That’s right, video.

See the Webers. (Okay, so I guess it’s technically Weber and Childs, though, according to federal documents I found, it used to be the Webers, back in 2000, while Weber (Lester, that is) worked in Iowa at the State Archives and Records Program.)

See the Weber House. (of which Fred once asked: “Have you seen the Weber house? I have, and it needs a lot of repair.”)

See the front of the Mariners’ Museum, slightly obsucured by sprinkling water.

See Lester tell us he’d never steal from his employer.

I am knee-deep into researching and writing another book, this one a little closer to home. I won’t reveal more about it until it’s closer to being done, but it is a crime that took place here at the University of Illinois (and a few other places).

In my posts, I often take note of the similarities of these crimes. So it was the uniqueness of this crime that drew me to it (and has sustained my interest). It also allowed me to do something that I’ve never done (and never thought a book crime would allow me to do): a walking tour.

Yesterday evening, I gave a tour of certain parts of the main library at Illinois, pointing out the places where this crime took place, and was foiled. I’ve done this on my own several times, of course, in an attempt to describe the crime. But this was the first time I’d done it with a group of people.

A month or so ago I mentioned the idea to the director of the Rare Book and Manuscript Library here as an evening event for students at the Midwest Book & Manuscript Studies. I thought they might find it interesting. She did too, and suggested we open it up to people who work at, and friends of, the library.

I expected about ten people to show up for the 7:30pm event, and was suprised to find that there were about thirty. It wasn’t perfect, because it was my first time doing it, but it was a lot of fun. The Q&A session afterward alone took 45 minutes.

So I get the impression people are interested in this crime, and these crimes in general. And not just any people, but library people. And that’s what we need more of.

I mentioned that Brubaker agreed to plea guilty to counts 2 and 3, and now that plea has been accepted by the court. Sentencing is set for September 15th.

What happens now is the pre-sentence report.

The probation officer, by July 28th, will produce a document about Brubaker, his situation and the crime. Both parties will get a chance to object to anything in the report, which will then be read by the judge. (For those of you who read my book, you’ll remember Daniel Spiegelman’s lawyers objected to several little things in the PSR, including the mention of an earlier border crossing arrest. There are tons of minor details in the report that defense attorneys object to as prejudicial. The parties first get a chance to negotioate about what stays in or goes and then, ultimately, the judge decides.)

All objections to the report will be resolved by negotiation by August 11th, or by the judge by August 25th. Then each side’s sentencing memoranda will be turned in by August 28th. Then responses to the sentencing memos are due on September 4th. Then the judge will retire to chambers with the sentencing memos, responses and the PSR. Then we cross our fingers.

He pleaded guilty to three charges (counts 20, 25 and 26, as it happens) which include Mail Fraud, Making and Subscribing a False Tax Return and Theft from and Organization Receiving Federal Funds.

Now, I know what you’re all thinking: Can any of these be sentenced under 2B1.5 (Theft of, Damage to, or Destruction of, Cultural Heritage Resources)?

Well, yes.

(I know what you’re thinking again: woo-hoo!)

Mail Fraud is violation of 18 USC 1341 and that’s sentenced under 2b1.1 (Larceny, Embezzlement and Other Forms of Theft). The Tax Return violation is 26 USC 7206(1) and that’s sentenced under 2S1.3 (Structuring Transactions to Evade Reporting Requirements) or 2T1.1 (Fraudulent or False Returns). But the theft charge is 18 USC 666(a)(1)(A) and that can be sentenced under 2B1.5. It can also be sentenced under the regular 2B1.1. So we’ll see.

(For those not familiar with the Cultural Heritage Resources guideline, suffice it to say that it adds time to the sentence.)

Weber’s wife, meanwhile, has not been able to plead guilty. On May 27th, the judge found that due to mental health issues, she might be “unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against her.” She was taken in to custody to be examined by a federal correctional institute psychologist.

You’ll know when I know.

From the US District Court for the Easter District of Virginia: “The Court has been advised that the defendant wishes to enter a plea of guilty.” 

This is like the book thief triple crown.

And I consider them all Big Brown.

“This motion is made on the grounds that the United States has determined that the defendant may be a proper candidate for a pre-trial diversion program. If she is determined to not be a qualified candidate, the United States may return to the Grand Jury for a new indictment.”

Let’s see. One week ago hubby agrees to plead guilty. Three days ago he sets a court date (June 23rd) so that he can make it official. Now the Government finds that the wife is a proper candidate for pre-trial diversion. Hmm.

Jeremy writes:

Peter Brill [Renehan’s attorney] said “We don’t really think jail is appropriate under the circumstances. This was a single aberrant act in an otherwise honorable life.” Except that it wasn’t. Renehan pleaded guilty to stealing three letters, and he’s still facing charges in Nassau County for the theft of another letter and the National Parks Service Investigative Services Branch believes he nabbed at least three additional items and sold them. So “single aberrant act” doesn’t fly. Sorry.

I, of course, agree. And I would add this. Renehan, who is 51, says that bipolar “explains much about his troubled childhood on the South Shore of Long Island.”

I’m not sure what “troubled childhood” means, but it sounds like it doesn’t square with this being a “single aberrant act.”  

And if the compulstion to steal is so strong, how has he managed to avoid it his whole life right up until he was put in charge of the Theodore Roosevelt Association?

These are questions I think can be answered in court. Federal court.

I don’t think any reader of UD will be at all surprised by this. He’s guilty. We knew he was guilty before he admitted it. The only real question was presented eloquently by “No Name Get your willies else where.” [sic, sic]

That is, what is the wife’s involvement?

