A (3:35)

Imagine you're incredibly rich. Go ahead, do it. You're incredibly rich. Rich enough to think I should buy a Picasso. You're out walking and a street vendor says, hey, it's your lucky day. I have a Picasso. Would you buy it? Probably not. You have no reason to believe the street vendor. He has no credibility. But if you walk down the block to a prestigious art gallery and notice the same Picasso, chances are you'd buy it. All that's changed is your level of trust in the seller. Art galleries are usually reliable institutions. When collectors buy from a gallery and they believe their purchase has been vetted by experts and deemed legitimate. This trust brought collectors to New York's Knoedler Gallery for over 160 years. When the business first opened in the 1840s, Knoedler was one of a few art houses in all of Manhattan. Around the same time, a new generation of oil tycoons and robber barons scored big during California's gold rush. They were happy to spend their money on art, especially at knoedler. Clients included J.P. morgan, John D. Rockefeller, even first lady Eleanor Roosevelt. But over the decades, Knoedler fell on hard times. Its purchase of a new storefront on the Upper east side nearly drove the gallery to bankruptcy in 1970. Enter oil tycoon Armand Hammer. He has no relation to the baking soda company, but he founded LA's Hammer Museum, which houses the art he collected throughout his life. And by the way, it is an amazing museum. If you're ever in Los Angeles, check it out. It is so good. In 1971, Hammer approached the Knoedler Gallery. But he didn't just buy a painting or two, he bought the whole gallery. Hammer installed one of its most successful directors, Lawrence Rubin, who changed the gallery's business model. Rather than vending art from the 19th century, the company would sell works by modern artists. Over the next few years, Rubin brought in new staff, including a young assistant named Ann Friedman. Friedman had already been in the art world, working at the nearby Andre Emmerich Gallery, and she held a BFA in painting, she found modern art inspiring. But even more valuable than her background were her sales skills. Ann Friedman made the gallery a lot of money. By 1994, she was promoted to director, and she was eager to succeed. As the head of the gallery, Friedman was in charge of acquiring paintings to sell. Soon after Friedman's promotion, one of the gallery's employees set up a meeting for Friedman with an art dealer named Glafira Rosales. Glafira Rosales was polite and had a sophisticated look, nicely styled clothes and frameless glasses. In other words, she looked like all the other dealers Friedman was meeting with. Rosales said she had a client looking to sell a Mark Rothko painting. If the gallery could make the sale, Knoedler would keep a cut of the proceeds, which would be massive. Mark Rothko was one of the most famous American abstract artists, known for his large color field paintings. If you've been to a major art museum, there's a good chance you've encountered a Rothko. If you're watching the video, you'll see some on screen, and it's kind of quintessential modern art in the sense that if you see a Rothko, you might think, well, it's the big deal. I could do that. It looks like it's just one color until you try to do it. I do a little painting and they become very impressive when you realize the subtlety he's working with. And Rothko pieces are big, often around 4ft wide and 5ft tall. He used these grand canvases to explore how simple shapes and colors can collide. And intentionally paired colors that might trigger certain feelings. Similar shades might feel more harmonious, while contrasted hues were more disruptive. Rothko and his mid century contemporaries like Jackson Pollock and Robert Motherwell were among the first American artists to achieve international acclaim. Their pieces have been displayed everywhere from Paris to Tokyo. The market for Abstract Expressionist paintings was especially hot When Rosales met with Friedman. Pieces were selling for millions. No wonder Friedman was so transfixed by the rothko. In the 2020 documentary Made youe Look, Friedman said, quote, I thought it was absolutely beautiful. If one can fall in love with something material, I do fall in love with art. But