Having now listened to the ninth and final episode about the thefts at the British Museum, I am left with one very obvious question.
If it is as clear as it appears to be that the thief is Peter Higgs, the former acting Keeper of the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, then why hasn’t he being prosecuted ? And why is the museum itself having to launch civil proceedings ? If theft in a senior position in a government funded institution does not lead to prosecution, then what hope is there for the law ?
I know that the man who stole Goya’s portrait of Wellington from the National Gallery was only prosecuted for damage to the frame, but does this mean there is some kind of immunity from prosecution for theft of works of art, providing they are not damaged ?
Of course, the police refused to intervene when half the senior civil service and the Prime Minister himself was breaking the law in 10, Downing Street. Even now, I’m not sure anyone was prosecuted except for the poor people who were copped for having drinks with friends.
Perhaps a lawyer can explain.
| Charles | Saumarez | Smith | 
After Goya’s Duke of Wellington was stolen from the National Gallery (by Kempton Bunton, or as it emerged by his son John, though Kempton claimed to have done it…) the Theft Act of 1968 specifically included wording to make it clear that you couldn’t remove things from public collections and somehow use the defence that you intended to return the items later …
Dear Sandy, Thank you. Glad to hear it. Besides, a lot of the gems have been wilfully and gratuitously damaged. Charles
Good questions. I am afraid that this episode will drift on with no finite conclusion. Which matters not so much insofar as it relates to the individual in question, but about general museum practice. At the heart of it is an increasingly unaccountable museum executive class, enabled by trustees unwilling or unable to hold them to account. I hope the new government will be more muscular in appointing trustees as guardians of the public interest, rather than letting the executive choose them, as is now generally effectively the case.
Dear Bendor, Do you think that’s true ? I thought the last government put much more pressure on trustee appointments through a unit in 10, Downing Street checking their credentials. At least that was what was said. Charles