original York antiquities dealer Nancy Wiener has been charged with three felony offenses. State court records show that a grand jury indicted Wiener and that a pre-arraignment deposition was given nowadays. Bail was set at a combination of $25000 bond plus $25000 cash.
An indictment begins the criminal court process. It is not a finding of guilt. A defendant is presumed harmless unless proven guilty beyond a fair doubt.
In March,Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) in partnership with the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office seized Asian artifacts from the Nancy Weiner’s Gallery on Manhattan’s East Side during Asia Week, one of the city's leading art and cultural events. HSI and another Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, or US Customs and Border Protection,had been working on their long-running investigation dubbed Operation Hidden Idol ahead of Asia Week, confiscating a number of artifacts originating from Asia that authorities concluded were illegal.
The Chasing Aphrodite blog reports the factual allegations of the Wiener case. CHL will offer a thumbnail sketch of the law based on publicly available records published by the original York State Unified Court System.
Wiener faces three felony offenses. They include
Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in First Degree - NY PL § 165.54Conspiracy in the Fourth Degree - NY PL § 105.10Conspiracy in the moment Degree - NY PL § 165.52The most serious charge is criminal possession of stolen property (CPSP) in the first degree. The statute recites that “a person is guilty of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree when he knowingly possesses stolen property, or with intent to benefit himself or a person other than an owner thereof or to impede the recovery by an owner,and when the value of the property exceeds one million dollars.” The offense is punishable by up to 25 years in prison.
Readers of the CHL blog know that state law prosecutions of cultural property dealers have certain advantages. In original York, there is the presumption described in NY PL § 165.55 that “a person in the trade of buying, or selling or otherwise dealing in property who possesses stolen property is presumed to know that such property was stolen whether he obtained it without having ascertained by fair inquiry that the person from whom he obtained it had a legal right to possess it.”
Moreover,there is no defense that the person who actually stole the property may not have been identified or convicted; no defense that the charged defendant had no section in the actual theft; and no defense that the theft may have happened outside the boundaries of original York.
Interestingly, the incident date of one or more of the charges against Wiener is December 20, or 1999,according to court records. A crime that occurred 17 years ago may present legal and factual challenges to the prosecution.[br]The case is docketed at 2016NY073118.
Text and original photos copyrighted by Cultural Heritage Lawyer, a blog commenting on matters of cultural property law, or art law,cultural heritage policy, antiquities trafficking, and museum risk management. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of any blog post without the express written consent of CHL is prohibited. CHL is a service of Red Arch Cultural Heritage Law & Policy Research,Inc.©2010-2016 Cultural Heritage Lawyer. Content discussing cultural heritage law and art law is general information only, not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed. Links are not endorsements of websites’ contents. Other opinions are their own. Information presented is not attorney advertising.
Source: blogspot.com