No one has been charged with the Gardner theft. No one has been convicted. No arrest has been made. No stolen work has been recovered. The current location of the thirteen pieces is unknown. Whether they are in the United States or elsewhere, together or separated, intact or damaged, is not established.
—
## Competing Theories and What Each Explains
Part of what makes the Gardner case so persistently interesting to investigators and the public alike is that the evidentiary record is consistent with more than one theory of the theft’s organization.
The Dorchester mob theory—Reissfelder and DiMuzio as the thieves, Merlino as the organizer, Donati as a connecting figure who may have controlled some pieces afterward—has the advantage of being specific: it names names, it explains connections, it is consistent with the physical evidence about the getaway car and the identification of *Chez Tortoni* in Reissfelder’s possession. The FBI has moved progressively toward this theory. Kelly endorses it.
But the Dorchester theory leaves several questions unanswered. Why those specific works? The shopping list theory—that someone provided Merlino or Reissfelder with a list of specific pieces to take—requires an explanation of who had the art knowledge to compile such a list. The Rembrandts make intuitive sense: they are the most famous works in the Dutch Room, the ones a non-specialist would recognize. But the specific Degas pieces, taken from flat file cabinets, require more specific knowledge. And the Chinese bronze beaker requires knowledge of what it was and where it stood in the museum.