The Bleeding Hearts

An ex-cop pulled off the largest armed robbery in Austria’s history, with his friend’s mistress as his accomplice. But he wasn’t trying to get rich. He wanted to be a real-life Robin Hood.

By Matthew Wolfe

The Atavist Magazine, No. 179


Matthew Wolfes writing has appeared in The New York Times Magazine, Harper’s, The New Republic, The Atlantic, and National Geographic. He is the author of Fires in the Night. His previous Atavist story, “The Talented Mr. Bruseaux,” was published as issue 165.

Editor: Jonah Ogles
Art Director: Ed Johnson
Copy Editor: Sean Cooper
Fact Checker: Emily Injeian
Illustrator: Marie Mohanna

Published in August 2026.


On the evening of December 22, 2013, an armored van packed with cash made its rounds through the regal streets of Vienna. The city’s elegant Baroque buildings were trimmed with glinting strings of lights; Christmas markets sold spiced glühwein on cobbled squares. A little after midnight, as the festivities quieted, the van, operated by the security company Loomis, stopped at a walk-up ATM on a desolate stretch of storefronts. Two guards stepped out, entered a room-size vestibule behind the machine, and commenced replenishing the ATM with cash. A minute later, two figures wearing black balaclavas and carrying handguns emerged from the shadows and followed the guards inside.

The pair ordered the guards onto the ground and handcuffed them. After snatching the keys to the armored van, one of them unlocked the vehicle and began stuffing crisp bank notes into black duffel bags. The thieves then checked the street for witnesses and disappeared into the night with nearly three million euros.

It was the largest armed robbery in Austrian history. The heist had been near perfectly executed, revealing intimate knowledge of Loomis’s anti-theft procedures—perfect, that is, except for one small oversight. The thieves didn’t realize that the ATM had a security camera that automatically took photos of the street whenever it was being restocked. The images were blurry, but they revealed that the perpetrator who climbed into the van was short enough to stand upright without hitting their head. Detectives decided that it was almost certainly a woman.

They soon homed in on a former Loomis employee, Tamara S., who, when she worked for the company, had scheduled the routes and was only five feet three inches tall. On the morning of January 10, 2014, federal police raided Tamara’s apartment and arrested her. Initially she denied any involvement in the robbery, but eventually she confessed. Investigators were stunned when she named her accomplice. The man she claimed had masterminded the job was one of their own: Gabriel E., a former officer in the city’s WEGA unit, the Viennese equivalent of SWAT.

The next day, a team that included some of Gabriel’s former colleagues raided his upscale apartment and placed him under arrest. Unlike Tamara, Gabriel confessed right away. When detectives asked why he had committed such an audacious crime, he replied that he hadn’t stolen the money for himself. He’d done it for the children of Africa; he planned to build an orphanage there.

It sounded absurd—the kind of desperate lie a thief might invent to deflect blame or ameliorate punishment—but it was very much the truth.

“Wouldn’t it be right,” Gabriel asked, “to steal something from a bank and give it to the poor?”

Austrians have a reputation, even among themselves, as scrupulous rule followers. In Vienna it’s rare to glimpse people jaywalking, and the city’s subway runs on an honor system. An Austrian friend suggested that this predilection had its roots in the country’s imperial past. From its power center in Austria, the Hapsburg monarchy ruled enormous portions of Europe for six centuries with the help of a dizzyingly complex bureaucracy. The compulsion to follow rules even a hundred years after the Hapsburgs lost power, my friend explained, was like the twitching of empire’s phantom limb. (Austria is also a very private country; the media don’t report the full names of people involved in criminal cases, a practice I’m abiding by too.)

As a police officer, Gabriel had been an enforcer of rules in a rule-bound society, making his crime all the more perplexing. His family told me that he was staunchly law-abiding, and had never incurred so much as a speeding ticket. In retrospect, however, they realized that there had been hints of where he was headed. He always loved to give things: presents to his three children, donations to charity, food to people begging in the street. After leaving the police force and starting a private-security business, he became wealthy, only to grow conspicuously ascetic, donating increasingly large amounts of money and possessions. By the time he was arrested, he’d sold his Audi and his Rolex, and he was down to almost his last suit. When police raided his home, they found bags filled with clothes purchased from H&M that Gabriel planned to give away.

