Welcome to Criminalia, a production of Shonda Land Audio in partnership with I Heart Radio. If you have been joining us since earlier seasons, you may recognize this man's name from our shows about stalkers. Arthur Wellesley, first Duke of Wellington's famously stalked by Lady Georgiana Fayne, heiress and daughter of John Fayne, tenth Earl of Westmoreland and holder of many government offices. The Duke of Wellington is probably best
remembered for his defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte at Waterloo. A military general, he became one of the leading military and political figures of nineteenth century Britain, and his portrait also became a target of theft from the National Gallery in London, though not for reasons you might imagine. The Duke was once quoted as saying, the only thing I am afraid of is fear. We wonder how he felt about ransom. Welcome to criminal Lea. I'm Maria from Marquis, and I'm
Holly Fry. There are a couple of people we need to get to know surrounding this art theft. The artist who painted the portrait, Francisco de Goya, The man who sat for the stolen portrait, Arthur Wellesley, and the apparent thief, a man named Kempton Bunton. Let's start by talking about Goya and how he was given the honor of painting the general's portrait. Goya is regarded as one of, if not the most important Spanish artist of the late eighteenth
and early nineteenth centuries. He was born Francisco Jose de Goya Elucientis on March thirtieth, seventeen forty six, in the small town of Fuende Toto's near Zara Zoga, Spain, in the northeastern Aragon region of the country. His father was Jose Francisco da Paula, a guilder, and his mother, Gracia Lucientez,
was a member of a weakened noble family. When he was fourteen years old, Goya began a four year apprenticeship with Spanish Baroque painter Jose Luzon, who had studied in Naples in his late teen so in seventeen sixty three and then again in seventeen sixty six, Goya participated in competitions sponsored by the Real Academia de San Fernando in Madrid,
but he was unsuccessful both times. Sometime after seventeen sixty six, and it's unclear exactly when he left, he traveled to Italy, where he is documented as living at least in the years seventeen seventy and seventeen seventy one. There he won an honorable mention in a competition held at the Academia de Parma, which got him the attention that he needed to obtain religious commissions back home in Spain. In June of seventeen seventy one, he returned to Spain, specifically to Zaragoza.
On July seventeen seventy three, in Madrid, Goya Marian Jussefa Byou, the sister of Francisco Bayou, the leading Spanish artist at court. His brother in law greatly impacted Goya's career by getting him a position at the Royal Tapestry Factory in Santa Barbara, where Goya produced cartoons. In this instance, cartoons are the working designs that serve as guides for tapestry. They were often created on paper, but some, like Goya's, were executed on canvas and then woven into wold tapestry on a
large mural scale. It was not unheard of for tapestry weavers, frustrated by their complex composition to return cartoons to Goya. There's an alternate narrative here about the cartoons that suggests it was German painter Anton Raphael Mengs who asked Goya to work on tapestry cartoons for the Royal Tapestry Factory. But regardless, his work on tapestry cartoons elevated his name,
and that's the point here. While you can view as cartoons today at the Proto Museum, many of the original sketches were sold as works in their own artistic rights. Goya's career at the end of the eighteenth century was busy. He was very popular. He was unanimously elected to the Academia in Madrid in May of seventeen eighty, and five years later he was appointed its deputy director. He was esteemed among his contemporaries for his ability as a portraitist.