NNGYWEW says “Between you [that’s me] and this Librarian [that’s Rob Lopresti] your both so far from the truth about the wife its sickning…[sic, sic, sic, sic]

(In my defense, I didn’t actually make a claim about the wife. I merely reported the facts.)

Anway, let’s hear from the husband as to his wife’s culpability:

“Whatever you think you will find…and I’m not saying I did anything wrong…but, whatever you find in this search, my wife…only helped me ship some items and with the listings and had nothing to do with obtaining the items…”

Okay, so she just helped him list the items on eBay and ship them. Got it.

But according to a “long-time colleague who has known Brubaker for more than 40 years,” (I wonder who that could be?) the wife played an even more active part.

“He and Brubaker had been together in the Seattle area when Brubaker and his wife took 15 to 20 books from an unknown library…” He was also “present with Brubaker and his wife on three occasions when Brubaker took library books from libraries in Reno, Nevada, San Francisco, California and the Seattle, Washington area.”

But how to reconcile this information with what has been offered by this most eloquent Brubaker defender: “I think you should get your facts straight before running your mouth. Maybe we should have a phone conference with the Judge and you can tel him were the false crap come from.”[sic, sic, sic, sic]

It seems like a toss up, really. The government’s evidence, Brubaker’s admission and longtime colleague’s testimony versus the ill-proofed rantings of an anonymous (though not really that anonymous) crank.

Well, anyway, if we do get the judge on the phone I’ll tell him right where ”the false crap come from”: Brubaker’s Plea Agreement (signed, and each page initialled, by Brubaker) and the government’s Offer of Proof.  

Other information I got from these documents:

Brubaker stole volumes 1 and 2 of the Milton’s 1749 Paradise Lost. Also, the 1752 Paradise Regain’d.

He stole George Custer’s My life on the Plains, published in 1874 before his death in 1876.

He stole an 1842 map of Illinois.

He stole from 109 different libraries and universities.

Twenty-one of the books he stole were published between 1749-1799.

Later in the week I will offer my guaranteed-to-be-wrong sentencing prediction. I need to gather more information so I know what the sentence should be (and thereby let you know what it certainly won’t be). 

An historian named Edward J. Renehan just pleaded guilty to stealing from the Theodore Roosevelt Association in Oyster Bay, New York. Renehan was temporary director of the association when he stole three letters, two by George Washington and one by Abraham Lincoln. He tried to sell them in a Manhattan gallery for close to $100,000.

(There are also charges pending at the state level for a TR letter theft. So it appears that Renehan took good advantage of his short tenure as director.)

Renehan is the author of several books from big publishers (one, a life of Cornelius Vanderbilt, is only six months old) and appears to be quite successful. He has blamed his thefts not on poverty but rather bi-polar disorder. Hmm.

As a justification for a single theft, that seems to me only moderately believable. As a justification for multiple thefts and the subsequent attempts to sell the stolen items at a gallery, it seems particularly flimsy. We’ll see how far the defense takes this line.

What makes this case strange is not the insider theft aspect, which we’ve seen before. Nor the published historian angle, which we’ve also seen (though I think Renehan is maybe the most successful). What makes this case unique is the procedural aspect.

Renehan appears to be in a hurry to get the federal judicial process over. He was arraigned in the Southern District of New York on May 20th. He pleaded guilty the same day.

I don’t know for sure, but this suggests that there was some negotiating going on before he was charged. Whatever the case, he appears to want to get right to sentencing.

I don’t see any particular problem with this, it’s just not typical.

I’ll let you know.

So I come back from a trip to the crabcake state (note to readers: if you plan on eating any crabs in the Maryland area any time soon, don’t bother. I’ve eaten them all) to find an inbox clogged with fun info.

Here’s the first bit.

One of my former students, Galen, sent me a heads-up on a new Transy theft. Or, rather, the new indictment for an old theft.

A LaPorte, Indiana, man name Eugene Zollman has been arrested for a 1994 theft.  He did “unlawfully take historical documents written by Jefferson Davis from the Transylvania University Library.” Zollman has been charged with - whoo hoo! - Theft of Major Artwork.

Zollman, a Davis collector and speech-giver, made personal visits to the Transylvania University library five times in April and May, 1994. In Novermber, 2007, Zollman put several lots of Davis items on consignment with a Connecticut autograph dealer who then listed the items on his website. The head of the Jefferson Davis Project, a person who works at Rice University, discovered that some of the documents for sale were ones she had microfilmed and cataloged. She knew they belonged to Transy.

A series of phone calls between the cops and feds and dealers led to an investigation that has led to this moderately happy ending.  He’s been indicted in Kentucky and Indiana and hopefully the 70 year old will spend some time in prison. The investigation also revealed that these are not the first documents Zollman stole from Transylvania and auctioned off.

There are some interesting coincidences in this case, aside from the fact that tiny little Transylvania University is back making book theft victim headlines again.

Rice University factors heavily in the research I’m doing for my current book, so I’ve been mentally spending a lot of time with their collection.

And the Connecticut dealer who worked with law enforcement to keep the Davis documents from being sold? Basil Panagopulos, one of the real heroes of the Spiegelman saga. Readers may remember him as the guy who Spiegelman tried to sell to after he skipped out on prison. BP knew something was shady, but the local cops wouldn’t do anything. So he called Jean Ashton to get some information and then set a trap for Spiegelman when he finally showed up at the shop.

As usual, I’ll keep you up to date on the court proceedings.

As a final note, I’d like to say this to any friends or family of Eugene Zollman who might be inclined to blame me for his problems. He’s been investigated by the FBI and a US Attorney found that there was more than ample evidence to charge him with a felony. I’ve been doing this for a while now and I’ve never seen a case like this where the person in question was acquitted or had the charges dropped. Get used to the idea that Zollman is a felon who stole from (at least) Transylvania University.