Weak and hungry, young Getty told the police he had been released five hours earlier and had wandered around in the rain trying to wave down passing cars. Thus ended late last week the bizarre kidnaping case of the 17-year-old grandson of American Oil Billionaire J. “May I have a cigarette, please?” The police immediately noticed what the truck driver had not: the youth’s right ear was missing. I need to get to a telephone to call my mother in Rome.” Tedesco pulled to a stop, and the young man, weeping and drenched to the skin, told him: “I am a kidnaping captive. Suddenly in the driving rain he saw a lone figure wildly waving his arms by the side of the road. Truck Driver Antonio Tedesco was heading toward Salerno on the Italian autostrada shortly before dawn. 24, 1973, issue described the moment the boy was discovered: Paul’s five months of captivity ended before dawn on Dec. If you don't get the confirmation within 10 minutes, please check your spam folder. Click the link to confirm your subscription and begin receiving our newsletters. According to the New York Times’ review of John Pearson’s book on which the film is based, “He would pay the $2.2 million of the ransom that his accountants said was tax-deductible as a casualty loss under the tax code of the day, which limited such write-offs to 10 percent of one’s taxable income the boy’s father would have to cover the rest, which he did by borrowing from his father at 4 percent interest.” The movie depicts a meeting between the elder Getty, his drug-addled son, Gail and a group of lawyers, in which Gail is incredulous at her father-in-law’s willingness to turn a life-or-death matter into a discussion about tax deductions.įor your security, we've sent a confirmation email to the address you entered. The ear delivery was apparently the straw that broke the camel’s back for the boy’s grandfather - sort of. Meanwhile, the young Getty’s mother had told her son’s kidnappers that she would look into negotiating a price, and (via a police-wiretapped a phone call) they eventually settled on $2,890,000. In other words, he will arrive in little bits.'” ‘If within ten days the family still believes that this is a joke mounted by him, then the other ear will arrive. ‘This is Paul’s first ear,’ read a typewritten note. It contained a lock of reddish hair and a severed human ear. 24, 1973, issue of TIME reported, “early in November, an envelope was delivered to the Rome daily Il Messaggero. One example not depicted in the movie: the Playboy-esque magazine Playmen paid $1,000 to publish nude photos of the red-haired, freckled-face boy, which had been taken before he disappeared.Īs the Dec. The kidnappers got to work trying to force the family’s hand, as the story generated increasing publicity. He immediately demanded that she pay half the cost of the ties, on the ground that she was getting half the credit for the gift.ĭid the kidnappers really cut off their hostage’s ear? Getty caught Collaborator Le Vane writing “From Paul and Ethel” on the accompanying card. Said Billionaire Getty: “Let’s take a walk around the block for a few minutes.” On another occasion he was persuaded by British-born Author and Actress Ethel Le Vane to send some silk ties to famed Art Critic Bernard Berenson, whom she and Getty had just visited while preparing their book, Collector’s Choice, a well-reviewed narrative of their hunt for art treasures. The admission fee was 5 shillings (70¢), but a sign over the entrance said: “Half price after 5 p.m.” It was then twelve minutes to 5. He once took a party of friends to a dog show in London. He eats simply, dresses well but inexpensively, spends about $280 a week for personal needs. For example, a 1958 TIME cover story that profiled Getty as ” probably the world’s richest private citizen” describes his frugality as follows: This reputation preceded the kidnapping incident. Notably, while it’s true that he installed a British payphone at his country estate while it was being renovated, forcing his guests to pay for their own calls, he also removed it 18 months later once the work was completed. (As he says in the film, he did have many other grandchildren who would have been susceptible to similar fates.) As the movie makes clear, he also had a reputation for keeping his fortune close, constantly looking for tax deductions and loopholes - but there was often a deeper story behind the anecdotes of his stinginess. TIME quoted the boy’s grandfather as saying that he opposed paying the kidnappers in principle, because it only encourages kidnapping as a criminal practice.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |