The museum’s lawyer argued that the negotiators for the art dealer were included on several of these spoof emails, and that they should have alerted the museum to the fraud. Dickinson’s lawyer argues that the museum should have verified the bank details for the Hong Kong account independently before sending payment. On Thursday, a judge ruled against the museum in a claim for damages, though the judge added the museum can amend the claims if they’d like to try to proceed with the case.
According to Bloomberg
, in court documents, the lawyer for Dickinson argued: “Instead of accepting the reality of the situation, the museum has reacted by pursuing a series of hopeless claims against [Dickinson], in the hope of pinning the blame for the museum’s mistake on [Dickinson].”
Rijksmuseum Twenthe is currently in possession of the painting and will not return it, even though Dickinson never received payment for the work.