I think they should be left alone for returning the notebooks. Personally speeking no artifact would be worth my own personal liberty or reputation regardless of how it was obtained. The return of lost artworks etc should be encouraged with an amnesty similar to gun/knife amnestys. If the items really are that important to society a reprocussion free return is worth it.
Exactly. But for many people possession of such artifacts is seen as protection against jail. Certain European organized crime figures have used the "return of cultural treasures" as a bargaining chip in plea negotiations. Possession of stolen art, or at least knowledge of where it is hidden, can reduce one's time in prison.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/magazine/what-is-the-valu...
"A prison sentence, for instance, might be reduced in some jurisdictions in exchange for a criminal’s help in retrieving a missing Monet. In effect, an unframed canvas, easier to move across borders than its equivalent in cash or drugs, acts as a high-value and extremely pretty bank note."
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2020/10/13/steal-and-repeat-...
"In other examples, it appears that anticipating the authorities catching up with them is exactly the reason why such prime works are appealing to criminals. “One thing I’m seeing more of is the use of such stolen works as a bargaining chip for [reducing] sentences,” says Robert Read, the head of art and private clients at Hiscox. “This trend was noted about a decade ago, but as sentencing gets more creative in the courtroom, it would appear that criminals are viewing it as more of an opportunity—in this case the more publicity and better known a work, the better.”"
Knowingly purchasing something in order to return it is never a good idea. More often than not it is in fact a crime. "I was going to return it" is not a good defense once they cops catch you in possession of a stolen object.
One dark market is for known forgeries. Forged art, like counterfeit money, is illegal to own or sell. But some collectors want to collect forgeries. Some coin collectors enjoy fakes from legendary or uncaught master forgers more than they do legal coins. So there is a black market for such things. A 100$ bill is worth 100$. I wouldn't bother putting it in a frame. But a masterful fake 100$ is something very interesting imho. The fake can have a better story than the original.
Do you have a reference for that? At least in Poland that's explicitly not the case, and I'm curious how does that kind of legislation distinguish between a forgery and a replica.
The much trickier problem, not uncommon in art theft, is when the thief attempts to ransom the artifact.
Do we even know when it went missing? It was discovered missing two decades ago, but was it in fact missing for longer but noone noticed?
I can imagine someone finding it in an old cupboard when an old don died and being embarrassed that they didn't return it immediately, so they did this
As in if you stole an invaluable cultural artefact? How often does that happen with you? How would it even happen once?
> and I found this story and it ended with public shaming and prison
You don't have to look at the end of this story. Thieves when caught end up punished. If there is some innocent explanation, then people don't end up in prison. But it is better be a very good one.
> then I'd just burn the thing instead of trying to return it.
And that makes you a terrible human being. Thank you for letting me know.
This is why for example when the British police run public cold case campaigns they often stress that people might seek to come forward because "allegiances change" -- careful code that hints at leniency while seeking help from former co-inmates who have fallen out with the offender, spouses or abused partners leaving husbands, children escaping the control of malignant parents, etc., or people who have simply survived the now dead offender and are no longer terrified to speak.
I would wager that many stolen objects are quietly destroyed by those who inherit them, rather than confront the difficulties returning them would involve.
Academic institutions are full of people who want to live a quiet life or build a reputation for the right reasons. They are full of people who come and go, most of which wouldn't know what they are looking at or whether it belonged there or not. Libraries and archives are among the few places that will properly inventory and catalogue what they have, and even the Cambridge University Libraries performed several searches to verify an error was not made on their end since it does happen.
It may be unlikely, but I think that it is possible that the process for handling these materials failed somewhere and it took twenty years for someone to come across them. Their desire to drop them anonymously may have been for any number of reasons. Regardless of their reasons, I don't think that doing the right thing should be punished. I could also understand why someone would rather burn something than deal with a slow and possibly misdirected justice system.
I don't say that doing the right thing should be punished. I think the circumstances should be investigated and if it looks like someone did stole it that person or persons should be punished.
> It may be unlikely, but I think that it is possible that the process for handling these materials failed somewhere and it took twenty years for someone to come across them.
Sure and that is the innocent explanation. Are you saying that we shouldn't even investigate because there is a chance that it might be something innocent? Because that is what the original comment is asking about.
> I could also understand why someone would rather burn something than deal with a slow and possibly misdirected justice system.
I also can understand it. It still a terrible thing to do, and anyone who would do it I would consider a bad person.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%A9phane_Breitwieser
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/jul/17/dutch-a...