Goya received his first and we should qualify that as first important portrait commissions in seventeen eighty three from the Conda de la Florida Blanca and the Infanta Don Luis, and he quickly became established as the portraitist of the leading members of Madrid Society. Goya painted on commission between seventeen seventy five and seventeen ninety one for King Charles the Third of Spain and later King Charles the Fourth of Spain, and both of those kings appointed him their
court painter shortly after their coronations. Of his sixty three works for the two royal palaces, nine hunting scenes were destined for the dining rooms at San Lorenzo de las Correale, and ten cartoons for tapestries were intended for the dining rooms at El Pardo. At the end of seventeen ninety two, though Goya fell ill to a mysterious condition that incapacitated him for much of the entire next year. It left him permanently deaf and caused him to reevaluate his work
and goals as an artist. After eighteen o one, we see that Goya was seldom given royal commissions, or at least seldom took them. That he continued to draw a large annual salary, and he continued to create portraits of government officials in which the sitter's rank was always clearly indicated in the piece, and that includes our sitter for
today's portrait the Duke of Wellington. The portrait of the Duke of Wellington was painted by Goya during the general's service in the Peninsular War, was kind of between the final years of the war from eighteen twelve to eighteen fourteen. Wellesley was a leading military and political figure, and he served twice as Prime Minister. But as we mentioned earlier, he is best remembered for his victory over Napoleon at
Waterloo in eighteen fifteen. His battle plans are still studied in military academies today, but right now we're looking at just a few years before Waterloo. In eighteen o eight, the French army invaded Spain and installed a new king, King Joseph, the first brother of the French Emperor Napoleon. The Peninsular War that followed, fought on the Iberian Peninsula from eighteen o eight to eighteen fourteen, was a period of really brutal conflict between the French and the Spanish,
Portuguese and British militaries. Goya's portrait that we're talking about here was painted just after the Duke's victorious entry into Madrid in August of eighteen twelve. A triumphant moment that established his reputation as an offensive general. His wins were the turning point in the war. His victory against Napoleon cemented Wellington's status as a military hero, and he's credited in part as the reason for the restoration of the
spain Fish monarchy, ironically as an asside on the Duke. Here, when he was young, he had no interest in a military career. Arthur had imagined himself pursuing his love of music. But here he was having a big moment in his military career. Who better to record it than the best portraitist Goya. We're gonna take a little break here for a word from our sponsors, and when we're back, let's begin by talking about what this painting actually looks like
and who confessed to stealing it. Welcome back to Criminalia. So Goya actually created more than one portrait of the Duke of Wellington's, all within just two to three years of each other. Let's talk about which one went missing and why. Goya produced a large portrait of the Duke appearing on horseback. This is called the Equestrian Portrait of the First Duke of Wellington, and it was publicly exhibited in September eighteen twelve at the Real Academia de Bellas
artist San Fernando in Madrid. In September eighteen twelve. That same year, he also completed a chalk drawing of Wellington. That piece now hangs in the British Museum. But the portrait of Wellington that we're interested in is the one simply known as the Portrait of the Duke of Wellington. Let's talk about what this famous portrait looks like. The head and Shoulders portrait was painted between eighteen twelve and eighteen fourteen, and it shows the Duke in a three
quarter profile and he's facing towards his right. He is standing with his head held high. His uniform bears the insignia of several military orders and yes there are several watch this. His left breast bears three stars, the British Order of the Bath, the Portuguese Order of the Tower and Sword, and the Spanish Order of San Fernando. He wears two broad sashes over his right shoulder, the pink sash of the Order of Bath over the blue sash
of the Order of the Tower and Sword. Around his neck hangs the Order of a Golden fleece on a red ribbon. The military gold cross hangs lower on longer pink and blue ribbons. Though the general was entitled to all nine gold clasps to the military gold cross, here he appears with only three, and art historians theorized that that might be to signify the battles he fought before the painting had been started. Experts report that the portrait appears to have been painted very quickly and with very
high energy. It's largely thought this portrait was originally painted directly from life, and that Goya went back and then made changes. For instance, over the years he altered the Duke's pose, and he also made significant updates to the piece each time the Duke was awarded new metal and military orders. The painting had passed through the Duke's family, owned by various people, until it was owned by John Osborne,
Duke of Leeds. He sold it at auction to an American collector, Charles Reitzman, for one hundred forty thousand pounds in early nineteen sixty one. In May of nineteen sixty one, Sir John Witt, the chairman of Trustees of the National Gallery, notified the Wolfson Foundation a major source of charitable funding and benefactor to the gallery. That quote, a highly critical situation has now arisen concerning a picture which is an essential part of British history. The Portrait of the Duke
of Wellington had been sold at Sobbys. That was completely a totally legal transaction. But because the British government decided that they did not want this painting to leave the country, the Treasury teamed up with a charity, the aforementioned Wolfson Foundation, and together they matched Rightsman's bid would be more than two million pounds in today's prices. British Prime Minister Harold McMillan pledged forty pounds and the foundation remitted the remaining
sum of one hundred thousand pounds. The gift was acknowledged in Parliament and by patrons of the arts, including Sir Witt, who characterized the funding as quote majestic, and in August of that same year, the National Gallery in London s Trafalgar Square unveiled its newest acquisition, the Portrait of the
Duke of Wellington by the Spanish master Goya. And just like that, Goya's portrait of the Duke became really famous among the Brits locals visited the National Gallery to see what the fuss was all about and what all of that money had been spent on. But that celebration didn't actually laugh for very long at all. Eighteen days later, yeah, I said, eighteen days the Duke's portrait went missing from
the wall. Guards didn't report seeing any intruders, no damage was done, and there were no traces of any equipment or weapons on the scene. Nothing appeared to have been touched, yet the goya was gone. The portraits absence was first noticed by two patrolling guards, but each assumed the painting had been temporarily moved by staff. That really wasn't an
uncommon occurrence at the time. It was gallery policy to post a notice, which guards called tags, in place of a removed work to inform security and others of its whereabouts, but not everyone followed the process, and in this case, there was no tag on the goya or the empty space where the goya should have been. Because of lacks tag usage, no guard assumed, at least not immediately, that
there had been a theft. At eight a m. The next morning, though with the piece still missing, security got involved. Guards searched the Galleries Conservation and Photographic Studios. By nine thirty a m. The Metropolitan Police were informed and over the next few days the building was inspected and the gallery staff was questioned. This was the first time in the galleries one thirty eight year history that a theft had happened. A reward of five thousand pounds was offered
by the Metropolitan Police for its immediate return. All reports do suggest that there was a reward, but some suggest that it was actually offered by the newspaper The Daily Mirror, and there are even some reports that suggest that both of those rewards were offered just a few years apart, so you could see where that would get confusing. And yet with one or two rewards offered, there were still
no leads. At one point the Metropolitan Police removed every single postcard of the portrait of the Duke of Wellington from the museum to use for identification purposes. In the year after the theft, a replication of the stolen work made a cheeky cameo in my favorite movie, the nine
two Bond film Doctor No. It was hidden in the villains layer on crab Key, and about thirty minutes into the movie we see bond take a lingering look at a pretend portrait sitting on a gilded easel, kind of a wink and a nod to the audience that perhaps it was fictional doctor Julius No who was the villain who stole the Goya. But no, it hadn't fallen into the hands of spector, and doctor No was not behind
this heist. Authorities and actually most people you might have asked, assumed that a professional art thief or a caper crew were responsible. Newspapers speculated that a gang of Italian thieves or perhaps even mafia, was behind the heist. Some speculated that perhaps a daring aristocrat sponsored its disappearance. I know, my first thought was probably the guy that tried to buy it wanted to take it the first Charles like, I'm like. But those assumptions all changed when the National Gallery,
among others, began to receive handwritten ransom notes. Now enter Kempton Bunton, a sixty one year old Newcastle retired bus driver or perhaps cab driver or maybe truck driver that's a little unclear, living on eight pounds a week, national assistance in a sequence of five notes, which he called calms Bunton communicated several things to authorities, including one that he had the portrait. The first note was sent to the news agency Reuters on August thirty one, and here
we quote from it. The act is an attempt to pick the pockets of those who love art more than charity. The picture is not and will not be for sale. It is for ransom one forty thousand pounds to be given to charity. Yes, while he kept Goya's priceless painting hidden in the back of his closet, Bunton sent anonymous notes to newspapers, the gallery, and other important people in
the matter consistently stay eating. He would return the artwork on the condition that the government invest in more elderly care. The next calm was received by the Exchange Telegraph news agency on July four, nineteen sixty two, and that one stated that quote the Duke is safe, his temperature cared for his future uncertain. We want pardon or the right to leave the country banishment. We ask that some nonconformist type of person start the fund for one forty thousand pounds.
Bunton's calm on December thirty one, nineteen sixty three, which also demanded a hundred forty thousand pounds arrived next, so that's quite a gap. On March sixteenth, nineteen sixty five. His note was marked as quote fifth and final calm and it read quote Goya's Wellington is safe. I have looked upon this affair as an adventurous prank. Must the authorities refuse to see it this way? I know now that I am in the wrong, but I have gone
too far to retreat. He did not demand the ransom sum this time, but rather insisted that he would return the painting if it was agreed that it would be exhibited privately for one month and then all viewing fees. He suggested they charged five shillings a ticket collected during that time be paid to charity. The thief well, of course that guy should be granted immunity. One final correspondence
was received on addressed to the Daily Mirror. In it was a left luggage ticket from the New Street station in Birmingham, four years after their investigation began. Police rushed to that left luggage locker, possibly the left luggage office at the station, but reports a little fuzzy on that detail, and that's where they recovered the missing artwork. About six weeks or less ish after the piece was found Kempton,
Bunton turned himself in. We're going to take a break for a word from our sponsor, and when we return we will talk about what happened after Bunton entered a West End police station and confess to the robbery. Welcome back to criminalia. If Bunton didn't steal the painting for financial gain, then why did he steal it? Well, for reasons you might not think of. Things are about to
get a little unexpected. In July of nive Bunton entered the now closed West End Central Police Station and announced that he was guilty of stealing Goya's portrait of the Duke of Wellington, but the police didn't actually take him seriously immediately. A detective sergeant later told the court that on Monday July five, he saw Bunton at New Scotland Yard, asked him what he needed, and was informed by Bunton that he was quote giving himself up for the Goya.
He had brought a statement with him to the station, offering these three explanations as part of his confession. Quote one my secret has leaked. I wouldn't like a certain gentleman to benefit financially by speaking to the law. Two, I am sick and tired of the whole affair. Three by surrendering in London, I avoid the stigma of being brought here. In quote chains Bunton was really nothing like
what authorities presumed or imagined. The thief would look and act like they were looking for a pro James Bond, and they got a man described by the New York Times as a quote burly, phlegmatic former truck driver. Bunton was arrested. He confessed he had taken the painting, yes, but he added he'd never intended on keeping it. To quote Bunton, my sole object in all this was to set up a charity to pay for television licenses which fund the BBC in Britain for old and poor people
who seem to be neglected by our affluent society. Bunton was regularly fired from jobs, usually we discovered for speaking up for employees against management. He was also an aspiring playwright whose scripts have been rejected by the BBC. And he was an activist who saw television as a lifeline for lonely seniors. And he was especially concerned for those who were veterans of the First World War, including his father.
Not all countries have or had this idea of a television license, so really stripped down here the idea is in some countries it's illegal to have a television without paying an annual fee for access to television programming. Bunton felt the fee for the British television license was too high for those on a fixed income or those having trouble making ends meet, and he protested by refusing to pay his own license fee, and as a result, in the year nineteen sixty alone, he had three short spells
in jail. Today, if your age seventy five are older and you claim pension credit, you're entitled to a free TV license in the UK. Bunton, who passed away in nineteen seventy six, we can only assume would be really pleased to hear that. Following his confession, Bunton was charged
with five offenses regarding the Goya heist. One two offenses contrary to Section two of the Larceny Act of nineteen sixteen by unlawfully taking the property of the trustees of the National Gallery by stealing the portrait of the Duke of Wellington and stealing the frame to two offenses of demanding money with menace by sending threatening letters to trustee of the National Gallery, Lord Robbins, as well as one of the world's great press magnates, Lord Rothermere, three and
one offense of public since by quote the unlawful removal and wrongful detaining of a painting on display at the National Gallery. Bunton's case was initially heard at bow Street Magistrate's Court, but was referred to trial at the Central Criminal Court of England and Wales, commonly referred to as the Old Bailey, between November four and sixteenth of nineteen
sixty five. He was represented by Jeremy Hutchinson, Queen's Council, a lawyer who had made a name for himself in the successful defense of Lady Chatterley's lover in nineteen sixties obscenity trial. The case for the prosecution was led by Edward Cussen and Brian Leary. Bunton's defense he wanted to undermine some of the charges against him. You'll see what we mean by that in just a moment, and of course to persuade the jury to be sympathetic to his situation.
