Gardner Museum Heist —Blog

2025 Blog Posts 2024 Blog Post   2022 Blog Posts   2021 Blog Posts   2020 Blog Posts  

April 22, 2026

Goolge's Gemini Ai differs with Geoff Kelly's view that George Reissfelder closely resembled one of the UNSUBS depicted in the police sketches.

When it comes to the Gardner heist police sketches Geoff Kelly, the retired FBI lead investigator of the case in his new book 13 Perfect Fugitives has his cake and eats it too. And why not? That's what he did for over two decades, before his retirment, on matters related to the Gardner heist case. Kelly's dissembling privileges have followed him into retirement, seemingly, with his book on the case serving as a new platform.

In the book, Kelly describes the "Police sketches of the UNSUBS [Unidentified Suspects]," as "so mundane and ordinary," and includes this characterizaton into a laundry list of challenges the FBI investigators faced shortly after the robbery.

"As I continued to peruse the subsequent serials [in 2003], the emotions of those first days following the robbery were tangible: confusion, disinformation, and the simmering exasperation that there was very little to go on. Police sketches of the UNSUBS, so mundane and ordinary, illustrated both with and without their bushy—and possibly fake—mustaches."

Kelly describes the challenges investigators faced, but the only specific relates to the police sketches. "Confusion" about what? "Disinformation" about what? "Simmering Exasperaton" About what? Oh right that there was "little to go on." If only those police sketches weren't "so mundane and ordinary."

The words "mundane" and "ordinary" mean pretty much the same thing. What exactly is Kelly's problem with the police sketches? It's the only specifice example he gives, has to do with the police sketches.

In what way are the police sketches being "so mundane and ordinary" a problem? Both words can also mean generic. So Kelly is taking a swipe at the police sketches, by implying that they lack specificity.

But despite the sketches being "so mundane and ordinary," he later asserts in his book that "Reissfelder closely resembled one of the UNSUBS depicted in the police sketches," in his book.

Kelly and his surrogtates like the Gardner Museum's Anthony Amore discredit the police sketches, while at the same time using them to make their case. It is a two-track that should lead to a head on collision, yet somehow, it never does.

The police sketches are to be deployed by the investigation insiders, at their discretion exclusively not by others, who are not part of the Gardner heist investigation narrative triad: The FBI, the Gardner Museum, and their surrogates in the media.

The case against Reissfelder hinges heavily on the sketches. There are even sketches of the sketches in an elaborate illustration accompanying Mashberg's 2026 anniversary story.

new york times sketches of the gardner heist sketches   sketches of the gardner heist sketches closeup

But in the wrong hands—which is anyone not approved by Kelly, without that special context that only investigative insiders can provide, the sketches are just "'Uncle Mort from Topeka' or 'my neighbor’s ex-wife’s nephew in Akron,'" as Kelly wrote in his book. If there was ever a promising lead from all of the time, effort, and expense the FBI expended sharing the sketches with the public, and not just something that turned into a plaything for time-wasting amateurs, you won't find any mention of it in Kelly's book.

fbi releases gardner heist police sketches

On March 18, 2026, Tom Mashberg, now a business associate of Geoff Kelly, who was making a personal appearance with Kelly on that very same day at Porter Square Books in Boston to promote Kelly's book, reported in The New York Times that "The F.B.I., Kelly writes, came to believe that the heist was the work of a group of ragtag Boston mobsters." [This does not appear in Kelly's book.] This is a common feature of articles by Kelly's media surrogates. They make unsupported claims in articles that include quotes of Kelly, then attribute these unsupported claims to Kelly or the FBI, but without quotation marks, allowing the FBI to extend the boundaries of their false narrative further without going as explicitly on record about the claim.

Kelly and Mashberg Porter Square Bookstore Bosotn, MA

Later, Mashberg writes, "Investigators [what investigators?] came to view two members of Merlino’s crew—Leonard DiMuzio and George Reissfelder—as likely being the men who had posed as the police." "For one thing," Mashberg wrote, they [the investigators?] thought the pair resembled sketches of the thieves drawn from the guards’ recollections."

These sketches have a formal name and serve an important role in robbery investigations. They are called "forensic art," "composite sketches," or "police sketches."