Gabriel’s son Florian* recalled that the summer before the Loomis heist, his father had posed a curious hypothetical. “Wouldn’t it be right,” he asked, “to steal something from a bank and give it to the poor?” Florian, who was studying to become a police officer himself, disagreed, and his father dropped the issue.

Still, to idly philosophize about such a crime was one thing. To actually do it—to fashion oneself into a twenty-first-century Robin Hood—was another.

After his arrest, Gabriel was remanded to Vienna’s largest and most forbidding jail, Josefstadt. When I visited him there in 2014, I expected to encounter someone solemn and morally serious—a grim-faced saint. But when Gabriel entered the room, he radiated the warm excitement of a Labrador retriever. A tall, fit man of 50 with fetching salt-and-pepper stubble, Gabriel was wearing a cerulean-blue hoodie, clear-plastic-rimmed glasses, and a beaded necklace. He looked less like a former law enforcement officer than a hip Los Angeles dad. We sat down, and without hesitation Gabriel, still the inveterate benefactor, offered me exactly what I wanted: an explanation of how he’d gotten into this mess.

Gabriel’s childhood, he told me, had been shaped by “gruesomeness.” He was raised in Tyrol, Austria’s bucolic eastern province, by an alcoholic father given to punching his two sons. Gabriel and his elder brother eventually came under the care of their grandmother, who as punishment would regularly lock them in a darkened closet. “I had a very fucking childhood,” he told me in emphatic, accented English, omitting an adjective but still making the point. (After our first encounter, I would meet with Gabriel several times in the ensuing decade and communicate with him by letter, phone, and email.)

The two siblings both went into law enforcement, Gabriel in Vienna, where he hoped to help others in desperate situations, and his brother in the state police. Athletic and competitive, Gabriel quickly made the famed Wiener Einsatzgruppe Alarmabteilung (WEGA), the Vienna police department’s most expertly trained unit. Despite his severe upbringing, Gabriel was by nature cheerful. Every WEGA operation, as he saw it, was a new problem to be solved through hard work and an upbeat attitude.

One afternoon in 1994, Gabriel told me, his WEGA squad was tasked with busting up a drug deal in Vienna’s Fifteenth District, which at the time was the city’s seediest neighborhood. When the team moved to make an arrest, the seller, an African immigrant, bolted. Gabriel pursued him, shouting for the man to stop and firing his pistol in the air. As he closed in, the suspect turned and pulled out his own handgun. The two men exchanged fire, hitting each other in the thigh. Gabriel tackled the dealer and, following a short, bloody wrestling match, overpowered him. The pair shared an awkward ambulance ride to the hospital.

The shooting put Gabriel’s relentless positivity to the test. He endured months of physical therapy to regain the use of his leg. When he returned to work, he transitioned out of WEGA. After a brief, unhappy stint as a traffic cop, he left the force entirely. In 2001, he started his own private-security company, specializing in investigations of corporate theft. He gave it an English name: Service of Secrecy. The early years were lean as Gabriel struggled against larger competitors, but as word of his talents spread, the business thrived.

Gabriel occasionally found himself thinking about the man who’d shot him. He saw him only one additional time, in court, and knew little of his past—not even which country he was from. But at some point, Gabriel learned that the man was an asylum-seeker, as were so many African immigrants in Austria. They’d begun arriving in the country in the 1990s, fleeing civil wars and ailing economies. Gabriel wondered what the man’s life had been like back home, what he was running from.