Hutchinson after the trial was quoted as saying that Bunton was quote just rather a darling. I had an affection for him. I had a great ace up my sleeve, which was at the ex President of the Royal Academy, Sir Gerald Kelly, had written to the Sunday Time saying this painting wasn't worth a hundred and forty thousand pounds
and that he had doubts about its authenticity. In addition, in Bunton's defense, Hutchinson also wanted to demonstrate that the accusation of stealing we're going to air quote that in this instance, in the form of larceny in this case, would need proof of criminal intent to sell or to
keep the work. The defense argued that, according to the language in the Larceny Act of nineteen sixteen, stealing was only a crime if at the time of the taking the person's intention was to deprive the owner of said property for good. The evidence in court was clear that Bunton had always said he intended to return the portrait to the National Gallery once a donation to charity had been made. In fact, he had stated that several times,
and he had written it in his calms. Hutchinson argued in court that in the st the sense of the law, this was not technically a theft because Bunton had merely get those air quotes ready again borrowed the painting for that single use, and in regard to that missing frame, Council argued that it was simply common sense that when a painting has taken, so is its related frame their final point. There was no villainous intent here and no
actual crime. At his trial, Bunton told the court that he heard the government had paid quite a lot of money for one small painting and he didn't feel that that was a fair thing. He described visiting the National Gallery to see what was so great about the Goya, and he explained how he navigated the heist. He described that contractors who had been doing some renovations had left a ladder lying in the street outside and a window
in the men's restroom had been left unlocked. According to Bunton's story, he noted the galleries weaknesses and he took advantage of them. But I mean that's hardly a mastermind situation, just taking advantage of lack of security. A Metropolitan Police investigation at the scene revealed that yes, his story matched. Building renovations had been in progress at the gallery on
the day that the painting disappeared. Their report included that a window in the men's restroom, which overlooked the inner of the buildings two courtyards, had apparently been left open, and they confirmed that a builder's ladder had been placed beneath that open window. The police had taken samples of dirt found on the window sill. Those samples were found
to be identical to mud in the inner courtyard. Similar mud marks had also been found on the top of one of the gates leading into St Martin Street off of Trafalgar Square. Putting this all together, the Metropolitan Police concluded that whoever had stolen the artwork had left from the inner courtyard, gone through the bathroom window and scaled
the outer gate into St Martin's Street. A government enquiry, led by a Lord Bridges convened to examine how a person was able in the early hours of the morning to exploit building repairs in the gallery, remove the painting scale the wall on St Martin Street and seemingly disappear. Sir Philip Hendy, director of the National Gallery, offered his resignation over the matter, but the trustees of the gallery
refused to accept it. There were, though a number of security changes implemented, including a night patrol with a guard dog, as well as the addition of a new larger rule of national security advisor to museums and galleries. Because Buntam had returned the painting, he was found not guilty of
its theft. Additionally, a member of the Metropolitan Police fingerprint branch testified that while a thumb print matching Bunton was found in his alleged correspondence to Lords Robbins and Rotherier, police had lost those letters prior to Bunton's arrest, which meant that they had no proof he had a hand in writing any threatening letters. He was acquitted on all charges except one. He was found guilty of stealing the
portraits frame. During investigation, Bunton had told authorities that he had thrown the frame into the River Thames, but during his trial, Bunton, through his council, stated quote, I had no intention of keeping the painting or of depriving the nation permanently of it. As to the frame, I believe it was gold colored and I left it on August one or twenty second in nineteen sixty one, in a cupboard under the stairs in a house where I lodged,
which was within three miles of King's Cross. It is not true that I threw the frame into the Thames. I said this because I did not want to get the landlady into trouble. Concluding his trial, just as Arhold spoke directly to Bunton stating, quote motives, even if they are good, cannot justify theft. Creeping into public galleries to extract pictures of values so that you may use them for your own purpose has got to be discouraged. You