emotions weren't enough to justify a purchase. Friedman needed to confirm that the painting was authentic. She began by noting the canvas was signed and dated by the artist. Next, she asked Rosales about the provenance, its history of ownership. Provenance is crucial to establishing a painting's authenticity. When there's a clear chain of ownership, a piece can be traced all the way back to an artist's studio. Also, whether it's pronounced provenance or provenance, well, that's up to you. We're going to say provenance. But here's where the situation grew suspicious. Glafira Rosales couldn't fully disclose the work's provenance. She claimed the Rothko was owned by a friend with whom Rosales had a confidentiality agreement. She referred to him as Mr. X. Yes, Mr. X. Not the most original. According to Rosales, Mr. X was a wealthy man whose family immigrated from Europe to Mexico after World War II. During the 1950s and 60s, they occasionally visited New York, where they met an Abstract Expressionist artist named Alfonso Osorio. Osorio connected Mr. X to other Abstract Expressionist painters. The collector bought pieces from them and took the artwork back home to Mexico. Mr. X later bequeathed the paintings to his son, who Rosales referred to as, wait for it, Mr. X Jr. He was looking to sell his father's collection with rosales help. Apparently, Mr. X Jr. Sister may have had receipts for the paintings, but the documents had likely been destroyed. Newer pieces, like abstract expressionist paintings by Mark Rothko, tend to be well cataloged and photographed. And because modern works have only been in circulation for a short time, it it's usually easy to identify previous owners. So when a relatively recent piece doesn't have any records, its authenticity becomes questionable. And when an entire collection lacks provenance, the Art Dealers association of America advises galleries to stay away. Plus, Mr. X Jr. Was willing to sell to Knoedler at a significant discount. An authentic Rothko could net a lot more than Mr. X Jr. S asking price. This story is so full of red flags. Okay, now, Friedman claims she did see these issues, but she also claims they have alternate explanations, and that's why she chose to ignore them. Apparently, some 20th century collectors bought pieces directly from artists and paid cash. So it was possible that Mr. X pieces never had a written record of his legitimate purchase. As for the steep discount, back in the 50s and 60s, Abstract expressionist works could be bought on the cheap. So even if Mr. X Jr sold them below current market value, he'd still clear a decent profit. So in the absence of provenance, Friedman relied on trusted experts to judge whether Rosales paintings were authentic. This is common practice in the art world. For every major artist, there are scholars and institutions who put together catalogues, raisonne, or records of authenticated works. The catalogs were treated as the Bible for a painter's body of work. Rothko's catalogue raisonne was compiled by David Anfam, one of the world's leading Rothko experts. All right, here's where they encountered another big red flag. None of the pieces in Rosales collection were documented by historians, but according to Friedman, when she showed Anne Pham the Rothko piece, he immediately declared it was authentic. The national gallery also examined two Rothko's in Mr. X's collection and responded positively. They even got a promising reply from Cranmer Art Conservatory, the conservator for the Mark Rothko estate. The organization said the artwork exemplifies the classic Rothko format from the 1950s. To Friedman, if the pieces passed the eye test from multiple experts, that was good enough for her. Plus, Rosales seemed trustworthy. She was a presence in the art world, spotted at auctions, gallery openings, and even buying pieces from the Knoedler Gallery. She was a friendly face, and everyone wanted to believe her. Especially Anne Friedman, because Glafira Rosalis was a walking lottery ticket. Usually, fraud victims lose money, but in Ann Friedman's case, buying into Glafira Rosales's story made her a multimillionaire. Which is why a lot of people think that the story I just told, Friedman's version is fake. Because as it goes on, it only grows more suspicious.

B (14:11)

Sparkle throughout the night with Born in Roma fragrances by Valentino Beauty. Each bottle holds the energy of Rome after dark. Donna Born in Roma blends luxurious jasmine with rich, creamy vanilla, creating a sensual and vibrant signature scent. Uoma Born in Roma fuses aromatic sage and smoked vetiver, leaving a lasting impression that lingers well into the early hours. Shop Born in Roma by Valentino Beauty now at Ulta this episode is brought to you by ebay. Before all the algorithm fed blah and the endless sea of dupes, shopping used to feel more fun. Find that feeling again on ebay. It's not mindless scrolling. It's a fashion pursuit. And when you score that rare Adidas Collab or the Dior saddlebag you've been manifesting, it's a rush. Ebay has millions of pre loved finds from hundreds of brands backed by authenticity guarantee. Ebay Things People Love.

A (15:11)

In the mid-1990s, the Knoedler Gallery's new director, Ann Friedman, met with dealer Glafira Rosales regarding rare abstract expressionist paintings. The artwork had some red flags, a murky providence and an anonymous owner selling his collection well below market value. But Friedman dismissed those concerns. Through Rosales, she bought several pieces formerly owned by this mysterious art collector known only as Mr. X, along with alleged Rothko's Friedman purchased work supposedly painted by Willem de Kooning, Robert Motherwell and Jackson Pollock. And if the canvases were good enough for the prestigious Knoedler Gallery and they were good enough for collectors. Every week, Friedman watched people's eyes light up as they took in the paintings in her gallery. Works from Mr. X's collection sold to individuals and institutions across the globe. Each sale generated hefty commissions for the Knoedler Gallery. Galleries in the secondhand art market often make a 100% profit on their pieces. That's pretty good. But Friedman was selling at even higher margins of 200 to 800%. Sales of that magnitude usually only happen once a decade, but Knoedler was raking them in every year. In one instance, the gallery bought a painting from Rosales for $600,000, then sold it for a whopping $5 million. In most businesses, the more profit you make, the more successful you are. But that doesn't always hold true in the art world. According to Dr. Jeffrey Taylor of New York Art Forensics, secondary market dealers, like galleries, should be concerned if their pieces are regularly selling for outrageous markups. Okay, here's why. Let's say you have Artsell in this situation, you're Mr. X. You're happy to sell paintings for $10,000 each. Then you notice your buyers in this situation, the Knoedler Gallery are reselling the same pieces for $50,000. You'll eventually realize your paintings are worth more and raise the price on the next piece. But Mr. X Jr didn't do that. He continued selling his paintings at a suspiciously steep markdown. That said, as long as nobody asked any questions, they wouldn't hear any troubling answers. Over the next few years, everyone felt like they were winning. The art world fawned over Mr. X's collection. Luxury publisher Taschen featured a Knoedler Rothko painting in their coffee table books. The prestigious Beiler Museum in Switzerland gave another piece its own wall in the Rothko rooms. With each sale, Friedman earned greater respect. She became known in the art world as the go to seller of rare abstract expressionist art. For about seven years, no one asked any questions until 2001. That year, investment banker Jack Levy offered $2 million for a Jackson Pollock from the Knoedler Gallery. But Levy's purchase had one condition. The painting's authenticity had to be certified by the International foundation for Art Research, or ifar. The organization would study the piece's materials and compare their findings to an authenticated Pollock from the same year. The Knoedler Gallery agreed to that term. And the painting went to Ifar. Ifar was not so easily fooled. According to executive director Sharon Flescher, the piece had multiple inconsistencies. Even though it was an old canvas, the paint on it was much newer than the kind used on authentic Pollocks. And the wood had aged differently than an original wood. Flesher was also troubled by how the painting looked. In the documentary Made youe Look, she said, quote, stylistically, there were many concerns about how the paint was applied, about that greenish, brownish wash no one had ever seen. Even the people who liked the work questioned that. And Ifar resurfaced an even bigger question. The 1949 painting would have been made during the height of Pollock's fame. So it should have been cataloged somewhere. And yet nobody could find it. Given the murky provenance, unidentified owner, and the fact that it was sold to Knoedler by a dealer no one had heard of, IFAR refused to authenticate this alleged Pollock. But IFAR stops short of explicitly labeling the painting a fake. In the art world, it can be risky to outright say a piece is a forgery. A painting's owner has a lot riding on its authentication. If it's real, it can sell for millions of dollars. If the work turns out to be fraudulent, it's worthless. So when a painting's authenticity is challenged, a collector stands to lose a lot of money. Some buyers have even sued experts who dared to question their purchases. So for specialists, there's little to gain and a lot to lose for critiquing a painting. It's much safer for organizations like IFAR to. To withhold any definitive judgments. But that ambiguity leaves room for gallerists like Anne Friedman to say the expert's opinion was inconclusive. She maintained that the piece was legitimate. Still, after Jack Levy read the full report, he demanded a refund. And even though she disagreed with the verdict, Friedman kept her word. She allowed Levy to cancel the sale and returned his $2 million. In light of the new question surrounding the piece, many gallerists would have taken the painting off the market until its authenticity could be