In 2006, Gabriel told me, he had an opportunity to visit Africa himself; a client had recommended him to authorities in the Central African nation of Gabon, which was interested in creating its own version of WEGA. He told me he flew down for an interview with the defense minister, Ali Bongo, the son of the country’s notoriously corrupt authoritarian president, Omar Bongo, and was offered a lucrative multiyear consulting contract. Gabriel didn’t love the idea of working for a despot, but he had a family to support. And at the end of the day, someone was going to train the country’s police. Why not him? Gabriel accepted the job.

He commuted between Gabon and Austria every few weeks. During his trips to Gabon, he told me, he spent much of his time touring the countryside, where Bongo wanted to establish an array of military bases. The poverty Gabriel witnessed shocked him. By African standards Gabon was wealthy, mainly due to its coastal oil reserves. In the capital, Libreville, a former French colonial port, supermarkets stocked expensive Bordeaux and Roquefort cheese. But the wealth was unequally distributed. “People lived in huts without ANYTHING,” Gabriel wrote to me in 2015. “Yet merely one hundred meters further I could see pompous buildings with inconceivable luxury.” The experience, he added, “completely overwhelmed me.”

Gabriel began to feel guilty about the money he made, which had bought him a posh apartment and car. He responded to his unease with an energetic program of handouts. Gabriel had been raised Catholic and later joined a Pentecostal church. He told me that charity was an important part of his faith. He decided to give money to destitute Gabonese. There was no formal plan; when he encountered someone in need—particularly single mothers and people requiring medical care they couldn’t afford—he gave them whatever cash he had.

Back in Vienna, Gabriel’s family was growing. Following an amicable divorce, he had remained close with his first wife, Sabine, with whom he had two children, Julia and Florian. He remarried a woman who taught French—helpful for his work in Gabon, where French is the official language—and, in 2012, she gave birth to his third child. Domestic life was good. But the feeling that plagued Gabriel abroad persisted at home. Soon he began filling the trunk of his car with clothes, toys, appliances, and other items, then driving east to Romania, where he’d stop in poor villages and give it all away. Sometimes he took his two elder children, who by then were teenagers and growing concerned about Gabriel’s haphazard giving. (So was their mother.) But the donations, and the astonished smiles of the people who received them, never failed to make Gabriel happy. It felt more than good, he told me once. Then he paused, searching for the correct English word. “It was,” he said, “mandatory. My duty. My obligation.”

In 2009, Omar Bongo died, and his son left the ministry of defense to run for president. The new defense minister, Gabriel told me, declined to renew his contract. Although the lost income was regrettable, Gabriel was by then so consumed by his mission to help Gabon’s people that he didn’t mind. While making his ad hoc contributions to everyday Gabonese, Gabriel had begun to dream of something bigger—something that, to his mind, would be truly consequential.

His difficult upbringing had made him empathetic toward children in dire circumstances, particularly those without parents. He wanted to instill in a frightened child a durable sense of safety and security—a feeling that, growing up, he had been denied. Before leaving Gabon at the end of his consultancy, Gabriel began drawing up plans to build an orphanage there. It was to be a whole complex, in fact, where every child would have their own lodgings, painted in bright colors, and where all their needs would be met. He named the imagined community Blue Sky Village.

Back in Vienna, Gabriel began soliciting donations to make Blue Sky Village a reality. He estimated that he’d need nearly a million euros to begin the project, and he wrote dozens of letters to aid organizations and philanthropists requesting help in financing the plan. Soliciting charity, Gabriel found, was much tougher than handing it out. He received few responses. The people who did reply politely suggested that, given his lack of experience in the aid space, he donate to existing groups. But investigating corporate theft hadn’t done much for his faith in how companies managed their money. What’s more, Gabriel thought that a lot of groups wasted money on lavish fundraisers—the Viennese have a long tradition of philanthropic balls—rather than spending it on people in need. He grew angry when he thought about money being used for frivolities when children were starving and scared. “This makes me so… hateful,” he told me. The only way to know that orphans in Gabon were being saved, he thought, was to save them himself.

As he struggled to get his project off the ground, Gabriel received a call from an old WEGA colleague named Heinz, who was now working in security for Loomis. The company had suffered some recent employee thefts, and Heinz wanted Gabriel to help the company’s Austrian branch sharpen its embezzlement protocols.