will go to prison for three months. The case, too, lead to an important clause being inserted into the Theft Act of nineteen sixty eight, making it illegal to quote remove without authority any object displayed or kept for display to the public in a building to which the public have access. And for his crime of frame theft, Bunton did spend three months imprisoned at HM Prison Forward in West Sussex, doing so, satisfied with having made his political
statement in court. So you know how sometimes we have stories of them. We have a butt, We have a butt with the capital but it was not actually Keptain Bunton who did it. I know, I know, there's a huge twist here. Wasn't expecting that now the person who really stole the goya was not Kempton Bunton at all. Although Kempton took the blame, the actual thief was the then twenty year old John Bunton, Kempton's son. In nine, John turned himself into authorities, much like when Kempton did.
At first, the police didn't pursue his claim despite his confession. The Director of Public Prosecutions decided that because there was no evidence available, it would be easier to just close the case on the matter. Plus, if they decided to try John for the theft of the goya, they would have to put Kempton back on the stand, where he'd have to admit he perjured himself during his trial, so
they did not. In though the confidential file detailing John's confession was released to the public, John Bunton was a temporary van driver living not very far from his father's home. In his confession, he described the heist as so first, he needed to stand on a parking meter to get himself over the galley's back wall, to get into the main building of the gallery. He then used a nineteen foot ladder left by contractors to climb through an unlocked window of a men's restroom. At the top of the
main stairs. He found the painting on an easel sectioned off within a roped off enclosure. John told the police, quote, I went up to it, took hold of it and carried it back to the gem's toilet. He described climbing back out the window, down the ladder, and retracing his steps to the back of the building by St. Martin Street. He stated, quote, I climbed over the wall, still holding the picture in one hand. I put the picture on the back seat of the car and drove back to
my room in Grafton Street. I then put the picture under my bed. There's also one small detail that John added that we can't resist including here. He actually had to roll start his black Wolseley, the getaway car, because it would not budge. Says John's son Chris, Quote, the Duke of Wellington painting was taken from this gallery and he spent four and a half years in my grandparents council house in Newcastle. He continued, quote, my dad never expected to get away with it. It was an idea,
that's all it was. He was working in London at the time, living in a rented room, and he wondered if it was possible. He saw the open window in the bathroom and the ladder behind the gallery, and one thing led to another. Chris has stated his father was in and out of a gallery within just a few minutes, right around five a m. And had no plans to
destroy or to sell the work. Once he had it, his plan was to give it to his father kempt In According to John, quote he intended to use it as a tool in his campaign and that it should ultimately be returned to the National Gallery. When the police asked why he or his brothers hadn't come forward sooner, John replied, quote, he told us not to ordered us. It was his wish. John's son continued, quote, My dad looked up to his father. He was the one person
who always supported him. Because he knew of John's crime, Kempton began sending notes to newspapers asking for a charitable donation because he hoped that such an act would put his son in a better light if he were to be arrested. Eventually, Kempton insisted on taking the blame himself, says Chris quote, Kempton was a flawed character. He wasn't the best father, but he did this extraordinary thing to save his son. If my dad had gone to prison
at that age, it would have ruined his life. Detective Inspector George Chandler, part of the investigation into the art deft, included in his nineteen sixty nine report after John's confession. Quote, at the time of the offense, Kempton was fifty seven years old. He is a tall, heavily built man who now weighs somewhere in the region of eighteen stone, and it is extremely unlikely that he would have had the agility to scale the outer wall and make his way
unaided to the toilet window. He would also, in my view, been incapable of returning to the wall and climbing over it without causing some damage to the painting, whereas his son, John, who at the time was only twenty years of age, is still of good physique and would have been quite capable of taking the painting in the manner in which he describes this echoes Justice Arvold, who pronounced in court that the theft based on the small size of the window.