confirmed. Instead, Friedman relisted the Pollock for $11 million. You see, when authorities like Ifar question a painting, they do it discreetly to protect collectors from the embarrassment of having been fooled. But the secrecy means there's no consequence. For the galleries, the worst case scenario happened. And all Friedman and Rosales got was a hush hush. Maybe it's fake. And in the time Jack Levy and Ifar were examining the Knoedler Pollock, the demand for Jackson Pollock's work only increased. So Friedman wanted to do what any good business person would follow industry trends and maximize profit. It was simply convenient that as Jackson Pollock grew more famous and the value of his art rose, Mr. X Jr revealed his father's collection of Pollux to offload. Yeah, not just Rothko's. I also have Pollux. Still, Ann Freedman did allegedly reach out to Rosales, mentioning the authenticity concerns and asking if she could provide any further information on the painting's provenance. Rosales shared this Part of the reason Mr. X desired secrecy was because he was in the closet. Now this was a much bigger bombshell in 2001, and even more understandable when you consider that these paintings were supposedly bought back in the 1960s. Plus, as Rosales explained, Mr. X had a wife and children in Switzerland who didn't know about his sexuality. Mr. X would leave them at home while he made visits to New York and lived a more authentic life while there. He bought many paintings from art dealer David Herbert. Herbert was also gay and the two had a relationship. Mr. X feared that if he took the art he bought from his boy boyfriend back home to Switzerland, he could be outed. Notably, this account didn't contradict Rosales original story. She said Mr. X first worked with Alfonso Osorio, then later with David Herbert. Both Osorio and Herbert were dead by this point, so there was no way to directly verify the provenance with them. So the Knoedler gallery kept selling Mr. X's paintings for another six years. Around 2007, Rosales brought in a piece by Abstract Expressionist painter Robert Motherwell. According to Rosales, it was a newly discovered part of Motherwell's Elegy to the Spanish Republic series. The paintings in the series were large abstract works that reflected the artist's anguish about the Spanish Civil War. Motherwell had ditched clean lines and vibrant colors in favor of jagged, unruly black shapes and drip marks sharply contrasted against slivers of white paint. The clash between the opposing colors represented the tension between order and disarray during the war. At some point after acquiring it, Friedman mentioned the find to her friend Jack Flaming. Flam was a historian and president of the Daedalus foundation, an organization founded by Robert Motherwell himself. But as Friedman excitedly described the painting, Flam's alarm bells started ringing, especially when he had a chance to look at the work. He noted excessive drip marks and oil. Flam told Freeman that just months earlier he'd been called to examine another newly discovered piece from Mother Wells Elegy series. After Performing the necessary checks, Flam penned a letter declaring the painting was an authentic Motherwell. But in his note, Flam said his opinion could change if new circumstances about the painting ever came to light. What Flam didn't know was the owner of that painting had bought it from Glafira Rosales. Apparently, she wasn't just scamming the Knoedler Gallery. Even though he was unaware of these two paintings provenance, Flam's concerns grew. He shared them with Friedman. This Motherwell piece might be a forgery. She might want to re examine the other pieces the Knoedler Gallery had acquired from the same collection. Friedman brushed it off her Motherwell was real. She'd even shown it to the artist's ex wife, Helen Frankenthaler. According to the documentary Made youe Look, Helen, quote, pointed her finger and said, yep, that's Bob. Friedman also explained to Flam that the piece was linked to art dealer David Herbert, supposedly a close friend of Motherwell. But Flam did some more research and learned Motherwell and Herbert weren't friends at all. There was no indication Motherwell even knew who Herbert was. So Flam challenged Friedman. He dared her to submit two of the paintings from Mr. X's collection for forensic testing. He even referred her to a leading forgery spotter, Jamie Martin. Friedman agreed to have the paintings tested. She may have finally been growing suspicious of Rosales. Or if she was in on the scam, she was confident any negative results could be covered up or brushed aside as a one off. In his lab, Jaime Martin ran a variety of scientific tests. While some so called experts used the eye test to judge painting's authenticity, Martin compiled hard data. His methods were so rigorous, the FBI sometimes consulted him. When Martin examined the Knoedler paintings, he detected a pigment on one of Mr. X's pieces that hadn't been invented until well after the work was supposedly made. Martin compared it to seeing a photo of John F. Kennedy holding an iPhone. Yeah, something was off. This was the second time forensic testing casted doubt on Mr. X's collection. But Ann Friedman still wasn't swayed. She didn't trust Martin's methods. He was a one man operation. He didn't employ any associates or lab technicians who could back him up. Plus, he thought the questionable pigment could be explained. According to an art historian, E.A. carmine Jr. Mr. X's pieces could have brushed against paint in the collector's home, collecting new pigments. Flam thought that was unlikely, especially since Mr. X wasn't a painter. More to the point, he couldn't understand why Friedman pushed back against this indisputable evidence. Either she knew the paintings were fake or she should have known. One thing was clear, she wasn't going to stop selling the Mr. X paintings. Flam realized if she wouldn't listen to him and other art world experts, he had to bring in someone she would listen to. The FBI.

