The Rescue Artist by Edward Dolnick Page B

Since things inevitably go wrong, the trick is to find undercover cops who can ad lib. (Compounding all the hazards that come with too little practice time is a difficulty that real scriptwriters never face: the detectives only write the dialogue for half the performers.)
    At the same time, the plot line has to be complex enough to be plausible. Crooks are jumpy, always on the watch for set-ups and double-crosses. If a come-on is too blatant, they’ll walk away. Game over.
    “First of all,” says Ellis, “you sit down and look at the theft, and you try to figure the type of criminals you’re dealing with. You need to put yourself in their shoes and come up with a scenario that they’ll feel comfortable with. That means they have to feel in control of the situation, when in fact what you’ve done is feed them into a scenario where they’ve actually lost control to the police who are running the operation.”
    This makes for a high-stakes game of “he thinks that I think that he thinks….” Lose your bearings, and you lose everything.

8
The Man from the Getty
    FEBRUARY 14, 1994
    C harley Hill’s first thought was that the thieves who had The Scream knew that it would be impossible to sell it openly. Unless they had stolen the picture in order to destroy it, they had some other purpose in mind. What purpose? Ransom, most likely.
    Could the Norwegian government pay for the return of a national treasure? No, that would just encourage the scumbags. What was a variation on that theme? Somebody else could pay on the government’s behalf. “Blatant casuistry, of course,” Hill thought, “but there you are.”
    Now, who in the hell would do that?
    The way to lure the thieves into the open, Hill figured, was to dangle money. Who could come up with millions to retrieve someone else’s painting? In the art world, one name in particular means money. Even crooks know the Getty Museum, the sprawling southern California museum named for its founder, J. Paul Getty, the oil billionaire. Getty, at one time the richest man in the world, had endowed the richest museum in the world.
    Getty himself had been a sour, pinched, bad-tempered cuss, a Dickensian villain who looked a bit like Homer Simpson’s boss, Mr. Burns. He lived outside London on an estate that was surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by twenty attack dogs. A pathological cheapskate despite his riches, Getty kept a pay phone in his mansion for his guests and squirreled away bits of old string to reuse later. In 1973, Getty made news across the world when he refused to pay ransom to an Italian gang that had kidnapped his grandson and demanded $17 million for his release. Only after the gang cut off the boy’s right ear and mailed it to a newspaper in Rome did Getty relent a bit. He negotiated his grandson’s release for $2.7 million, which was, he said, as much money as he could put his hands on.
    The Getty Museum, in contrast, spent money like a lottery winner on a binge. U.S. tax laws require that foundations spend five percent of their endowment each year, and for the Getty that meant a mandatory $250 million a year. Older, poorer museums cringed with envy as they watched their nouveau riche rival gobble up treasure after treasure. Today the Getty’s see-it-and-buy-it frenzy has eased—the museum opened a new, six-building, dollar-devouring “campus” in 1997—but after years of conspicuous consumption, mention of the Getty produces a response that is almost Pavlovian in everyone who hears it.
    It was the one institution a villain would know about, Hill figured. No other museum conjured up images of money spilling out of pockets. Beyond that, the Getty could do what it wanted without fretting about the rules and red tape that slowed down tax-supported dinosaurs. Above all else the name had cachet. You couldn’t tell the crooks, “Uncle Fred’s going to pay your ransom.” It wouldn’t carry any weight. But a mention of “the Getty” would catch their