The Detective’s DeskPEN & PAPER · CASE FILE
Pen & Paper · A fictional European gallery, 1911–1913
A portrait disappears during a closed-gallery maintenance morning. A work coat seems to authorise removal; a later letter offers a remarkably similar painting for sale. Investigate two years of records to identify the original, its route, the writer behind an alias and whether a porter knowingly helped.
Read the case file below, or open the interactive desk to examine records, keep notes and submit your reasoning. These are the case materials, without the solution.
Begin at discovery in 1911, then follow the preserved later lead. The empty frame is found on an inside stair; no gallery window is broken. In 1913 a dealer alerts the gallery before paying for an offered portrait. Nobody is automatically guilty because they recognise the building or sell similar art.
Morning porter
I opened the service door for a familiar worker carrying a flat wrapped object.
I assumed an authorised move because of the work coat; I did not inspect it.
I would have been reprimanded for holding up repairs.
Gallery conservator
The original has a butterfly-shaped rear repair and a small accession burn beneath its lower brace.
Neither appears in the public catalogue or on the gallery’s copies.
I had recommended better rear-panel documentation before the loss.
Former gallery joiner
I came in to collect my old tool chest, not a painting.
My white work coat was still accepted by the doorman.
The gallery refused my request to buy a small portrait.
Maintenance clerk
No portrait move was authorised that morning.
My register distinguishes returning a worker’s tools from moving collection objects.
I had approved Victor’s tool-chest pickup, not his presence inside the portrait room.
Dealer who reported the offer
A man calling himself “Leon” offered the original portrait in 1913. I withheld payment and asked for an examination.
The writer knew a hidden support repair, not just the famous front image.
An authentic sale would bring commission, but I made no agreement to hide a theft.
Copy painter
I painted a permitted copy on modern canvas.
The original is on a rigid wooden panel; my delivered copy remains with its authorised buyer.
People wrongly accused me because my work resembles the missing portrait.
Read each record on its own terms. A claim made by a person is different from a fact established by an independent record.
Case record · Service store
Victor signs out his chest empty at 07:20. A supervisor locks the store immediately afterward; no other visitor has a chest there. Victor returns to the service exit with the chest and a flat wrapped object at 07:40.
Case record · Maintenance office
The only entry for Victor authorises collection of his personal tool chest from the service store. No collection move is approved, and no work task requires entering the portrait room.
Case record · Service door
Anna records a familiar white-coated worker carrying a flat wrapped panel out after the chest collection. She writes “assumed collection move; contents unseen”. She does not record an instruction to help steal.
Case record · Maintenance office
The “collection move” slip produced by Victor copies the genuine tool-pickup number but adds the portrait title. Evan’s retained original has no added title or collection authority.
Case record · Gallery stair
The original frame and protective glass are left on the inner stair. Its opening dimensions match the rigid portrait panel. No outside break-in or damage indicating a forced window is found.
Case record · Dealer’s office
The offered panel has the butterfly repair, T19 burn and matching irregular join. All three align with the private record; the painting is the missing original, not merely a similar front image.
Case record · Lodging room
The registered lodging clerk identifies Victor as the person who lodged the retained alias letter, using the numbered dispatch receipt found with his original draft. The receipt predates the dealer’s police notification.
Case record · Copy studio
Selma’s work is painted on flexible modern canvas and remains with her recorded buyer from before the theft through the 1913 inquiry. It has no wooden rear or T19 burn.
Case record · Conservation desk
Before the theft Ruth records the wooden panel’s butterfly repair, accession burn T19 and an irregular join under its brace. The public catalogue shows none of these rear details.
Case record · Dealer’s office
In 1913 “Leon” offers a rigid portrait, refers to a butterfly rear repair and requests private payment. The dealer keeps the envelope and makes no acceptance of a secret transfer.
Case record · Lodging room
At supervised recovery Victor’s chest contains the panel’s fitted wrapping and a preparatory sale draft addressed to Gio. Its private rear-detail wording matches the alias letter.
Case record · Dealer’s office
Gio asks to verify provenance, delays payment and notifies the gallery before meeting the seller. The preserved correspondence contains no prior commission, funding or secret-sale agreement with Victor.
Use the interactive case desk to select your finding and cite the records that support it. The answer is checked there, and your progress stays in your browser.
Compare the records with each account. Work out what the evidence establishes, then separate that finding from anything it does not prove.