In a bleak irony, Heinz had been fired from the Viennese police in 2006, after he was accused of beating a Gambian immigrant resisting deportation. Gabriel told me that he’d heard about Heinz’s case in the media. Despite what Heinz had allegedly done, Gabriel found it easy to rationalize taking the Loomis job: The more money he earned, the more he could give away to those in need. He agreed to come on as a consultant, and the two men became friendly. Soon, Heinz introduced Gabriel to a Loomis employee named Tamara.

Tamara realized that, at the end of the day, all she required was a roof over her head and food on her table. Everything else was a luxury.

As a child growing up middle-class in Vienna, Tamara had been on track to play professional tennis. She worked with private coaches and traveled to tournaments. But when she was 15, her father died in a car accident. On top of her grief, there was suddenly no money for tennis. Her promising career withered. The years that followed were dark. Tamara dropped out of school and fell into an abusive relationship with a man who had a drug addiction. Eventually, she reported her boyfriend to the police.* She became close to the officer assigned to her case, and the two kept in touch after it concluded. When the officer left the police department and started his own private-security company, he hired Tamara as his assistant.

Tamara worked in the private-security industry for a decade, moving up the ranks until she earned enough to buy a Mercedes. Her boss once had her accompany his wife as a sort of bodyguard on a charitable trip to Moldova, among the poorest countries in Eastern Europe. Tamara was overwhelmed by the level of destitution she saw: homeless children with dirt-smeared faces, an old woman who carried buckets for miles every day to collect drinking water. Like Gabriel, Tamara responded by giving things away on the spot, including her mobile phone and the money in her wallet. “I left it all behind, except for the clothes I was wearing and my passport,” she told me. “I had never experienced this suffering, this misery. I had never seen anything like that.”

After she returned to Austria, Tamara sold her Mercedes, donating most of the money to charitable organizations, and gave her motorcycle to someone she knew who needed transportation. Tamara realized that, at the end of the day, all she required was a roof over her head and food on her table. Everything else was a luxury.

In 2011, she began working at Loomis. She was loading an armored van one day when she met Heinz, who was looking into an attempted robbery. Her first impression of him, throwing his weight around in an expensive suit, was that he was “an arrogant prick.” Later, after being promoted, Tamara was put in charge of supervising the company’s drivers as they transported cash to ATMs around Vienna. When she had to send Heinz a text about a training session, she politely ended it with a smiley-face emoji. Heinz sent one back. The smiley faces led to longer texts, which Tamara found surprisingly charming. The texts soon became calls, then coffee and dinner. Though Heinz was married, Tamara was smitten with him. According to police records, the two began an affair.

Tamara and Heinz hadn’t been together long when he introduced her to Gabriel. Knowing that Heinz was conflicted about the affair, Gabriel invited him to visit his church, a Pentecostal denomination where pastors and congregants joined in ecstatic worship. Heinz reluctantly attended once or twice with Tamara but never returned. When Tamara showed up by herself shortly afterward, even though she wasn’t religious, Gabriel was pleasantly surprised. Soon she was attending the church several times a week with Gabriel.

In no time, the pair struck up a platonic friendship. Gabriel’s relentless positivity turned out to be exactly what Tamara needed at that moment in her life. Her beloved grandmother had recently died, and dating a married man came with difficulties. Gabriel was the most warm-hearted, energetic person she’d ever met, always willing to listen to her problems and asking nothing in return. Being emotionally available for Tamara was, it seemed, another form of giving, and it left Gabriel feeling replenished. “No matter what it was, he was always there for me,” Tamara said. “And that’s why he was my angel”—her own Gabriel.

In Tamara, meanwhile, Gabriel had found someone else who yearned to mend the world’s horrific inequalities. She told Gabriel about her painful trip to Moldova, and he confided in her about his frustrations making Blue Sky Village a reality. After church, they often went out for pizza, offering the leftovers to unhoused people.

