Art crime: fraud and forensics

Abstract

The role of scientific investigation in the attribution and authentication of art and antiquities is accepted as a necessary, although hardly a sufficient, part of any rigorous assessment. While historical studies and connoisseurship provide useful investigatory frameworks for attribution, scientific methods provide means by which to interrogate the materials and techniques of the object, enabling a comprehensive collection of data about the construction and history of a work. This provides contestable and verifiable evidence of the kind required in legal cases. When the investigation includes claims of fraud then the research moves beyond scholarly investigation and into the domains of policing and the law. Research relating to cases of art fraud therefore requires evidence to be developed in ways that will support the need for the investigation to show intention and deception. It is possible to investigate the action of ‘intending to deceive’ by assessing the choice of materials and the construction of a work. While not conclusive evidence, these materials-based studies are often significant in assisting the jury to understand the process of developing and trading fake art.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.