states:

General Allegations

1. Plaintiff Val Hughes is a resident of Crows Nest, Marion County, Indiana.

2. Defendant Lou/Lu Ting, d/b/a Charity Operations Network, is a resident of Carmel, Hamilton

County, Indiana and purports to be a professional charities art auctioneer.

3. On September 7, 2013, Plaintiff was at the Caring Hearts Children’s Hospital Foundation Gala &

Charity Auction (Charity Auction) where Defendant offered for sale for the benefit of the Foundation

works of fine art represented to be collectibles and Masters.

4. Defendant organized and managed the Charity Auction from start to finish, including, but not

limited to, providing works of art for the auction, auctioning the works of art, collecting payment, and

delivering the works of art to the buyers.

5. Defendant prepared, published and distributed to Plaintiff a catalogue of all works of art

available for sale at the Charity Auction (“the Catalogue”).

6. The Catalogue represented that Lot 39 was an original oil canvas painting by American

Impressionist Elvida Colline (“the Artist”), entitled Fishing at Dawn, painted in 1927 and signed by artist

Elvida Colline (“The Painting”).

7. The Catalogue further represented that the Painting was in “good condition” with minimal

restoration.


8/80

8

8. The Catalogue also represented that the owner obtained the Painting by descent from a family

member that received it directly from the Artist.

9. The Catalogue represented that the Estimated Value of the Painting was between

$300,000-$500,000.

10.

Paintings by the Artist in the American Impressionist style are highly collectible and valuable.

11. At the beginning of the Charity Auction, Defendant represented that all works of art at the

Auction that contain a signature had been authenticated by a nationally recognized, independent third

party.

12.

When the Painting came up for auction, Defendant represented that the Painting came with a

Certificate of Authenticity and that the Painting was authentic.

13. Defendant either knew or failed to perform sufficient due diligence to determine if the

representations made about the painting were false.14. Plaintiff relied upon the representations made by Defendant in writing and verbally at the

Charity Auction.

15. Defendant failed to conduct adequate independent research into the authenticity of the

Painting.

16. Plaintiff was the highest bidder for the Painting in the amount of $455,000. (“the Purchase”).

17. Plaintiff paid Defendant the purchase price of $455,000 by wire transfer on September 8, 2015.

18. Defendant delivered the Painting to Plaintiff at Plaintiff’s residence on October 7, 2015.

Count I Rescission Based on Mutual Mistake

19. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 18 as if fully set forth herein.

20. Plaintiff bought the Painting believing it to be a genuine painting by Colline .

21. Defendant represented in the Sales Receipt issued to Plaintiff for said Purchase that the Painting

was the Artist’s work.

22. The Painting is a forgery.

23. Plaintiff had no knowledge that the Painting was a forgery.

24. Plaintiff relied upon the representations made by Defendant to his/her detriment.25. To the extent Defendant was not aware of the forgery, Plaintiff and Defendant were mutually

mistaken in believing that the Painting was an authentic work by Elvida Colline.

26. Plaintiff agreed to and did purchase the Painting without any knowledge of these mistakes.

27. Plaintiff fully performed all of his/her obligations for the purchase.

28. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and is therefore entitled to a rescission.


9/80

9

Count II Breach of Express Warranties


30.

Before and at the time of the sale, for the purposes of inducing Plaintiff to purchase the

Painting, Defendant represented to Plaintiff that the Artist who created the Painting was Elvida Colline,

that the Painting was authentic, that the Painting had a Certificate of Authenticity, and that the Artist’s

signature on the Painting had been independently verified.

31. Plaintiff relied upon Defendant’s express warranties concerning the Painting's authenticity and

would not have purchased the work had he/she been aware that those warranties were false.

32. Plaintiff fully performed any obligations under the purchase agreement.

33. Defendant breached its express warranty because the Painting is a forgery.

34.

Plaintiff suffered damages, as a result of this breach.

Count III Fraud


36. Defendant fraudulently induced Plaintiff to purchase the Painting by falsely stating the Painting

was authentic.

37. Defendant knew the Painting was a forgery, and that it had no value.

38. Defendant knowingly participated in the sale of a forgery.

39.

Plaintiff had no reason to know that Defendant’s statements were false.

40. Plaintiff relied on each of the misrepresentations made by Defendant in purchasing the

Painting.

41 Plaintiff ’s reliance on Defendant’s misrepresentations was reasonable.

42. In reliance on the misrepresentations and omissions of Defendant, Plaintiff was damaged.

43 Because Defendant engaged in the fraudulent conduct, willfully and maliciously, and with the

intent to damage Plaintiff, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages.

Count IV – Negligence

44. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 43 of the Complaint as if fully set

forth herein.

45. Defendant was negligent in failing to exercise due diligence in determining the authenticity,

provenance , condition and value of the Painting.


10/80

10

46. As a consequence of the negligence of Defendant, Plaintiff suffered damages.

47. The damages sustained by Plaintiff were proximately caused by the negligence of Defendant.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Val Hughes, prays for damages against Defendant Ting, and all other just

and proper relief.

/s/ Ben Trikt .

Ben Trikt, esq.

HOOD WINK & TRIKT, PC

1000 Meridian Street

Indianapolis, IN

Attorney for Plaintiff

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff respectfully requests trial by jury. /s/ Ben Trikt .

Ben Trikt, esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff


11/80

11

STATE OF INDIANA )


MARION COUNTY )

VAL HUGHES )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO.: 49C01-1410-CT-0777

)


NETWORK )

)

Defendant. )

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

The Defendant, Lou/Lu Ting d/b/a Charity Operations Network, for his/her answer to the

Complaint, states as follows:

1. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations of paragraph 1 of the Complaint.

2. Defendant admits the allegations of paragraph 2 of the Complaint.


4.

Defendant admits the allegations of paragraph 4 of the Complaint.


6.

Defendant denies the allegations of paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

7. Defendant denies the allegations of paragraph 7 of the Complaint.





12.


13.



12/80

12




16.


17.



Count I

19.

Defendant incorporates herein by reference its answers to the allegations of paragraphs

1 through 18 of the Complaint.


of the allegations of paragraph 20 of the Complaint.21. Defendant denies the allegations of paragraph 21 of the Complaint.







25.






Count II

29. Defendant incorporates herein by reference its answers to the allegations of paragraphs






34.



13/80

13

Count III



36.


37.





41.




Count IV






WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment in his/her favor, that Plaintiff take nothing by way of his/hercomplaint, for costs, and all other just and proper relief.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

First defense

The sole proximate cause of the damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff was plaintiff's own

negligence, and for that reason, plaintiff is not entitled to recover.

Second Defense

The damages allegedly sustained by the plaintiff were caused in whole or in part, or were

contributed to, by the negligence or fault of the plaintiff, and for that reason, the plaintiff is not entitledto recover, or, plaintiff's damages must be reduced accordingly.

Third Defense

Plaintiff failed to exercise due diligence.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant prays that Plaintiff take nothing by way of his/her complaint; that judgment

be entered in favor of Defendant; and for such other and further relief as is just and proper.


14/80

14

/s/ I.M. Reddy .

I.M. Reddy, esq.