Tamara and Gabriel both understood that their desire to give went beyond typical human sympathy. Tamara believed that they both suffered from a psychological condition—a compulsive, all-consuming need to aid others. A German psychologist named Wolfgang Schmidbauer had coined the term helfersyndrom (helper syndrome) in 1977 to describe a malady he observed in some of his patients. As detailed in his book The Helpless Helpers, Schmidbauer found that assisting others made some otherwise unhappy or anxious individuals feel calm and confident, which in turn created a feedback loop: a desire to help that became so insatiable it could lead to burnout and depression. Teachers, doctors, and clergy were especially vulnerable, he noted, as were people with traumatic childhoods.

Gabriel recognized something of himself in the condition Tamara described. “It probably stems from my childhood, which was full of violence and abuse,” he told me. “This probably drives me to help people, especially children, because witnessing their suffering has had a profound effect on me.”

Schmidbauer also warned that the compulsion could cause a person to become delusional, losing all sense of what’s helpful and even moral. “Ideals of perfection can only be maintained by denying reality,” he wrote. “As a result, the helper’s activities easily lose their focus.” This proved true for Gabriel and Tamara. As they became closer, they chose a fateful course of action—one that, in the depth of their mutual sympathies, made complete sense to them. The only way to get the money needed for Blue Sky Village, they decided, was to steal it.

Tamara and Gabriel would later disagree about who first suggested robbing Loomis. As Gabriel told it, the idea began as a wisecrack. One evening, around June 2013, they were eating pizza and he was lamenting the lack of progress on Blue Sky Village. He made a lighthearted suggestion that they steal the funds from their employer. In Gabriel’s recollection, he was clearly kidding, but Tamara was intrigued by the notion. “I said, ‘Hey, come on. It was a joke. I’m joking,’ ” Gabriel told me. But Tamara’s response, he said, was serious.

Gabriel claimed that for months afterward, Tamara wouldn’t stop talking to him about a possible robbery. She insisted they could come up with a foolproof plan. She was familiar with Loomis’s routes and security systems, while Gabriel, with his WEGA training, could provide the muscle and operational expertise. Even as Gabriel resisted the idea—he told me he went so far as to cut off all contact with Tamara for a while, and even changed his phone number—he found himself beginning to justify the heist. “Over the months, I rejected the project on numerous occasions, as I simply considered it too dangerous and pointless,” he wrote me. “At some point, however, I found myself in the midst of preparing for it.”

Gabriel came to view the robbery as a victimless crime—even a virtuous one. He often complained to his wife that it was obscene Loomis had so much money while children starved. The company’s loss would be covered by insurance, he reasoned, and at last he’d be able to save orphans. He even offered Tamara a job as an administrator for Blue Sky Village, with a salary drawn from the stolen loot.

In Tamara’s version, it was Gabriel who persuaded her to do the robbery. She said that he earnestly pitched her on the idea, the logistics of which he’d begun sketching out by the time he brought it up with her. Tamara said that she was open to the idea, so long as no one got hurt. She was newly single—she told Gabriel that Heinz had dumped her after his wife confronted him about the affair. She’d also recently left her job at Loomis. The robbery seemed to offer the chance of a new start. She had never been to Africa, but she liked the idea of helping children. As much as anything, Tamara told me, she was swayed by Gabriel’s optimism.

Having lost his perch in Gabon—and with it his visa—Gabriel decided to build Blue Sky Village in neighboring Equatorial Guinea, where he’d been offered a new security assignment, set to begin in 2014. On his first trip, Gabriel encountered the kind of poverty he’d seen in Gabon, and he noted that many children had been left parentless by the AIDS epidemic. He told me that he also met some locals interested in helping him build an orphanage.