Although "composite sketches are barred by the hearsay rule and thus are generally inadmissible against defendants to prove guilt," they serve a valuable role. "In some cases you can get a sketch that very closely resembles the subject. In other cases, the sketch is used primarily as a basis for eliminating people as suspects,"

"In some cases you can get a sketch that very closely resembles the subject. In other cases, the sketch is used primarily as a basis for eliminating people as suspects," Barnstable County sheriff's deputy Andrew Neil McGonagle, an FBI trained composite sketch artist told the Cape Cod Times.

In the Garner heist case, the composite sketches were created by a forensic artist who worked for the Boston Police Department, the largest municipal law enforcement agency in the state, quickly removed from the case and the FBI took exclusive control of the investigation.

Eleven years prior, Mashberg reported in a story about the case for The New York Times: "On his PowerPoint, Mr. Kelly showed me [pantomimed?] that Mr. Reissfelder and Mr. DiMuzio closely resembled police sketches of the two men who had entered the museum."

Two weeks later, in 2015, Shelley Murphy in The Boston Globe reported on the Gardner heist's 25th anniversary that the "FBI’s presentation [by Geoff Kelly] notes that George Reissfelder, who was implicated in the heist by an informant and died of a cocaine overdose in 1991, matched a composite sketch of one of the thieves."

Matched? That is a strong word: "matched." "Composite sketches are barred by the hearsay rule and thus are generally inadmissible against defendants to prove guilt," but are nonetheless useful in identifying and eliminating suspects. END When it comes to the Gardner heist police sketches Geoff Kelly, the retired FBI lead investigator of the case in his new book 13 Perfect Fugitives has his cake and eats it too. And why not? That is what he did for over two decades, before his retirment, on matters related to the Gardner heist case. Kelly's dissembling privileges have seemingly followed him into retirement, seemingly, with his book on the case serving as a new platform.

In the book, Kelly describes the "Police sketches of the UNSUBS [Unidentified Suspects]," as "so mundane and ordinary," and includes this characterizaton into a laundry list of challenges the FBI investigators faced shortly after the robbery.

"As I continued to peruse the subsequent serials [in 2003], the emotions of those first days following the robbery were tangible: confusion, disinformation, and the simmering exasperation that there was very little to go on. Police sketches of the UNSUBS, so mundane and ordinary, illustrated both with and without their bushy—and possibly fake—mustaches."

Kelly describes the challenges investigators faced, but the only specific relates to the police sketches. "Confusion" about what? "Disinformation" about what? "Simmering Exasperaton" About what? Oh right that there was "little to go on." If only those police sketches weren't "so mundane and ordinary."

The words "mundane" and "ordinary" mean pretty much the same thing. What exactly is Kelly's problem with the police sketches? It's the only specifice example he gives. In what way are the police sketches being "so mundane and ordinary" a problem? Both words can also mean generic. So Kelly is taking a swipe at the police sketches, by implying that they lack specificity.

But despite the sketches being so mundane and ordinary, Kelly later asserts in his book that "Reissfelder closely resembled one of the UNSUBS depicted in the police sketches," in his book.

Kelly and his surrogtates like the Gardner Museum's Anthony Amore discredit the police sketches, while at the same time using them to make their case.

The police sketches are to be deployed by them, at their discretion exclusively not by others who are not part of the Gardner heist investigation narrative triad: The FBI, the Gardner Museum, and their surrogates in the media.

The case against Reissfelder hinges heavily on the sketches. There are even sketches of the sketches in an elaborate illustration accompanying Mashberg's 2026 anniversary story.

new york times sketches of the gardner heist sketches    sketches of the gardner heist sketches closeup

On March 18, 2026, Tom Mashberg, a business associate of Geoff Kelly, who was making a personal appearance with him on that very same day at Porter Square Books in Boston to promote Kelly's book, reported in The New York Times that "The F.B.I., Kelly writes, came to believe that the heist was the work of a group of ragtag Boston mobsters." [This does not appear in Kelly's book.] This is a common feature of articles by Kelly's media surrogates. They make unsupported claims in articles that include quotes of Kelly, then attribute these unsupported claims to Kelly or the FBI, but without quotation marks, allowing the FBI to extend the boundaries of their false narrative further without going as explicitly on record about the claim.