B (29:46)

This podcast is brought to you by Carvana. Carvana lets you buy your next car on your terms. Explore a massive inventory online filter for what matters and find your perfect match. Then choose delivery to your home or pick it up at one of Carvana's iconic car vending machines. Every car also comes with a seven day money back guarantee so you can make sure it's the right fit. Buy your car on Carvana. Deliver your pickup fees may apply. Limitations and exclusions may apply. See our 7 day return policy@carvana.com Carvana so good so good so good. Give big, Save big with Rack Friday deals at Nordstrom Rack for a limited time, take an extra 40% off red tag clearance for a total Savings up to 75% off. Save on gifts for everyone on your list from brands like Vince Cole, Haan, Sam Edelman and more. All sales final and restrictions apply. The best stuff goes fast, so bring your gift list and your wish list to your nearest Nordstrom rack today.

A (30:46)

In 2007, art historian Jack Flam reported gallerist Ann Friedman to the FBI. He believed Friedman was selling fake artwork at the prestigious Knoedler Gallery. Okay, believe it or not, the FBI has a special unit devoted to prosecuting art crimes, and it might be one of the busiest task forces in the country. They reported that $6 billion worth of fraudulent art is bought and sold every year. When prosecutor Jason Hernandez was assigned the case, he recognized it would be a historic one, regardless of the verdict. If the pieces turned out to be legitimate. Mr. X's collection included some of the rarest, most valuable art in the world. But if the paintings were fake, Byers had been defrauded out of $80 million. It would be the largest art fraud case in American history. The Art Crimes Unit's first step was to investigate Glafira Rosales, the dealer who'd sold the pieces to Knoedler Gallery. At first, authorities weren't sure if Rosales knew the paintings were forged or if she'd been duped by the real criminal. But while Jack Flam contacted the FBI, he also hired a private investigator. Within a couple of weeks, the PI discovered Rosales lived with her boyfriend, Jose Bergantinos Diaz, who'd previously been accused of trafficking stolen art. Back in 1999, the pair shared a multimillion dollar mansion. Then the FBI investigated Rosales Paper Trail. Throughout the early 2000s, she'd sold paintings to multiple galleries in New York, including the Knoedler Gallery. When the galleries bought pieces from Rosales, they wired funds to her bank account in Spain. 90% of those proceeds should have gone forward to the owners of the artwork, Mr. X's family. For her service as a broker, Rosales should have only pocketed about 10%. But when the FBI followed the money, the agency saw Rosales was keeping all of it for herself. Which signaled two things. First, her alleged client, Mr. X Jr. Probably didn't exist, otherwise he would have taken his cut. Second, Glafira Rosales was lying on her taxes. She never reported her income from the art sales. In 2013, the FBI had enough evidence and arrested Glafira Rosales. But not for forgery, for tax fraud. Now, that's usually punishable by years in prison. The hope was that Rosales would strike a plea bargain and confess in exchange for a lesser sentence. And she did. Not only did Rosales confess to selling fake pieces, but she said she'd hired someone to create them. The true artist was a math professor in his 70s named Pei Xing Qian. By the time investigators learned about Kien, he'd already fled to China. But he'd left plenty of incriminating evidence. At his house in Queens, New York, authorities found an envelope labeled Mark Rothko Nails, a variety of art books and paints that match the ones used in the fraudulent pieces. When they looked into Kien's past, investigators learned the forger had been a successful artist in China. In 1981, he'd immigrated to the U.S. he studied at the Art Students League in Manhattan, the same school as Jackson Pollock. Over the course of his studies, Keon learned how to copy Pollock's techniques as well as those of his contemporaries, like Rothko and Motherwell. He started selling his copies of abstract expressionist paintings on the streets of New York. I used to live in New York, and you'd see these kind of artists all the time, selling works that look like the amazing famous ones, but they're ones they did. They were often really good. And that's where he met Glafira Rosales's boyfriend, Jose Bergentinos Diaz. At the time, Rosales and Diaz were plotting a forgery scheme and interviewing different painters. Kien's skills were the most impressive. Allegedly, the three worked out this Kien would create Forgeries of Abstract Expressionist art. Rosales and Diaz would buy them for a minimum of $5,000. From there, Diaz touched it up to make the painting appear older, as though it was made during the 1950s, not the 1990s. Diaz sourced old frames and used techniques to create a weathered look, like staining canvases with tea bags. Then Rosales would sell the piece to a gallery netting millions over 15 years. Gien created over 60 paintings from his garage in Queens, and they got away with it for so long because they knew the secrets to pulling off a good con. First, Rosales identified a good target. As author Maria Konnikova said in the documentary Made youe Look, a master con artist gives you what you want. When Rosales first made contact with Friedman, the gallerist had just been promoted. Friedman was at a vulnerable point in her career. She was under pressure to source fine art they could sell. Rosales pitched Friedman on Mr. X's collection, but she didn't suddenly show up with dozens of paintings that would have been too suspicious. Instead, she brought one single piece to their first meeting. From that point onward, Rosales only brought Friedman one or two paintings each year. She was vague about the collection's owner and providence, but offered enough plausible details to make her story seem real, especially to someone who is desperate to believe it. As we mentioned earlier, Rosales initially said the first Rothko was owned by a collector who'd moved from Europe to Mexico after World War II. This was a common post war immigration story, one that wouldn't arouse suspicion. And she said he bought pieces from Alfonso Osorio. Well, that wasn't some made up art dealer. Osorio was a prominent figure in the Abstract Expressionist art scene during the 1950s, a real person. And he was also a convenient subject. Osorio was no longer alive, so there was no way for anyone to ask him whether or not he'd sold a painting to Mr. X. And when concerns first started popping up about Mr. X's collection, Rosales revised her story to include another real life art figure, David Herbert. Like Osorio, Herbert was a prominent figure in the New York art scene during the mid 20th century. But he too was dead by the time Rosales met Friedman, so it was impossible to ask him about the revised provenance, assuming Friedman even wanted to. The Knoedler Gallery's accountant later revealed the institution wouldn't have been profitable without Rosales paintings. The livelihood of the gallery, and by extension its director, depended on Mr. X's collection. As long as the forged paintings looked authentic. Friedman had every incentive to Trust Rosales. Rosales seemingly didn't account for forensic testing. But when she approached KNOEDLER in the mid-1990s, scientific analysis was rarely conducted on artwork, so she probably wasn't worried about exposure. By the time forensic testing hit the fine art world, Friedman had been working with Rosales for years. She was reluctant to accept the art collection she'd built her reputation on and made millions from. Could have all been fake. Author Maria Konnikova, who studied and wrote about con artists, said Friedman's behavior was typical for a victim. Friedman was so invested in Rosales works and their authenticity, her instinct was to to deny any unsettling evidence. Whenever red flags popped up, Friedman found ways to rationalize them. And eventually, someone had to pay the price for her refusal to see the truth. In the end, Glafira Rosales pleaded guilty to wire fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, and other charges. She served three months in jail, nine months of house arrest, and three years of probation. Now, you might be thinking like me. Wait a minute. If that's all you serve for getting tens of millions of dollars, might be worth it. I think I'd take that. There's a rub. She was also ordered to forfeit the $33 million she'd made off her art sales and pay 81 million in restitution to her victims. Not so worth it. Overnight, Rosales went from hobnobbing at fancy gallery openings to Persona non grata, blackballed from the fine art world forever. Meanwhile, Pixien Qian, the Chinese artist who, according to Rosales, painted the forged works, got off scot free. He fled to China, where the US doesn't have an extradition treaty. Prosecutors also went after Rosales boyfriend, Jose Bergantinos Diaz, but he'd already fled to Spain. Although the feds tried to have him extradited to the US The Spanish government ultimately declined the request, citing Diaz's poor health. And then there's Anne Friedman and the employees working under her in the Knoedler Gallery. They swear they were duped, but it's a hard story to believe. As the New York Times M.H. miller said, either Friedman was complicit, or she was one of the stupidest people to have ever worked at an art gallery. But Ann Friedman never seemed stupid. She seemed like a shark with strong business acumen. She was initially appointed co director, but fought for a sole director position and landed it seems like she knew what she was doing. One artist told Vanity Fair that for Friedman, it was always about making it rain. And a co worker said she could point to the blue sky and tell you it was red, and she would believe it. She clearly knew what to say and when to say it. And as she succeeded at the Knoedler Gallery, her social status rose. A 2009 Washington