As Gabriel and Tamara became more serious about the heist, they began communicating via prepaid phones, changing their numbers every two weeks. Gabriel also plotted how he would get the stolen money to Africa. He was wary of bank transfers and other means that would leave a record. He decided instead to buy a batch of secondhand electronics—radios, TVs, VCRs—and conceal the cash among them in a shipping container, which he’d then dispatch to Equatorial Guinea. A year later, after construction of Blue Sky Village was complete and her relocation wouldn’t raise suspicions, Tamara would fly down and get the orphanage up and running.

Next came the question of where precisely to strike. While the vault at Loomis’s fortified Austrian headquarters contained huge sums of money, the delivery vans were more or less unprotected, defended only by a pair of often unarmed guards. Gabriel and Tamara could catch one of the vans on its twice-weekly rounds. After some scouting, they selected a stop, an ATM in an area of the city that seemed free of security cameras. To load money, the guards entered a vestibule behind the machine. The vestibule was owned by an adjacent plumbing company and had a tiny bathroom, but otherwise there was only one way in or out of the space. Gabriel and Tamara could be sure to catch the Loomis guards unaware.

They would need a copy of the vestibule’s key, because the door would be locked while the guards fed bills into the machine. To solve this problem, Tamara snuck into a cloakroom at Loomis—the access code to the office was the same as when she’d worked there, and it was easy for her to enter undetected. She stole a uniform. Then, disguised as a guard and wearing a dark wig to cover her light hair, she visited the plumbing company. She explained that the key to the vestibule had broken and they’d need a replacement to access the machine. She walked out with one in hand.

Gabriel and Tamara then needed to decide when to execute the heist. Gabriel was heading to Equatorial Guinea in early 2014, which meant that they would need to act quickly if they wanted the money to arrive while he was there. To Gabriel, success hinged on picking the right guards, the combination of which changed every shift. He and Tamara scrutinized copies of Loomis’s weekly rosters, which Tamara poached using company passcodes. Gabriel preferred to target guards who had been with the company awhile, particularly women, on the assumption that they would be smart enough not to play the hero. At one point, Gabriel and Tamara set a date for the robbery at the end of November 2013, but they realized that the van would be manned by an amateur bodybuilder. Finally, they settled on a low-risk pair of guards, and the heist was scheduled for three days before Christmas. Millions of euros would be set for delivery to cash machines depleted by holiday shopping.

The day before the theft, Gabriel noticed an unusual number of police patrolling the city. It was, he would later decide, a sign from the cosmos that he shouldn’t proceed with the crime—but one that, out of earnest belief in his purpose, he declined to heed.

On the evening of December 22, Gabriel left his wife and one-year-old son at their apartment, explaining that he had a late work assignment. He picked up Tamara in his minivan, a SEAT Alhambra, which he had cleaned to avoid spreading forensic evidence to the crime scene. The pair were dressed in matching black outfits, with military boots and stolen Loomis jackets. Gabriel had shaved and his hair was slicked back. He brought along an unloaded Glock 19. Tamara, who had little experience with firearms, carried a pellet gun Gabriel had bought from a sporting goods store. Both weapons were fitted with red-laser sights to intimidate the guards.

They drove to the Loomis headquarters and parked outside, waiting for the van to head out. Although they knew the vehicle’s route, drivers left on their own schedule, and Gabriel and Tamara didn’t want to risk attracting suspicion by hanging around the ATM they’d selected longer than necessary. At one point, Gabriel stepped out of his minivan to relieve himself on some nearby grass. Moments later, the Loomis van left the parking lot to begin its rounds. When Gabriel got back in his vehicle, Tamara was frantic that their target had left. Gabriel jammed his foot on the accelerator and tried to catch up. Finally, they spotted the Loomis van at a bank in central Vienna—mere steps from Café Schwartzenberg, a coffeehouse Gabriel often visited with his children. Tamara and Gabriel followed at a distance, then sped ahead to the ATM, where they pulled on ski masks and goggles and waited in Gabriel’s vehicle.

A little after midnight the van arrived. Gabriel and Tamara watched the two guards enter the vestibule. A few minutes later, they crept into the darkness and approached the ATM. Tamara inserted the key into the vestibule door and Gabriel pushed it open, gun drawn. He expected to see both guards, but there was only one, crouched in front of the ATM. The guard, a man, looked up at the intruders and froze. Gabriel held his finger to his lips.