WEIR REDDY & WILLING

26 West Main Street

Carmel, IN Attorney for Defendant


15/80

15

STATE OF INDIANA )


MARION COUNTY )

VAL HUGHES )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO.: 49C01-1410-CT-0777

)


NETWORK )

)

Defendant. )

STIPULATIONS

Note: No witness may contradict or deny knowledge of the facts contained in the stipulations.

1.

Unless stated otherwise herein, all exhibits included in these Case Materials are

authentic and accurate in all respects; no objection to the authenticity of these exhibits will be

entertained. The admissibility of the exhibits on other grounds may be challenged.

2. All witness statements were signed under oath by each witness on October 15, 2015.

3. In accordance with Mock Trial Rules, the parties are not permitted to enlarge or enhance

any item in the Case Materials, including Exhibits. Due to the limitations of Mock Trial, the parties

stipulate and agree that Exhibit 2 is an oil canvas painting of the size of 29” x 23” with the artwork as

depicted. The parties further stipulate and agree to the admissibility of Exhibit 2 the authenticity of

which will be determined in this trial.

4. The parties agree that Exhibits 1, 3, and 6 are created by a person with knowledge of the

information contained therein at or about the time of the events, that such records are kept in the

course of regularly conducted activity and that it is not necessary to enter the exhibits through the

custodian of the records.

5. The parties stipulate and agree that the Curriculum Vitae of Cassidy Dowt (Exhibit 8) is

admissible, without objection.


16/80

16



17/80

17

APPLICABLE LAW

Burden of Proof in Negligence Cases

The plaintiff has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence on the following

propositions:

a. that the defendant was negligent ;

b. that the plaintiff suffered damages; and

c. that the negligence of the defendant was a proximate cause of the damages suffered by

the plaintiff.

Negligence

Negligence is the failure to use reasonable care.

A person may be negligent by acting or by failing to act. A person is negligent if he or she does

something a reasonably careful person would not do in the same situation or fails to do something areasonably careful person would do in the same situation.

Reasonable or Ordinary Care

Reasonable or ordinary care is the care a reasonably careful and ordinarily prudent person

would use under the same or similar circumstances. Reasonable care does not require a person to

foresee and guard against that which is unusual and not likely to occur.

Proximate Cause

An act or omission is a proximate cause of the damages suffered if the damages are a naturaland probable consequence of the act or omission. To establish that an act was the proximate cause of

damages, a party must show:

(1) That damages would not have occurred but for another’s negligence; and

(2) That damages were reasonably foreseeable as the natural and probable consequence of

the other’s negligence.

Fraud

Fraud exists when:

(a) there is a material misrepresentation of fact

(b) made with knowledge of its falsity or recklessly made without knowledge of its truth

(c) with the intention of being acted upon by another, which

(d) is relied upon by another (a buyer)

(e) to his/her damage.


18/80

18

STATUTES AND RELATED LAW:

Ind. Code § 26-1-2-313 Express Warranties

(1) Express warranties by the seller are created as follows:

(a) any affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the

goods and becomes part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that thegoods shall conform to the affirmation or promise.

(b) any description of the goods which is made part of the basis of the bargain creates an

express warranty that the goods shall conform to the description.

(2) It is not necessary to the creation of an express warranty that the seller use formal wordssuch as "warrant" or "guarantee" or that he have a specific intention to make a warranty,

but an affirmation merely of the value of the goods or a statement purporting to be merely

the seller's opinion or commendation of the goods does not create a warranty.

Ind. Code § 26-1-2-314 Implied Warranties

(1) a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if

the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind.(2) Goods to be merchantable must at least pass without objection in the trade under the

contract

(3) Unless excluded or modified (IC 26-1-2-316), other implied warranties may arise fromcourse of dealing or usage of trade

ADDITIONAL LAW:

Express warranties are not created from puffing or statements of personal opinion such as I think this is a

beautiful painting or an affirmation of value such as this is one of the best values you can find today in

art of this period.

One who sells a piece of art has a fiduciary responsibility to exercise due diligence in the authentication

of a piece of artwork.

Due diligence is the responsibility of one who sells, buys or donates personal property to establish that

the item is not stolen and can change hands with good title and that it is real.

Autocephalous Greek Orthodox Church v. Goldberg & Feldman Fine Arts, Inc. 917 F .2d 278 (7th Cir 1990)

“In a transaction like this, all the red flags are up and the red lights are on, all the sirens areblaring. In such cases, dealers can (and probably should) take steps such as a formal IFAR search, a

documented authenticity check by disinterested experts, a full background check of the seller and his

claim of title, insurance protection and contingency sales, contract, and the like.”


19/80

19

Statement of Val Hughes1

My name is Val Hughes. I live in Crows Nest, Indiana, about 7 miles northwest of downtown2

Indianapolis. I live in the former home of Eli Lilly. I also have a home in Naples, Florida. Even though I3

now live in mansions in pretty swanky areas, I have humble beginnings. I grew up in the small town of4Vevay, Indiana, where life was pretty simple and my family, neighbors, and friends felt good about5

putting in an honest day's work. My parents instilled in me the core values of fairness, honesty,6

integrity and truthfulness. I have held on to my core values from those humble beginnings. The way I7

see it is that if a person has integrity, nothing else matters. If a person does not have integrity, nothing8

else matters. Perhaps I have been naive in thinking that once I ventured out into the world that others9

would abide by those same principles. Unfortunately, the circumstances surrounding this lawsuit have10

shown me that is not the case.11

If you're wondering how a simple 26 year old from Vevay, with just a high school education,12

amassed such wealth to own two mansions and circulate among the rich and famous, I guess you could13

say I won the lottery - literally. In May of 2013, I won the largest jackpot in the history of Powerball,14

with winnings of $590 million, and some change. Ordinarily,I didn't waste the little money I had on a15

game of chance. But I knew the jackpot was going to be big the week I purchased my ticket and I16

thought that spending $5 for a chance at the largest jackpot was at least worth the entertainment of17

looking at the winning numbers the next day to see if they matched my lucky numbers. After paying the18

IRS and Indiana their respective shares in taxes, I still was left with quite a fortune. Becoming instantly19

wealthy gave me the opportunity to purchase a new home, expensive cars, and some of the finer things20

in life, including artwork.21

Prior to winning the lottery, I worked at the Gold Bars Casino in Madison, Indiana. During my22

employment at Gold Bars, I was assigned to the craps table. Craps is a dice game where players make23

wagers on the roll, or a series of rolls, of a pair of dice. I rotated positions on the craps table as either a24

Stickman (the person who announces the results of each roll and moves the dice on the table with an25

elongated wooden stick) or a base dealer (the person who collects and pays bets to the players). What I26

observed as an employee at Gold Bars is that people would lose hard-earned money with the roll of a27

dice. The “House” (the casino) always had the advantage. There may be players who are really lucky for28

a period of time, but in the long run those winning streaks end, and their money is lost. When I won the29

lottery, I didn’t want to risk losing money in a “crapshoot.” I wanted to invest my winnings in something30

stable; something that was “a sure bet.”31


20/80

20

Many people came out of the woodwork when I won the lottery. There were relatives I never32

knew and friends from even grade school that soon referred to me as their favorite relative or best33

friend. Some wanted a loan, others had investment “opportunities.” There were many investment and34

financial advisors that contacted me with ways to grow my money. Of course, I was a bit nervous about35

investing in the stock market when some analysts were predicting that the market was headed for36

another crash, and I saw my 401K drop to half of its value after the 2008 stock market crash.37