University notable alumni profile noted that Friedman was a founding member of the Art Dealers association of America and served on multiple museum, charity, and nonprofit boards. She became an art collector herself, then got rich enough to start donating pieces to museums for tax write offs. This put her name on donor lists and websites for museums like the Met, the Smithsonian, the National Gallery of Art, and even Harvard. Ann Friedman gained so much by selling these paintings. And her complete oblivion was especially hard to believe for the people who spent millions on fake paintings. In 2011, collector Pierre Lagrange threatened to sue the Knoedler Gallery. Years prior, the business sold him a Jackson Pollock for $17 million. Now, LaGrange was going through a divorce and in the middle of dividing up his assets. But when he enlisted the help of auction house Sotheby's to sell the Pollock, Sotheby's declined because of questions surrounding its authenticity. So lagrange submitted it for forensic testing, and it was forged. Okay, and get this. Days after lagrange threatened to file a lawsuit, the Knoedler Gallery abruptly closed, citing business reasons. The Knoedler Gallery's attorney later denied that LaGrange influenced the decision. But up to this point, Knoedler had operated continuously for 165 years, staying open through the Civil War and both world wars. So when news spread about the closure, lagrange's rumored lawsuit, and an FBI investigation, former buyers grew concerned. One by one, they filed complaints. Seemingly overnight, the Knoedler Gallery and Ann Friedman went from two of the most respected names in the art world to defendants in 10 different lawsuits. All 10 were eventually settled without Ann Freedman ever having to take the stand in court, meaning testify under oath in public interviews, since she's consistently said she didn't know the paintings were fake. Of course, the FBI investigated Ann Friedman and and she continued to insist the paintings she sold were legitimate. But once each painting was examined, there was no denying that from 1994 to 2008, she sold more than 60 fake paintings, grossing around $80 million. But at the end of their investigation, the FBI declined to prosecute Friedman. According to Assistant U.S. attorney Jason Hernandez, the bureau didn't feel they had strong enough evidence that she knowingly deceived buyers in order to make millions in commissions. And if Rosales thought Friedman knew what was going on or if she definitely knew that she knew what was going on, she never brought it up in her confessions. Which makes it hard to know what to think about whether Friedman knew or not. I mean, it sure seems like she does, but. Well, I've been duped on the Moroccan rug stories, family lore in my household, so I guess it's possible. And if you're wondering where Friedman is now, she's now in her 70s. And according to documentary producer Barry Averich, she's still selling modern art. And get this, right after the scandal broke, she opened her own gallery, Friedman Art, just three blocks away from what used to be the Knoedler Gallery. For at least 10 years, she hosted exhibitions and sold pieces as if nothing had ever happened. Eventually, she transitioned to operating by appointment only, perhaps due to negative reviews. And as for that fake Rothko, the very first painting Rosala sold to Friedman after the scandal, the piece was displayed in a major exhibition about counterfeit art. Instead of decorating the wall of a prestigious gallery, the painting was displayed beside a knockoff designer handbag. As striking as ever, but officially worthless. Thank you for listening to conspiracy theories. We're here with a new episode every Wednesday. Be sure to check us out on Instagram heconspiracypod. If you're watching on Spotify, swipe up and give us your thoughts. For more information on the Knoedler Gallery fraud, amongst the many sources we used, we found the documentary Made youe Look and reporting by the Art newspaper and Vanity Fair extremely helpful to our research. Until next time, remember, the truth isn't always the best story. And the official story isn't always the truth. This episode was written by Ben Hanani, edited by Maggie Admire, Georgia Hampton and Angela Jorgensen researched by Chelsea Wood, fact checked by Kevin Johnson and Sophie Kemp and engineered video edited and sound designed by Alex Button. I'm your host, Carter Roy. Hey, Ryan Reynolds here wishing you a very happy half off holiday because right now Mint Mobile is offering you the gift of 50% off unlimited. To be clear, that's half price, not half the service. Mint is still premium unlimited wireless for a great price price. So that means half day.

B (48:40)

Yeah.

A (48:40)

Give it a try at mintmobile. Com.

B (48:43)

Switch Upfront payment of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per month required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow 135 gigabytes of network busy taxes and fees extra. Cmtmobile.

A (48:50)

Com.