By Ross Todd, From The Recorder

SAN FRANCISCO — When Luke Brugnara represented himself during a bizarre art fraud trial in May, the fallen real estate magnate frequently railed that the art he was accused of stealing was “fake” and essentially worthless. That argument didn’t carry much weight with the federal jury that convicted Brugnara.

But at an evidentiary hearing on Wednesday, a government expert conceded that much of the art at issue in the case has “no commercial value.” The hearing led U.S. District Judge William Alsup to muse aloud about how the prosecution might have turned out had Brugnara relied on counsel rather than represent himself.

“I told him things like this would happen,” Alsup said to defense attorney George Boisseau, whom the judge appointed to represent Brugnara post-trial. “I’m not too sympathetic [to the argument] that this is new evidence.”

Brugnara was charged with persuading a New York art dealer to send him $11 million worth of works that he never intended to pay for, lying to cover up his scheme, then escaping from federal custody in the run-up to trial. Brugnara received five crates in spring 2014, including an Edgar Degas sculpture valued by the seller at $3 million and a collection of paintings attributed to Willem de Kooning valued by the seller at $7 million. The government seized four crates from Brugnara’s garage in the Sea Cliff neighborhood of San Francisco last year, but a fifth crate containing the Degas remains missing.

During trial, Alsup repeatedly warned Brugnara that his frequent outbursts were undermining his defense. Alsup held Brugnara in contempt more than a dozen times for talking over him, insulting federal prosecutors, badgering witnesses, and improperly testifying from the counsel’s lectern. By the end of trial, Alsup’s summary contempt orders had tacked on 471 days to whatever sentence Brugnara gets.

Lawyers in the case have yet to make their sentencing recommendations, but if Alsup finds that the value of the art exceeded $1 million, it could add a couple years to Brugnara’s sentencing guidelines.

At the outset of Wednesday’s hearing, Alsup said he was “troubled” by both sides’ expert reports, particularly questions raised about the authenticity of the works attributed to Dutch-American expressionist de Kooning. The government’s expert witness Christopher Gaillard testified that the purported de Koonings were valueless, saying they were “stylistically” inconsistent with authenticated paintings. Gaillard said that one of the paintings appeared to have one signature painted over another. During Gaillard’s testimony, Brugnara slapped the defense table and tossed his glasses in disgust. Boisseau’s co-counsel, Dena Young, told Brugnara to be quiet multiple times.

Ironically, defense expert Victor Weiner pegged the De Koonings’ value higher that the government’s expert. Weiner agreed that the “signature was suspect,” but he found that there was a market for similar paintings and estimated they would fetch $80,000 as a group.

On cross-examination, Weiner defended his $600,000 estimate for the Degas bronze sculpture that went missing out of Brugnara’s garage—an item that could tip the total value of the art in the case over $1 million. Weiner pointed to ongoing controversy among Degas scholars over whether the statue and others from the same casting are genuine.

Although the government didn’t have its own expert submit an estimate, FBI agent Jeremy Desor testified a similar statue sold at auction in Hong Kong in 2011 for about $1.75 million. Weiner said that the Hong Kong auction was likely attended by “Chinese buyers who are new to the marketplace” and might have mistaken thestatue for an earlier, more valuable bronze cast.

At the end of the hearing, Boisseau urged Alsup to allow him to augment his motion for a new trial with information from the hearing. The defense lawyer contended that a substantial amount of the loss claimed in the case simply “was not true.” He said the government displayed “deliberate indifference” by waiting until after the trial to explore the value of the art.

“I’ve lived with this case and I’m not as impressed with that fact as you are,” Alsup said. The judge pointed out that Brugnara insisted on representing himself at trial rather than waiting three months to let Boisseau get up to speed. “We can’t retry a case because a good lawyer comes in and develops a better argument,” Alsup said.

Brugnara’s motion for a new trial is set to be argued on Oct. 8, the same date as his sentencing.

IMAGE: Luke Brugnara

For more on this story go to: http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202736331438/Pro-Se-Defendant-Argues-Swindled-Art-Was-Worthless#ixzz3kgTxbyR2