A family friend, who had acquired some Salvador Dali signed prints, told me that the value of38

the prints had quadrupled in value and suggested that I look into art as an investment. I had always39

heard that art was a good investment. I admit I was, and still am, new to the art scene and a novice40

buyer. However, I thought it would be a safe investment for some of my money, if I purchased41

collectible art from a reputable dealer.42

When I was invited as one of the exclusive, VIP guests to attend the Caring Hearts Children’s43

Hospital Foundation’s fundraising gala and art auction, I thought it was the perfect opportunity to44

acquire a collectible art piece. At the same time, I thought I could help a charitable cause, especially one45

that would provide for the health and well-being of children. The Foundation's goal was to provide46

funds for pediatric cardiology equipment and services for the children of Indiana. So, on September 7,47

2013, I attended the Foundation’s Gala and Art Auction at the Crowne Plaza in downtown Indianapolis.48

The wealthiest and most elite citizens of Indiana were there. It was one of the most publicized events of49

the year in Indiana, and the fanfare surrounding the event was over the top. The “buzz” of excitement at50

the gala set the mood to contribute and buy some art to support the children of Caring Hearts. I shared51

the enthusiasm of other prospective donors to give generously to the charity.52

The art auction was conducted by Lou/Lu Ting of Charity Operations Network. A week prior to53

the auction, I along with the other attendees received a glossy Catalogue of the art pieces with54

photographs of the art that would be auctioned at the fundraiser. Anyone wishing to view any of the art55

to be auctioned had the opportunity to schedule an appointment with Ting to have the art examined, or56

even appraised. I was busy negotiating the purchase of my homes in Crows Nest and Naples, and didn’t57

see any need to personally examine the paintings prior to the auction. The catalogue noted that the58

paintings I was interested in came with a Certificate of Authenticity, so I felt like I had a guarantee. I did59

not request any documentation of any particular painting’s history, Certificate of Authenticity, or Lot60

Condition Report. It had not occurred to me that a charitable auction company raising funds for a61

children’s hospital couldn’t be trusted. Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of excerpts of the Art62

Catalogue for the Caring Hearts Children’s Hospital Foundation Art Auction.63


21/80

21

I was particularly drawn to the American Impressionist paintings because they depict a lighter,64

carefree sense of life, which reminded me of my youth and growing up in Vevay. The Catalogue65

featured paintings by Daniel Garber, Theodore Robinson, and Elvida Colline (pronounced El-VEE-dah66

Cah-LEEN). I had no idea of the current market value for collectible American Impressionist original67

paintings. Feeling like a fish out of water, I used ARTnet.com, an internet data base, to determine the68

current market price for similar works of Garber, Robinson and Colline. The recent sale prices on69

ARTnet.com for those artists were consistent with the estimated prices listed in the Charity Operations70

Network Catalogue. In fact, the recent sales prices that I located on the website sold higher than the71

estimated market value.72

The line-up of artwork at the September 7th art auction was nothing less than impressive.73

Charity Operations Network pulled out all of the stops. Early in the evening, it was evident that bidding74

would be active, and the event would generate some serious cash and the much needed funds for the75

Children’s Hospital. Even to an art novice like me, I could tell there were plenty of offerings that were76

drawing attention as highly desirable collector’s items. The reactions of other guests and sophisticated77

potential buyers to many of the art lots convinced me that this was my opportunity to purchase a78

collectible painting. As I browsed the various lots displayed at the Gala, I referred to the Catalogue for79

each painting’s description, provenance, condition, and estimated value. Then, I used a smartphone app80

that instantly connects with auction house databases to check on comparable paintings by the artist. A81

few of the guests told me that they had hired an appraiser to preview specific pieces at the Charity82

Operations Network gallery prior to the auction, or to accompany and advise the buyer at the auction.83

In retrospect, I wish I had done that.84

I narrowed my selection to a painting by Daniel Garber, called Bayou, depicting two row boats,85

and an Elvida Colline painting depicting a boat with two people in a boat ready to fish, entitled Fishing at86

Dawn. I was drawn to both paintings because of the serenity of the water and the way the light danced87

off the landscape. Both paintings were considered highly collectible and there were crowds surrounding88

those displays. The Colline piece went up for auction first, so I decided not to take any chances. I also89

thought the piece by Colline was a better investment because the Catalogue noted that most of Colline’s90

American Impressionist paintings had been destroyed in a fire, and that in later years she followed the91

movement into Modernism. In an attempt to familiarize myself with some of the Lots in the Catalogue, I92

read a few blogs about some of the American Impressionists. I learned through the blog that there were93

only a few women American Impressionist painters, and Elvida Colline was quite prominent. I believe94

the blog was authored by Chris Cross, although I did not know him/her at the time. I recall that the95


22/80

22

blogger said he/she would like to get his/her hands on a Colline painting and noted that they were rare96

and in demand. I did not print the blog and I have since looked for it on the internet but it has been97

taken down. I think it was by Chris Cross, but I can’t recall with any certainty. 98

Lou/Lu Ting, the owner of Charity Operations Network, was the auctioneer for the Caring Hearts99

Children’s Hospital Foundation Charity Auction. Of course, auctioneers can talk really fast, but there100

were definitely some things that Ting said that I clearly understood and provided reassurance that I was101

purchasing something of great value and a solid investment. At the opening of the auction, Ting said102

Charity Operations Network uses nationally known signature authenticators for all items. More103

specifically, when Ting described the Colline painting during the auction, he/she represented that the104

painting came with a Certificate of Authenticity. Ting said the painting had provenance and had been105

verified as authentic. I also noted that the Catalogue indicated that a Certificate of Authenticity was106

available for the Fishing at Dawn painting.107

The bidding at the auction for Colline’s Fishing at Dawn was quite fierce. Ultimately, the final108

two bidders were some Indianapolis mogul magnate and me. The hammer came down on my bid of109

$455,000. Of course, I was also required to pay the Buyer’s premium fee of 20%, which I understand is110

fairly typical in the art auction world, and sometimes it is even more. And I also paid the Indiana sales111

taxes. Exhibit 2 is the Painting I purchased at the Auction and Exhibit 3 is a true and accurate copy of the112

Sales Receipt for the purchase of that painting. I paid a premium price for the E. Colline painting, but I113

wouldn’t have been the successful bidder if I had not bid the $455,000. In any event, I was happy to114

help out the Children’s Hospital, and I was satisfied that because Fishing at Dawn was in such high115

demand, it would be a great investment and would only increase in value over time.116

When I purchased the Elvida Colline painting, it was the f irst “real” artwork I had ever purchased117

and the first item I had ever purchased through an auction, charity or otherwise. I purchased the118

painting, not because of its value, as there were lots of other works of art at the auction that had119

greater value. Rather, I purchased it because I liked it. At the time, I was not familiar with the artist, and120

had no idea that Fishing at Dawn was such a valuable, coveted, piece. I subsequently gained more121

appreciation for the fact that Colline’s work is quite an exception in the art world and that she was one122

of the few female American Impressionists of that time, and certainly also in the Midwest. Colline had123

studied in Europe with many of the Impressionists, such as Claude Monet and Pierre-Auguste Renoir.124

However, Colline was most heavily influenced by the works of Alfred Sisley, a French Impressionist, who125

was the most consistent of the Impressionists in his dedication to painting landscape en plein air (i.e.,126

outdoors).127


23/80

23

I provided a wire transfer of the total sales price to Charity Operations Network the day128

following the auction. When speaking with Ting regarding the wire transfer, I also asked about the129

Certificate of Authenticity. Ting responded that everything would be delivered in thirty days. On130

October 8th, the painting was delivered from Charity Operations Network. When the painting was131

delivered, the Certificate of Authenticity was not presented to me. I contacted Ting again, and he/she132

said the paperwork had been misplaced. Ting said “Oh, I know we have it in a file somewhere.” I133

received the Certificate of Authenticity one year later (after the painting was discovered to be a fake).134

Exhibit 4 is a true and accurate copy of the Certificate of Authenticity.135

I did not press to receive the Certificate of Authenticity because it was just a piece of paper; the136

artwork should speak for itself as to its authenticity. I needed to obtain an appraisal anyway for137

valuation purposes to insure the painting and to determine any charitable contribution I could take on138

my tax return. When I inquired at art galleries and dealers as to a recommendation for a fine art139

appraiser, and particularly American Impressionist paintings, Cassidy Dowt kept coming up as the top140

recommendation for an appraiser.141

I made arrangements for Dowt to come to my home for purposes of appraising the painting that142

I had purchased at the Caring Hearts Auction. Dowt arrived at my home on November 1, 2013. I was143

surprised by Dowt’s demeanor. Even though his/her business thrives on social and business connection,144

he/she was generally rude. Dowt acted haughty. Perhaps that know-it-all attitude, however, convinced145

me to blindly trust his/her opinions as to the Colline painting.146

Dowt attributed the painting to that of Elvida Colline. Dowt was unequivocal that the painting147

was authentic. Dowt appraised the value of the painting at $575,000. Exhibit 5 is a true and accurate148

copy of Dowt’s appraisal. Dowt did note some condition issues of the painting, specifically some prior149

restoration work. However, Dowt mentioned that these condition issues were minor and did not affect150

the value of the painting. Dowt recommended that I hire an art conservator to perform restoration151

work to bring out the painting’s full beauty and to preserve its value. Dowt also suggested that I invest152

in re-framing it to highlight the painting’s flow of lighting throughout the piece. Dowt recommended153

Chris Cross as the conservator and restoration expert. Dowt informed me that Chris Cross specialized in154

American Impressionist paintings, and had a keen eye for Colline’s paintings, among others. After I155

found out the painting was a fake, I filed suit against Dowt. Unfortunately, Dowt filed bankruptcy. The156

lawsuit is probably why Dowt is here in court testifying against me. In any event, any claim I had against157

Dowt has been discharged in the bankruptcy case.158

Shortly thereafter, I followed up with Chris Cross by phone to set up an appointment to discuss159


24/80

24

the potential restoration work. On November 8, 2013, I met with Cross at his/her Broad Ripple studio.160

My instant read on Cross was that he/she is a bit quirky, but very likeable. Cross disclosed right from the161

beginning his/her past and life of crime as a forger. Chris showed humility, yet strength of character.162

Cross shared with me his/her history of imprisonment for forgery and how it changed his/her life. I163

learned that Chris now even works with the FBI. After Chris’ confession, I had no concerns of his/her164

trustworthiness. As evidence that my trust was not misplaced, Chris is the one who uncovered the165

forgery and it was Chris who notified the FBI and started an investigation on the same day Chris notified166

me that my painting was a fraud. Cross showed his/her stand-up character and never even sent me a167

bill for any work he/she did on the painting. I guess he/she felt bad that I was the victim of a forgery.168

Cross was passionate about his/her conservation work. Cross discussed his/her the meticulous169

attention to detail and care he/she takes to preserve the Masters. He/she did not want to do anything170

that would decrease the value of a painting. In Cross’ studio, he/she showed me some of the work171

he/she had done for other collectors, museums, and galleries. Cross specialized in restoration work of172

American Impressionists. I knew that by hiring Cross, I was retaining a conservator who is very skillful173

and knowledgeable, and likely the best in his/her field. Before Cross would accept the restoration work,174

however, he/she said it was necessary to view the painting in person.175

The following Monday, on November 11th, Cross came to my home and looked at the Fishing at176

Dawn painting. Cross’ reaction to seeing the painting for the first time was priceless. It was like seeing177

a long lost friend after years of separation. It was like Cross could not keep his/her eyes off the painting.178

Chris examined the painting closely and then told me that he/she would be honored to be entrusted179

with the care of Fishing at Dawn and restoring the painting to its original beauty. In addition, Cross said180

that he/she had the perfect frame, almost like it had been made just for it.181

Chris talked to me about maintaining the quality of the painting once it had been restored,182

including proper humidity levels, keeping it out of direct sunlight, proper methods to hang the picture,183

and how to dust and clean it. Chris even suggested a place where he/she thought the painting should184

be hung in my home. To enhance the painting, Cross suggested accent lighting and even recommended185

a contractor to do that work. Cross also recommended that I install added security measures given the186

significant value of the painting and the lure of it for art thieves. Cross made a recommendation for a187

security system contractor as well. Cross won me over with all of his/her personal attention and interest188

in making sure the painting would be preserved long-term.189

Chris discussed his/her hourly fee for restoration work of $250.00 per hour plus the cost of190

materials, including the frame, which would be $14,000.00. Chris noted that significant restoration work191


25/80

25

was not necessary as the painting was in good condition. He/she estimated 30-40 hours of work, and192

described in detail the work that would be performed to clean, make repairs, and reframe it.193

Chris could not start on the project immediately due to other pending projects and the194

upcoming holidays. Cross also explained he/she would need to work on it intermittently between195

working on a significant project at Wishard Hospital of restoring murals by T.C. Steele and other famous196

artists. Cross was also working on a mural at a local church. I was in no rush to get the painting back. In197

fact, as I told Cross, I had plans to leave on November 22nd for a four-month World Cruise. Satisfied with198

my arrangements with Cross, I agreed to have Cross do the restoration work, and authorized him/her to199

pick-up the painting from my home when he/she was ready to start the project.200

Prior to departing for my World Cruise, I made arrangements for work to be done on my house201

to upgrade the lighting and to upgrade my security system to safeguard the Colline painting. The202

Contractors began work on November 18

th

. I authorized the contractors to release the painting to Cross203

when he/she was ready to work on it. While I was on my cruise, I received a text message confirming204

that Cross had picked up the painting on January 6, 2014.205

I returned from my cruise on March 21st. I had no idea what news was in store for me. Then on206

April 7, 2014, I received a call from Cross. He/she said “Sit down. I have bad news for you.” Cross then207

told me that he/she had just begun the restoration work on the painting and upon closer examination208

had discovered it was a forgery. Cross told me that he/she had notified Agent O’Klooz of the forgery 209

and a federal investigation had been started. Imagine my shock. Imagine my anger. Lou/Lu Ting and210