Kelly and Mashberg Porter Square Bookstore Bosotn, MA

Later Mashberg writes "Investigators [What investigators?] came to view two members of Merlino’s crew — Leonard DiMuzio and George Reissfelder — as likely being the men who had posed as the police. "For one thing, Mashberg wrote, they [The investigators?] thought the pair resembled sketches of the thieves drawn from the guards’ recollections.

These sketches have formal names and serve an important formal role in robbery investigations. They are called "forensic art," "composite sketches," or "police sketches." Although "composite sketches are barred by the hearsay rule and thus are generally inadmissible against defendants to prove guilt." In this case the composite sketches were created by a forensic artist who worked for the Boston Police Department, the largest municipal law enforcment agency in the state, but which was quickly kicked off the case as the FBI took exclusive control of the investigation.

Eleven years prior, Mashberg reported in a story about the case for the New York Times: "On his PowerPoint, Mr. Kelly showed me [pantomimed?] that Mr. Reissfelder and Mr. DiMuzio closely resembled police sketches of the two men who had entered the museum."

Two weeks later in 2015, Shelley Murphy in the Boston Globe reported on the Gardner heist 25th anniversary that the "FBI’s presentation [by Geoff Kelly] notes that George Reissfelder, who was implicated in the heist by an informant and died of a cocaine overdose in 1991, matched a composite sketch of one of the thieves.

Matched?That's a strong word, "matched." "Composite sketches are barred by the hearsay rule and thus are generally inadmissible against defendants to prove guilt."

Matched suggests a more formal evaluation of the comparison, than just the subjective impression of an investigator, twelve years after the crime, and eleven years since the criminal in question, Reissfelder had died.

So I decided to ask Google's Gemini Ai if they matched, or to what extent that they matched. What follows is the (undedited) reply I recieved from Gemini Ai:

Reissfelder compared with police sketches
Photos of Reissfelder and the police sketches including the two used (right) in the recent New York Times article by Geoff Kelly business associate Tom Mashberg

Gemini Ai: Here is a breakdown of the anatomical markers found in the 1990 police sketches compared to the photographic evidence of George Reissfelder.

This analysis isolates the skeletal architecture, which remains constant, from transient features like hair or eyewear.

1. Analysis of the 1990 Forensic Sketches The forensic renderings represent the eyewitness memory of the perpetrators' bone structure. They are characterized by an Ectomorphic (slender/elongated) facial archetype.

Mandibular Path: The jawline in the sketches is steep and narrow. It tapers significantly from the ear toward the chin.

Chin Morphology: The chin is depicted as pointed or narrowly oval.

Vertical Index: The face is vertically elongated, featuring a high forehead and a notably long philtrum (the space between the nose and upper lip).

Soft Tissue Markers: The sketches capture a specific downward set to the mouth corners and "pouching" or hollowness in the lower cheeks.

2. Analysis of George Reissfelder (Photographic Evidence) The photographs of Reissfelder reveal a fundamentally different Mesomorphic (broad/heavy-boned) skeletal structure.

Mandibular Path: Reissfelder possesses a wide, heavy mandible. The jawline is "lantern-like" and maintains its width rather than tapering.

Chin Morphology: His chin is broad and deeply squared-off. This is a permanent bone structure that contradicts the pointed chin in the sketches.

Vertical Index: His face has a wider horizontal-to-vertical ratio. He possesses a very short philtrum, meaning his mouth is set much higher and closer to his nose than the subject in the sketch.

Nasolabial Structure: His smile lines (nasolabial folds) flare outward toward a wide jaw, rather than the narrow, downward-tapering lines seen in the forensic drawings.

AI analysis Reissfelder compared with police sketches

Forensic Conclusion The primary skeletal markers—specifically the width of the mandible and the shape of the chin—are mutually exclusive. In forensic identification, bone structure is an "exclusionary" tool. Because the sketches record a narrow, tapered jaw and Reissfelder possesses a broad, square jaw, he does not meet the anatomical requirements of the eyewitness description.

The appearance of a match is often created by "soft" features (glasses and mustache), but the underlying craniofacial architecture indicates two different individuals.

by Kerry Joyce

Copyright © 2026 All Rights Reserved