Kempton allegedly climbed through with the painting. Must have been a quote remarkable athletic eat for the two and thirty eight pound man who had retired from driving because of injury. So if you started out thinking that this was going to be an open and shut case about the stolen painting of a military general, it's kind of anything, but
wasn't it. The portrait, upon its return, was shown at a press conference on and it went back on display at the National Gallery immediately after, and you can see
the Duke's portrait there still if you'd like. I don't think they serve any highst hooge there though, So I'm gonna tell you that I really did theed on the name here because part of me kind of wanted to figure out a name based on the sloppy protocols in place over a painting that had just been attained through a lot of fancy footwork in terms of funding and like making it happen because it was such an important piece.
Then we stuck it on an easel with a rope around it, and then we left a bunch of windows open right next to it. It was it'll be fine. I kind of wanted to do that, but I didn't. I went with a slightly more obvious name for a drink though, that I think is really quite delightful. And we're calling this the False Confession. You're gonna be happy because there's bourbon in this. This one is gonna before you do anything else, put a martini glass in your
fridge to chill it. So while you're making the rest of it, you're cooling off your glass because you just want to chill your receptacle into your shaking tin. You're gonna put an ounce and a half of bourbon, three quarters of an ounce of lemon juice, three quarters of an ounce or jaw. If you don't have more jab but you have another almond syrup, throw it on in there, that's fine, and then two ounces of pineapple nectar. I'm not crazy crazy like a fox. So then we're not
even done yet. So you're gonna shake this, give it a really good shake with ice. You want to basically make it super duper cold, because there will be no ice in the glass. That's part of why we're pretty chilling. You're gonna take that cold glass out though, and You're gonna pour just a little bit of gold Schlagger into it and then turn it carefully so you coat the interior of the glass. But it's just like a film
of gold schlager. If you have any left at the bottom, you pour it out you don't want it, and then you strain that shaken cocktail into it, and then you sip it and you go home. Mama, I would confess to stealing things that, yeah, I would take the blame. I am deeply in love with this drink. I have to on you. It came together accidentally. As I mentioned, I think early in the season, I'm doing something with these drinks that I haven't revealed yet, and we'll I'll
probably tell you at the end. So any time I'm doing them, I have a set of criteria in my head and that leads me to pick things out that I would include that will all be revealed in time. But this one turned out to be even more delightful than I anticipated. It is yummy. It's a nice transition drink again, a seasonal transition drink, because we are here in the northern Hemisphere into autumn now. But for some of us that live in warm places, you get like a warm day and then a cooler day, and then
a warm day and then a cooler day. And this because of the cinnamon of the gold schlager, and like the warmth of the bourbon, the pineapple brings out. There's a sweetness that bourbon naturally has and it really brings that out really nicely, so delicious. This is an easy one to do the mocktail for You are just going to sub out that bourbon like we often do for a black tea in lieu of your gold schlager. You're
just gonna do a cinnamon syrup. And if for any reason you can't get a cinnamon syrup, just make a simple syrup on the stove and throw a couple of sticks of cinnamon into it and let that simmer on low for a bit and then take those out and strain it, and your golden you have a great little cinnamon syrup to use for whatever you may desire. Great on pancakes, by the way, it is very good. That is the false confession, which is so yummy. It will
make you confess to things you didn't do. Hopefully I will confess that I always have fun doing this show, and this season has been such a delight so far, and there is more to come, so we're thankful that you are along for the ride. And next week we will have another heist and another beverage, and we hope you're here with us. Criminalia is a production of Shonda
land Audio in partnership with I Heart Radio. For more podcasts from Shondaland Audio, please visit the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.