Charity Operations Network had duped me. I brought this lawsuit because one should be able to trust211

and rely upon the expertise of, and statements made by, the auctioneer.212

I affirm under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my belief213

and knowledge.214

Val Hughes . 215

216

217

218


26/80

26

(Page intentionally left blank) 219

220

221


27/80

27

Statement of Chris Cross222

My name is Chris Cross. I live at 6060 N. Park Avenue in Broad Ripple, Indiana. For the past223

eleven years, I have owned and operated The Art of Art, an art restoration business, also located in224

Broad Ripple. Specifically, I restore high-end master paintings. I also am a guest art columnist for the225Indianapolis Star and blogger.226

I primarily specialize and would consider myself a connoisseur of oil paintings by Impressionists227

and American Impressionists. It is an art of immediacy and movement, of candid poses and228

compositions, of the play of light expressed in a bright and varied use of color. Impressionists were229

radicals. They violated the rules of traditional academic painting at the time. Impressionists’ brush230

strokes are small, thin and short, but are visible. Their paintings are characterized by the use of colors231

that are blended, but not smoothly, as was customary, to achieve an effect of intense color vibration.232

They portray overall visual effects instead of details. They used open composition with an emphasis on233

the accurate depiction of light and its changing qualities. The subject matter of their paintings focused234

on realistic scenes of modern life, with ordinary people, and used movement to illustrate the human235

perception and experience. Impressionists often painted outdoors. Previously landscapes were usually236

painted in a studio.237

My restoration work includes preventing deterioration of paintings, repairing damages, and re-238

framing the paintings. My business is successful, without advertising. Word of mouth generates most of239

my business. I get referrals from numerous art galleries, art dealers, fine art appraisers, collectors, and240

even museums. My ability to mirror the work of the masters in order to preserve it is a critical241

component of my success as a restorer. I have a knack for recreating the likeness of the artist’s original242

without disturbing the original painting and decreasing its value. I have become well-respected in the243

inner sanctum of the art world because when I restore a painting, I am meticulous about keeping the244

original art piece as true as possible. I exercise great caution to not change the painting, or if I make245

changes to have those changes documented and obvious. For example, I will use paints for the touch-up246

that are chemically different than the original paint, so that they can be removed in the future without247

damaging the original.248

I am not a member of the Appraisers Association of America (AAA), nor am I an Accredited249

Member, senior or otherwise, of the American Society of Appraisers (ASA). I also am not a member of250

the American Institute for Conservation and Historical and Artistic Works (AIC). I do not need the labels251

to get referral work. Not to say that I reject the purpose of establishing guidelines for this industry. As a252


28/80

28

matter of fact, the manner in which I perform restoration work is consistent with AIC guidelines.253

I also did not attend college, or have any formal training in art restoration, appraisals, forensics254

or art history. Instead, I have years of on the job training, so to speak. In my prior life, I was an art255

forger. I forged several American Impressionists, and some have yet to be discovered. A few of my256

forgeries are still hanging in museums. I never forged any works of Elvida Colline, although I would have257

enjoyed the challenge of doing so. Her brushstrokes, techniques, and visual acuity, are quite unique.258

I never forged for greed. Rather, I had been rejected by art world for my original works and so it259

was a sense of pride for me to pull off forged art to unsuspecting museum curators, art galleries, and the260

like. To forge artwork also requires a bit of a cunning spirit. To be in on the con, you have to project an261

image of expertise and sophistication that comes with years of training. But the one thing that kept me262

from getting caught for many years was to follow the cardinal rule of keeping lies to a minimum. I was263

turning around forgeries of major pieces in a month to two months’ time. But it soon all caught up with264

me. My vanity got to me and I started putting my initials in the art work I forged. It was my little joke265

on the art world. That’s how FBI finally caught me, and I landed in prison. My imprisonment for art266

forgery hurt my family, and I vowed that when I got out of prison I would lead an honest life.267

I have ended my life of forgery, but I have used that knowledge, skill, and connoisseurship to268

make an honest day’s wage. As you might expect, forgers make good conservators. My experience as a269

forger has taught me the techniques and practices of individual artists, enabling me to restore the work270

of an artist as if their hand was on my brush. So, I opened this little shop for restoration work, and271

business has been great. I don’t hide the fact that I once was a con, forging art work. I am completely272

upfront about it to all of my customers. In fact, my ‘bad” reputation has been good for business. My273

ability to mimic almost identically an artist is a much sought after talent in art restoration. I have reaped274

personal rewards too. I now have gained recognition and notoriety for my talents that I had to once275

hide as a forger.276

As part of my transformation, and in a complete turnaround, I now work WITH the Federal277

Bureau of Investigations to detect forgeries. I've turned a dark period of my life into something good.278

People think a person can't change their colors, but I am living proof that you can. The FBI uses my279

expertise as a former forger to determine attribution and authenticity of a painting. In addition to280

aiding the FBI in the detection of art forgeries, my experience with known forgers has been helpful to281

the government to identify the forger. You see, I have the unique experience, unlike most art experts,282

of recognizing a forger’s work, as well as the work of particular artists. I am not a detective, nor am I283

trained as one. My training is in street smarts, which candidly sometimes the stodgy FBI agents lack. I284


29/80

29

like to think of myself as an art sleuth. I approach detecting forgeries by looking for clues. The more285

clues I have, the more I learn about the forger, the more I am able to fit the clues together, and wrap up286

a case. It is much like Sherlock Holmes. Each case is a study in collecting and analyzing clues, then287

drawing logical conclusions from the clues.288

The perception that an art piece was created by the artist is critical to its desirability and289

salability. A buyer wants to believe that the art piece represents the artist's creative genius and vision.290

Many artworks have value because of their attribution. A big name brings big bucks. Unfortunately, art291

is an appealing target for a forger, and easier to get away with than forgers of currency. A forger's292

mission is to create something that will be accepted as genuine and have value, AND it must go293

undetected by those who are practiced at examining a particular artist.294

Through my blog, I try to help educate the public on acquiring art. Many people are under the295

delusion that investing in art is a solid investment. The best way to double your money is to not buy art,296

but rather take your money out of your wallet, fold it in half and put it back in. The perception that art297

is an investment is perpetuated by the myth that art always goes up in value. While the myth may be298

true in certain circumstances, buyers should not accept this myth wholesale. Buyers need to do their299

homework, know who they are dealing with, and refer questions about a potential purchase to an art300

professional, such as an appraiser.301

Buyers can be fooled by the "packaging" of a painting. If it looks old, it must be old, right? For302

example, reproductions of seventeenth century paintings can be dummied up to look authentic by303

printing a piece on paper, then gluing it on oak panels, then highlighted with oil paint in places. You304

package up what appears to be an original in an elaborate gold frame, and the painting appears to be305

more than it is. It is an easily affordable technique to masquerade as an original antique oil painting.306