Doing his best impression of a Russian accent—a ploy he’d decided would throw off investigators—Gabriel whispered for the guard, a man, to get on the ground. The guard knelt, and Gabriel pushed him onto his stomach, securing his hands behind his back with handcuffs and pulling a wool hat over his eyes. Gabriel and Tamara looked at each other. Where was the other guard? There was only one possibility: The second Loomis employee, a woman, must be in the vestibule’s bathroom. Had she heard them? What if she didn’t come out? Was she calling for help? For a few agonizing moments, Gabriel and Tamara waited. Then they heard the sound of a toilet flushing and the woman emerged, buttoning her pants. Tamara—who remained silent throughout the crime, lest the guards recognize her voice—waved her gun. The female guard joined her colleague on the floor.

Gabriel took a key ring from the male guard’s jacket pocket and handed it to Tamara, who exited to the street, removing her goggles and lifting her mask as she went. She opened the back door of the Loomis van. Inside were nearly twenty locked cases, each containing about 160,000 euros. While Gabriel watched the guards, Tamara unlatched the cases with a second key and began shoving the money into giant duffel bags. It was slow work. At one point, an old man walked up and asked her how long the ATM would be out of service. “Longer,” Tamara replied.

Inside the vestibule, Gabriel threatened the guards with execution in broken, accented German. Later, at trial, the male guard would recall Gabriel exclaiming “death” over and over: “Death! Death! No police, no talking! We know everything! Death!” Occasionally, Gabriel would bark nonsense into a walkie-talkie—“Da! Da! Da! Go! Go! Go!”—to give the impression that other accomplices were outside.

After Tamara finished loading the cash, Gabriel exited the vestibule and lugged the bulging duffel bags to his SEAT. Then he picked up a bucket, used the vestibule’s bathroom to fill it with soap and water, and dumped it on the guards, to make it harder for police to gather evidence. Before he left, Gabriel bent down and hissed into the female guard’s ear that he knew where she lived. Then he and Tamara slipped into the night.

As they sped away, Tamara, suddenly overwhelmed, burst out laughing. “My adrenaline, once I was in the car, was so intense,” she told me. “I was caught in a fit of laughter, tears and all, because I simply didn’t know where to channel all those emotions.” After driving a few miles, she and Gabriel parked in an alley, changed, and stuffed their clothes, their weapons, and the stolen keys into a garbage bag, which they threw into a dumpster. Gabriel then dropped Tamara off at a gas station, where she called a taxi. On the ride home, Tamara passed the scene of the crime. Police were already there, blue lights flashing. Back at her apartment, Tamara fell asleep a little after 4 a.m., but she didn’t rest long. She had to wake up a few hours later for a first-aid course—preparation for the move to Africa.

As agreed, Tamara had taken a thousand euros from the haul—she was still unemployed, and the cash would help her cover expenses. The rest of the money remained with Gabriel. Once he got home, he transferred the money from the bags into three suitcases. His family would be driving to Carinthia, a mountainous state in the eastern Alps, to celebrate Christmas with his wife’s parents. As they packed the minivan, his wife noticed the suitcases. Gabriel explained that they contained business documents. When they arrived in Carinthia, he hauled the bags up to his in-laws’ attic, then joined his family for dinner.

Gabriel kept hoping he’d suddenly wake up and realize that the robbery had been a ridiculous dream. He wondered if there was some way to return the money without getting into trouble.

In the months leading up to the heist, Gabriel had felt an uncanny serenity. But once he’d succeeded, the enormity of the crime rose up and struck him like a tidal wave. From the minute he was back at his house, he would later tell me, he was “nervous, nervous, nervous.” While he cared about his plans for Blue Sky Village, committing a historically large armed robbery to support the project now felt impossibly foolish. How had he not seen it before? “I was thinking it was the biggest mistake in my life,” he said.

