Hatfield v Artworld - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - June 4 2013

Ritchie Sinclair identifies the alleged forgers by name

Q. You are the protégé of Norval Morrisseau. So tell me, Wolf Morrisseau now is all of a sudden the great forger of Norval Morrisseau's work?
A. Not all of a sudden. I've known that Wolf Morrisseau was an issue since 1979.
Q. Funny, when did you testify in this case? When was the last day you testified? It was in February, wasn't it?
A. February 23rd.
Q. You didn't mention it then?
A. Yeah, I did.
Q. You mentioned that Wolf Morrisseau was faking his art?
A. I don't know if I mentioned that...
Q. I don't...
A. ...he was faking.
Q. ...think you did.
A. Well, maybe I didn't have the opportunity at that time, but now I have the opportunity to be clear with you about it....
Q. Who are the other five?
A. Well, David Morrisseau's definitely one.
Q. Yeah.
A. Christian Morrisseau's definitely one. Eugene Morrisseau's definitely one. His nephew, Benji Morrisseau is another. There's a few others.
Q. So the whole...
A. Gary Lamont is definitely...
Q. ...Morrisseau family?
A. ...a part of it.
THE COURT: Sorry, I didn't hear the response. Just repeat, after Benji Morrisseau, who did you say?
A. Gary Lamont, who's kind of like the -­ you could call him the host of the show. These -­ all these boys were paid in drugs, primarily, for doing the work. So they would receive a few hundred dollars in drugs, and, and Mr. Lamont would receive the work, and eventually the work would be passed on to auction houses in southern Ontario.
MR. SHILLER: Q. You've uncovered the whole thing?
A. It's taken four and a half years, and working with the RCMP for two of them.
Q. We have all the answers now from you today, finally. After five days of trial we know what the conspiracy is.

Hatfield v Artworld Inc., Ritchie Sinclair Testimony, 2013

Hatfield v Artworld - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - June 4 2013

Ritchie Sinclair Testifies about Randy Potter Auctions

SHILLER: Q. Now, it's just so incredible I had to ask it again. So, the six artists, they painted all of these paintings that are at Potter Auctions, with the black brush strokes on the back, that's your story, right?
A. There are others too. Most of them were paid with drugs, but there are...
Q. With drugs?
A. ...others too.
Q. They were paid with drugs?
A. Paid with drugs.

Hatfield v Artworld Inc., Ritchie Sinclair Testimony, 2013

Hatfield v Artworld - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - June 4 2013

Ritchie Sinclair addresses Joe McLeod's false allegations

MR. SOMMER: Q. All right. I'd like to take you to something that Mr. Joe McLeod said to us today. He listed various accusations. He said that you were yelling at him on the street. You set off an alarm at his gallery in the middle of the night, and that you harassed him....
MR. SHILLER: Set off an alarm at his home.
MR. SOMMER: Sorry?
MR. SHILLER: He was woken in his home.
A. Well, would you like me to respond to those?
MR. SOMMER: Q. Yes, please.
A. Well, actually, Mr. McLeod told the same story to the Toronto Police Services. They're outright lies. They're bald faced lies. There was not a date in any -­ he said there was nine times in total in Crown disclosure, and I contend that Mr. McLeod never showed up in, in criminal court because he would have to answer to the string of lies that he laid to the, onto the police. If these things were true, if his alarm was set off, it was set off, I'm sure it wouldn't have taken too much. I mean, he lives, lived in his gallery, so when you say it's his home, it's also his gallery in Yorkville. There are cameras there. I don't know what he's got -­ what his alarm system is but, usually, these are hooked up somewhere, and when you've made multiple phone calls to the police where each time he'd received a subpoena to appear in this court, in the Otavnik v. Sinclair case, he called the police. He made up these stories. And, of course, I have a videotape of the last service.
Q. So you were....
A. Which I actually have with me.
Q. You were charged with harassment?
A. Pardon me?
Q. You were charged with harassment?
A. Yeah, I was charged with criminal harassment. Yeah.
Q. What was the result of the proceeding?
A. Well, the result was on March 5th, March 8th, March 9th and March 12th, I attended criminal court, three motions courts and then finally the trial date, all four days, attempting to get Mr. McLeod to show up in court, to explain why he wouldn't show up. He was trying to adjourn it, saying he was having open-­heart surgery, and I knew he was on call here only a week before. He was expected to be showing up for, for criminal court and not only did he not show up, the police didn't show up, nor did his daughter, the only other witness.

Hatfield v Artworld Inc., Ritchie Sinclair Testimony, 2013

Hatfield v Artworld - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - June 4 2013

Ritchie Sinclair confesses to being the man

MR. SHILLER: Q. So, you alone are the man who decides what is a real Morrisseau and what's a fake Morrisseau, correct? You're the man?
A. Actually, the man is Norval Morrisseau.
Q. Well, Mr. Morrisseau, unfortunately, is no longer with us. So, after him, it's you?
A. Well, I, I painted with Mr. Morrisseau for many years.

Hatfield v Artworld Inc., Ritchie Sinclair Testimony, 2013

Otavnik v Sinclair - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - March 18 2010

Ritchie Sinclair discusses the verso signature on the Subject painting

On the back of his painting, written in black paint that's not properly liquefied, we call it, "dry brush, " is on the mass of these forgeries, including this one, have been signed on the back in paint with a fraudulent Morrisseau name, usually a title, often a copyright symbol. You know, sometimes they'll write his actual name in English on the front as well, in other words, they scream out, "please believe I'm a Morrisseau." But in this case, for example, it's painted on the back with his signature. In all the years I have known Norval, he would never do that. First of all, the first thing on the list for me, as a painter, was make sure that the black paint was twice as liquefied as any other colour, because that's the colour that he uses to do the black lines that create the stained-glass effect. So, if you wanted, if someone were buying a Norval Morrisseau painting and I didn't have a chance to see it or whatever, and they asked me for my opinion, I would ask them, "was it painted in black dry-brush on the back of this thing? 'Cause if it was, it's a fake."

Ritchie Sinclair Testimony in Otavnik v Sinclair

Otavnik v Sinclair - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - March 18 2010

How to get a good night's sleep

"My eyes are wide open now, and I see an overwhelming, ever-growing body of evidence that tells me that I absolutely must do what I can to stop this. What I see to date, are dangerous, dark pieces of art that I, for one, would not hang on above my bed and expect a good night's sleep."

Ritchie Sinclair Testimony in Otavnik v Sinclair

Otavnik v Sinclair - Sworn Testimony of Ritchie Sinclair - March 18 2010

What Ritchie Sinclair did not see

MR. OTAVNIK: Q. The point is, you did not see Norval Morrisseau paint this painting?
A. Your painting?
Q. No.
A. No, because he didn't paint it.
Q. Okay.
A. He was nowhere near it ever.

Ritchie Sinclair Testimony in Otavnik v Sinclair