Also, it is common for a painting to be inherited and the later generations believe they have a prize307

possession when, in fact, the artwork is merely decorative art that looks like it could be something of308

value.309

Nor should a buyer rely upon a Certificate of Authenticity (COA). Many COAs are faked and310

forged, and simply are not reliable. Traveling charity auction companies and internet sellers are311

notorious for offering a certificate of authenticity, such that there is now a cottage industry willing to312

fabricate COAs. In many galleries, and particularly traveling charity auction companies, the truth is313

replaced by a fictional narrative.314

The Certificate of Authenticity is one of the most misunderstood and abused tools in the art315

market. The only person who can authenticate a work of art is the person who created it. In other316


30/80

30

words, the only certificate that matters is the one signed by the artist himself or herself. All other317

certificates are merely opinions of authenticity and are only as valid and credible as the reputation of318

whoever signed it and the extent of the research they performed to arrive at their opinion. A certificate319

of authenticity does not become more valid if it is printed on special paper with a fancy border and a320

gold seal. To be useful, a COA should contain the name, nationality, and life dates of the artist, the title321

of the artwork, the medium, dimensions, location and medium of the artist's signature, identification of322

the person signing the certificate and the date, and most important, a guarantee of the truthfulness of323

the information. If a dealer or an auctioneer is unwilling to provide a money back guarantee, there is324

reason to doubt the veracity of the information provided by that dealer or auctioneer. Yet, I find it325

amazing how people are so willing to accept a certificate that provides no guarantee.326

People get the art they deserve. If you don’t enter the art market with a level of sophistication327

you become fair game. Even those considered to be collectors and art aficionados are in danger of328

buying a forgery attributed to a famous artist. They trust the dealer or auction company and do little to329

nothing to obtain an independent opinion or scholarly review. The best advice I can give any buyer of330

fine art, especially a novice buyer, is to rely upon an independent expert, such as an independent331

appraiser.332

A conservator is practiced in the art of looking at art as a physical object, paying less attention to333

its content, like that of an art historian or connoisseur. The conservator is looking close at the painting334

to determine what needs to be restored. The initial visual inspection by the conservator isn’t335

undertaken to determine authenticity. That’s not why you are hired. Nevertheless, in some instances,336

just looking at the painting to do the conservation work reveals something suspicious.337

For me, the first thing about spotting a fake is something just seems a bit off. Something seems338

not right. A forger almost always unintentionally incorporates something of his or her own nuances to a339

painting. I have used my gut instincts to uncover other fakes because the forger was not careful enough340

to do a thoroughly convincing job. If one develops an expertise in a particular artist's works, that expert341

will trust their initial response to an art piece and usually know at first contact that something is not342

right. As in many other professions, your brain compares available data with prior experiences.343

Anomalies always raise red flags and demand an explanation. The clues are always there. I find that344

99% of the time, if I follow the clues, I will confirm my first impression. Most often, you don't need345

scientific testing or an involved, lengthy analysis to determine a painting is a fake.346

Of course, as with any rule, there are exceptions. The rule that "if everything doesn't look right347

it may be a fake" does not always hold true. Sometimes an artist incorporates elements into an artwork348


31/80

31

that they had not previously utilized. In those circumstances, only the artist would know if the painting349

is their work or a fake.350

In November, 2013, I received a call from Mr./Ms. Hughes requesting restoration and reframing351

for a painting. Hughes mentioned that Cass Dowt, a colleague and appraiser, had recommended me to352

Hughes. According to Hughes, Dowt suggested that a painting that Hughes recently purchased needed353

some restoration work to increase its value. I met with Hughes at my studio on November 8th. As I do354

with all of my customers or potential customers, my first order of business is to confess my prior life as a355

forger. I do so with great humility, as I realize now that when you are on the receiving end of forged art,356

you feel violated. We then discussed the general nature of my services and my fees of $250 per hour. I357

also showed Hughes several of restoration projects that I was in the process of completing, in various358

stages of the process – from the beginning to the end. I use a raking light to show how a painting, when359

it is first received by me, may have heavy, poorly done restoration. Then I show the other steps in the360

restoration process, including cleaning, structural repairs, touch-up, and applying varnish.361

When a customer is considering hiring me to do conservation work, I think it is important to362

educate the customer so that they see the value of my services and can understand the necessity of363

conservation to maintain the value of their investment. Deterioration due to age is a fact of life for364

everything, including art. Deterioration is constant, relentless and ongoing. Conservation treatment is a365

way by which we can slow down this deterioration and attempt to preserve the art piece. I explain to366

my customers that paintings are fragile creations that require special care to ensure their continued367

preservation. Paintings consist of various layers. Traditional paintings are finished with a coat of varnish.368

Paintings that do not have all of the traditional layers may be more fragile and susceptible to change or369

damage.370

Hughes asked me to do the restoration work for the painting that he/she had recently371

purchased. My schedule was already booked solid and I hesitated to take on another commitment,372

especially if a customer wanted a quick turnaround. Hughes told me that he/she was in no hurry and373

that he/she was leaving soon on a four month cruise. Hughes then told me the painting was by the374

artist Elvida Colline depicting a scene on Lake Lemon. My interest was piqued, as I have long375

appreciated Colline’s work. So, I agreed to view the painting at Hughes’ home before making a376

commitment to accept the restoration job.377

After our initial meeting, I met with Hughes the following week at his/her home in Crows Nest.378

After seeing the Colline Fishing at Dawn painting, I was excited about doing the restoration work. I have379

always admired Colline’s work and style. There are so few of her paintings remaining because of the fire380


32/80

32

at her studio in the late 1920’s. I felt it was an honor to work on the piece. I wanted to do my part to381

preserve one the few Colline Impressionist paintings remaining. I consulted with Hughes about doing382

his/her part also to preserve the painting. We discussed proper conditions such as humidity,383

temperature, direct and indirect lighting, and even proper dusting techniques. We also discussed the384

best location in the house to hang the painting. Finally, I cautioned Hughes that a rare piece like the385

Colline painting would have thieves scouting the place, especially with no one home. I suggested hiring386

contractors that I knew to install proper lighting and a highly sophisticated security system. I recall387

spending more time consulting about how Hughes could best preserve and display the painting in388

his/her home than the time I spent examining the painting. I probably did not spend more than fifteen389

minutes looking at the painting. My only thought was that I did not see heavy restoration work done390

previously, so I estimated that it would only be between 15 and 20 hours of conservation work.391

I was not able to work on Hughes’ painting prior to January due to the holidays, and I was392

committed to other private collection restoration projects. Also I was involved in restoration work at393

Wishard Hospital involving murals created by American Impressionists from the Hoosier Group. The394

mural restoration was a pretty exciting project, but it was time-consuming. Finally, I was able to arrange395

and have the painting delivered to my studio on January 6, 2014. I knew when it was delivered that my396

time would be limited in working on it, and that I would have to work on it intermittently between the397

mural project, an off-site restoration at a local church, as well as other privately owned collections and398

pieces which had been contracted earlier.399

I actually didn’t see the painting when it arrived. The painting had been wrapped in paper and400

then securely stored in a crate. The contractors said that they wrapped it up and protected it from the401

dust from their work shortly after Hughes left for the cruise. In hindsight, I probably should have been402

more fastidious about confirming the delivery was legitimate and arrived undamaged. I should have, at403

a minimum, taken a cursory glance of the painting, inventoried it, and taken a photograph. For all I404

knew, it could have been a print of Scooby-Doo behind that brown wrapping.405

When the piece was delivered to my studio, I set it aside because I knew I had a few months to406

work on it. My pressing priority at the time was consulting in another case with the FBI regarding an art407

forgery, which preoccupied much of my time for the next month. Actually, that has become my most408

lucrative source of income. In the United States, I am one of only a handful of experts on American409

