> Meanwhile, when Breitwieser's mother had heard of her son's arrest from Kleinklauss, who had been able to evade authorities, she proceeded to destroy many of the works by cutting or carving them up, leaving the remains of the frames in the trash over a period of several weeks and forcing the shredded paintings down her garbage disposal unit.[1] Other artifacts, such as vases, jewelry, pottery, and statuettes, were simply thrown into the nearby Rhone-Rhine Canal, where some were later recovered through dredging. She claimed that she destroyed the paintings out of anger at her son, but police believe it was to destroy incriminating evidence against him.[7] She apparently had no inkling of the large monetary value of the works she destroyed.[7] Police found nothing besides the cord of the stolen antique bugle when they first searched her home, and she took seven months to admit to destroying the artwork, after some pieces had washed up on the shore of the Rhine. A Swiss police officer said, "[N]ever have so many old masters been destroyed at the same time."[2]
In his mind, he 'worked' to get all that art only to have it destroyed, no wonder that he attempted suicide.
> Stealing art for money, he says, is stupid. Money can be made with far less risk. But stealing for love, Breitwieser knows, is ecstatic.
Wow.
> more than 99 percent of art thieves are motivated by profit rather than aesthetics. This is why art crimes are typically solved on the back end, when the thieves try to sell the work. But with Breitwieser, law enforcement's chief strategy—poring over art-market data, waiting for the stolen items to reappear—is dead on arrival.