Impressionist artists. Many consider me to be the preeminent authority on the Midwest American410

Impressionist and Hoosier colonies. I have been an expert witness for the FBI, the IRS, state attorneys,411

almost always as a dis-interested third party. This particular case is quite unusual because I was hired412


33/80

33

to do the restoration work, and I was the first one to suspect and ultimately detect the forgery. Usually,413

there is a suspicion of a forgery and I confirm that the artwork is a forgery. When I’ve been called to414

testify, I have always concluded that the artwork in question is a forgery. I wouldn’t be testifying if the415

artwork was authentic. There would be no dispute.416

Cleaning and restoring a painting is very delicate and tedious work. A good restorer will make417

sure that all techniques used in the restoration process are reversible and that any retouching is limited418

to the specific areas of damage. It typically takes about one to three months from the time the419

restoration begins until it is finished. Oil painting restoration is an exacting, labor intensive process and420

adequate drying time is necessary between steps of the restoration process. The first step is to remove421

the frame carefully so as not to damage an aged canvas. The next step is to clean the painting of dirt,422

smoke, grime and other “stuff” that, over many, many years, has accumulated and adhered to the423

surface of an oil painting. The cleaning of a painting is a slow, methodical process using special solvents424

and neutralizers, cotton balls, Qtips, and hours upon hours working 2 square inches at a time under a425

bright light and magnifier. Most oil paintings have had one or more coats of a varnish applied. So, the426

next step is to remove the varnish. Subsequently, the conservator will repair damages, such as holes,427

scratches, peeling, chipping or other damage to the surface of the painting. Then, inpainting or re-428

touching will begin. This is the process that requires the highest level of skill because the integrity of the429

original painting must not be compromised. While many individuals can learn to clean a painting, kill430

mold, and even repair a tear or hole, it is the careful reapplication of paint to the surface of the painting431

that reveals the difference between having a painting restored by a technician or a true artist. The432

careful and precise mixing and application of oil paint and replicating the original artist’s technique is433

crucial. The last step is to apply a varnish to protect the art.434

Once Hughes’ painting arrived at my studio, it was several weeks before any restoration work435

began. We were behind in fulfilling commitments on other restoration work, and we were balancing the436

private collection restoration work with the Wishard Hospital mural restoration. I had the added437

obligation of assisting the FBI on a forgery case. So, I had my assistants handle some of the groundwork438

on the Hughes restoration work – removing the frame and handling the tedious, time-consuming439

cleaning process. Finally, after the preliminary work was done, including the cleaning, removing the440

varnish, it was given time to dry. All of that work was delegated to my assistants. My expertise was in441

the actual restoration of matching the strokes and colors and images where needed to bring the picture442

back to its full glory.443

Once I began my part of the work for the restoration is when I began to question whether it was444


34/80

34

a forged piece. I didn’t initially suspect it was a forgery. In fact, it was a very good, almost perfect,445

forgery. Even the signature of E. Colline appeared authentic. But I noticed a few things. I took my446

time, just like I would do if I had been hired to detect whether it was a forgery or to verify it was447

authentic. There were subtle changes and clues – the shadows of the trees by the dock looked448

unnatural, but could have also been a stylistic change by the artist. The darker shadows among the trees449

looked flat, rather than deep and had a uniformity that I found unconvincing. There is also a spot at the450

back of the boat that seems out of place. Over the next few days, I studied Hughes’ painting more451

closely. I used 50x magnification to look at the age of the painting and to see if the cracks in the painting452

were consistent with its age. I was unable to confirm that the cracks were fabricated. Of course, a453

highly skilled forger can add cracks to a recently painted piece that goes virtually undetected by baking454

the painting in a low temp oven.455

One additional tool available is a long wave ultraviolet light, which is frequently referred to by456

the oxymoron black light. I use ultraviolet light to establish authenticity. One telltale sign of a forgery is457

the paint pigments. Some forgers unknowingly will use paint pigments that were not available at the458

time the work was allegedly created. Different painting materials exhibit characteristic fluorescence459

when exposed to ultraviolet light. Using a portable ultra violet light, I observed that the shadows among460

the trees all fluoresced brightly and were therefore, in my opinion, a type of pigment in the paint that461

was not available in the 1920’s. I don't believe the discrepancies were a matter of changes to the462

varnish from cleaning or restoration. Based upon my training and expertise in Colline’s paintings and463

other American Impressionist paintings, it is my opinion that the purported Elvida Colline painting called464

Fishing at Dawn is a fake.465

It is also my opinion that Lou/Lu Ting misrepresented the painting as authentic. It is also my466

opinion that Ting failed to perform necessary due diligence before offering the E. Colline painting for467

sale at the charity auction. Ting has a duty to verify the painting’s provenance and to confirm the468

authenticity of the painting through the retention of qualified experts that will thoroughly examine the469

painting through subjective and scientific methods.470

I contacted the FBI as soon as the UV light confirmed my suspicions. On that same day, April 7th,471

I contacted Val Hughes. I told both of them that the Colline painting was a forgery.472

I am familiar with Cassidy Dowt. Dowt’s training and background is as a museum curator and as473

a connoisseur, studying the work of an artist. In contrast, I am a conservator. A conservator tends to be474

more objective than a connoisseur. The conservator and connoisseur both use magnifying glasses to475

examine the artwork more closely. After using magnification, a connoisseur is likely to stop further476


35/80

35

investigation. They will only do further work after the initial visual examination if there is a red flag that477

causes suspicion. The conservator will explore more deeply to get a complete picture.478

I understand that Dowt performed an appraisal of this painting for insurance purposes for479

Hughes. Given that the purpose was for insurance purposes, I believe that Dowt may have been sloppy480

in performing the appraisal for this painting. Insurance companies will accept values from almost any481

source and they are not particular as to the amount of detail or work that is done to provide an opinion482

for the appraisal.483

Generally, I have a lot of respect and admiration for Dowt's expertise. However, Dowt is484

arrogant and pretentious. Dowt wants to sound erudite and knowledgeable, using lots of art jargon.485

His/her character makes no difference to me unless it interferes with his/her assessment of art he/she486

has evaluated. In this case, Dowt's arrogance is getting in the way of the facts. Dowt won't let his/her487

ego admit that he/she is wrong. That ego also causes him/her to discredit opinions contrary to his/her488

own. He/She is impressed with his/her own credentials and does not believe anyone has the ability or489

credentials sufficient to evaluate art in the same manner as he/she does. I disagree that one needs490

formal training to detect forged art pieces. In fact, I think understanding how forgers work gives me an491

edge that Dowt can never have. Cass and I have evaluated several paintings in the past and in all of the492

prior cases we have reached the same conclusion as to the authenticity of the work. This is the first493

case that we have differed, and quite frankly, I think Cass is standing by his/her opinion to avoid liability494

for failing to detect the forgery at the time he/she appraised the piece.495

Dowt relies heavily upon the provenance of the painting. In the fine art market, generally, the496

artworks carry provenance establishing a history of exhibitors, ownerships or publications in which the497

painting’s authenticity and importance is verified. Often there are stickers on the back from particular498

collections or exhibits which adds to its credibility and market value. In this case, no stickers were499

present. Still, Dowt relies upon the statements of Doane Orr that E. Colline was a family friend of the500

Orr family and that the painting was given to Beau Teak shortly after its creation, and remained in the501

possession of Beau Teak until his death, then given to his daughter June Orr, who then gifted it to the502

Foundation.503

However, the apparent provenance can blind those associated with a painting – owner and504

appraiser – to facts that in hindsight seem fairly evident. For example, a very well-known Norman505

Rockwell painting, titled Breaking Home Ties was purchased directly from Rockwell and remained in the506

possession of friend and fellow illustrator, Don Trachte. It was one of several paintings contested when507

Trachte and his wife divorced. Trachte generously loaned the painting for exhibitions. Twenty-five508


36/80

36

years later, the painting was in an exhibition when it was noted that there were disparities in the509

painting from a picture of it in the Saturday Evening Post cover of 1954. No one suspected that it was a510

copy of the real painting created to protect the original. Subsequently, it was discovered that Trachte511

had a false wall built in his home where he had hidden his originals while hanging the copies on the wall512

for others to see. So, the moral of the story is Caveat Emptor, translated “Let the buyer beware!” 513

I affirm under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my belief514

and knowledge.515

Chris Cross . 516

517

518


37/80

37

Statement of Hunter O’Klooz 519

My name is Hunter O’Klooz. I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigations. The520

FBI defines its core values as obedience to the Constitution, dignity of those it protects, compassion,521

fairness, integrity, accountability, and leadership. I have been a Special Agent for 28 years, after522graduating from University of Notre Dame in Art History. A special agent must be a US citizen, and have523

a Bachelor’s degree from an accredited University. All employees of the FBI undergo a thorough524

screening and background check in order to qualify and maintain a top-secret security clearance.525

Once selected to become an FBI agent, we train for 20 weeks at Quantico, Virginia. There are526

200 categories of Federal law that come under the FBI's investigative authority. The FBI, in addition to527

protecting the United States from terrorist attacks and foreign intelligence ops and espionage, also528

combats public corruption, criminal organizations and major white collar crime.529

To be quite frank, the United States has a lukewarm commitment to art crime. Of the 14,000530

special agents in the FBI, there are only 16 agents assigned to the art theft team. The Bureau generally531

assigns cases to the appropriate squad in the city where the crime occurred regardless of expertise.532

Once assigned, art theft crimes are rarely transferred. It is often forgotten among cases involving533

corruption of public officials and violent acts of gangs and gangsters. There is a perception that art534

forgery is a victimless crime, or rather that it only affects the very rich and that these elitists deserve to535

have the wool pulled over their eyes. The prison sentences for art forgers tend to be slight too, and536

many forgers achieve fame and wealth after they are caught.537

Yet, art theft and forgeries should be a major concern of the FBI. Art forgery, fraud, and theft538

are the 3rd largest crimes in the country in dollar value, only after sales of illegal drugs and firearms.539

There is an estimated $6 billion in losses due to art theft annually. Art crime is a problem of epic540

proportions. Art forgery is widespread and routine.541

Art theft includes theft, looting, and faking originals, and transporting illegal art across state and542

international lines. Art thieves are different than art forgers. Art thieves have no specialized knowledge543

or skills, and tend to steal art only on one occasion. Art forgers, in contrast, are complex psychological544

characters, driven by a diverse range of motivations to the life of crime, such as fame, revenge, pride,545

and of course, greed. The most common is greed. Frequently, pride plays a role in the forger's modus546

operandi. The forger takes pride in fooling those considered to be experts, especially museum curators547

and the heads of auction companies who often can be smug and arrogant.548

Forgers fake art in all price ranges, not only expensive pieces or those by famous artists. So549


38/80

38

don't think that you're safe just because you’re not buying a Monet. Fifty-two percent (52%) of all550

pilfered works are taken from private homes and organizations, such as galleries, churches, and551

archaeological sites. As an interesting aside, the US government has a warehouse full of art forgeries552

and relics and uses those fakes for undercover work to catch Columbian drug dealers.553

One of the most interesting FBI investigations into public corruption was the undercover sting554

operation named ABSCAM. The name came from a fake company set up by the FBI, supposedly run by a555

rich Arab sheik who wanted to invest oil money in valuable artworks. FBI agents posed as556

representatives of the sheik to target mobsters trying to sell forged paintings. As it turned out, the557

evidence led to arresting members of Congress, who offered to arrange for a state gambling license in558

Atlantic City in exchange for a bribe from the fake sheik who supposedly wanted asylum in the United559

States.560

The art market is not a regulated market. All one has to do to go into business is hang out a561

shingle and find a place to display the art for sale. There are few protections from shady art dealers,562

cunning forgers pretending to be sophisticated experts, auction companies, and even internet sales.563

Often a buyer of fine art will not find out for years, if ever, that the art purchased is a fake.564

Victims generally share common characteristics. First, victims of art fraud are usually565

unsophisticated first time buyers. They are propelled into a market which they know very little and rely566

totally upon the representation of others. Second, they have sufficient capital to invest. Third, they567

have an interest in art, but naiveté about the art market. Too often the art dealer, or in this case, the568

auction company will take advantage of the ignorance of the buyer. They count on the tendency of569

most people to rely upon the expert and to trust that surely they would not take advantage of him/her.570

A purchaser needs to exercise his/her own due diligence. They need to do independent research and571

obtain a separate appraisal prior to an art purchase.572

The primary burden of due diligence, however, falls upon the dealer or auctioneer selling the573

painting. The auctioneer has a responsibility to verify the authenticity and provenance of a painting.574

This entails thoroughly researching the painting’s history, examining the painting in person, using575

fluorescent lighting, and even submitting a valuable painting to the International Foundation for Art576

Research (IFAR).577

Dealers and auction companies often avoid digging very deep into the authenticity of a work of578

art in order to turn a blind eye to the possibility that it is a forgery. One of the secrets that art dealers579

and auction companies keep to themselves is the number of fakes in circulation and in collections.580

Bogus works of art hang in all museums and galleries, appear in almost every auction, and are sold581


39/80

39

online. No dealer wants the reputation of being a whistle blower on another dealer as it will only be a582

matter of time before the tables are turned. Consequently, most fakes will often just reappear on the583

market.584

If the art dealer or auction company disclosed the truth, they would lose the money they585

invested. Galleries and auctions often are unwilling to guarantee the art sold because they don’t want586

the forgeries back. In their book "Everyone’s Guide to Buying Art ,” authors Peggy and Harold Samuels587

say that every art buyer should determine their personal painting size. The authors explain that your588

size is the measurement of the curled fingers of your hand to your armpit – because after your589

purchase, if you try to sell the art, you will go from gallery to gallery with the painting under your arm590

looking for a buyer to unload it.591

I am familiar with Charity Operations Network (CON), the defendant in this case. I have studied592

Documents

Mock Trial Case Indiana 2015-16