On the afternoon of December 23, a distraught-sounding Heinz called Gabriel to inform him that there had been a robbery, an enormous one. He called again a day later and said that investigators had discovered a clue. There was a camera in the ATM that took a photograph every three seconds whenever the machine was being refilled. (This was a new security feature, one Tamara hadn’t known about.) The images from the robbed vehicle, Heinz confided, indicated that one of the thieves might be a woman. He explained that the heist was so well planned, there was little question that one of the perpetrators was a Loomis employee. The police were already considering female suspects.

Gabriel was dumbstruck and suddenly nauseated by the thought of getting caught. Christmas Eve, when Austrians open presents, was usually his favorite night of the year—after all, it was entirely about giving. But that evening, Gabriel felt no joy watching his youngest son unwrap toys. Uncharacteristically, he drank a lot of beer, trying to forget about the danger he’d placed himself in. His guts were in an uproar, forcing him to use the bathroom constantly. “It was a fucking feeling,” he told me later.

Lying in bed early Christmas morning, a jittery Gabriel heard a noise outside and thought it was the police, but it was only the newspaper carrier. His wife said he looked nervous and stone-faced, and she asked him what was wrong. Gabriel wanted to tell her the truth, but doing so would make her an accomplice. So he shrugged, saying that he didn’t know. When he returned to Vienna the next day, his two elder children came to his apartment and noticed him glancing nervously out the window.

In a panic, Gabriel decided that he would give away some of the money as quickly as possible. He told me that he shoved tens of thousands of euros into the mailboxes of needy neighbors and a church. (This was never confirmed by authorities.) But he was still left with millions, and the crisp bills felt increasingly radioactive.

Tamara, meanwhile, was suffering a similar if less perceptible breakdown. She’d later tell me that she recalled the days after the robbery only vaguely, because she had experienced a sort of “blackout.” She spent Christmas with her brother, who subsequently said that he’d noticed nothing unusual about her. Tamara and Gabriel had agreed to avoid speaking for a month following the heist, but after a week she left a note on his windshield urging him to contact her on a new burner phone. She signed the note “Robin H.”

After Christmas, Heinz reached out to Gabriel again and said that he wanted to speak about the case in person. On December 29, they met in the lobby of the lavish Grand Hotel Wien. Gabriel was wary. It had been unclear on the phone whether Heinz wanted help with the investigation or considered him a suspect. At the hotel, Heinz revealed that the police’s prime suspect was none other than his own former mistress, Tamara. The female guard had told authorities that the robber’s small stature made her think of Tamara even before she saw the photographs from the ATM. The police had since placed a GPS tracker on Tamara’s car, hoping that she would lead them to the money.

Gabriel, feeling dizzy, tried his best to act surprised. Spiraling into paranoia, he wondered whether Heinz himself was in on the crime and had worked with Tamara to set him up. Wasn’t it convenient, he thought, that Tamara had claimed she and Heinz had broken up right before coaxing him into committing the crime? That her access codes continued to work even after she left Loomis? (Call records would later show that Tamara and Heinz had remained in contact after the end of their relationship, although there’s no indication that Heinz knew anything about the heist.)

Gabriel, usually so magnanimous, suddenly felt that no one deserved his trust. Still, he called Tamara at the number she’d left to tell her she was a suspect and that police might be following her. He assured her that the evidence was circumstantial at best. There was no proof linking either of them to the crime—only a guard’s hunch that the woman in the photos might be Tamara. He urged her to keep quiet.

Tamara drove her car to a maintenance garage, and sure enough a strange device was under the hood. To avoid further suspicion, she left the tracker in place but decided to use public transportation for a while. Days passed, and Tamara entertained the idea that the police had lost interest in her.

Then, on the morning of January 10, federal officers smashed in the door of her apartment with a battering ram and rolled in a flash-bang grenade, which exploded with a deafening crack. The police hauled her out of bed and placed her under arrest. A cash-detection dog, trained to sniff out large sums of money, was brought in. It found the last 270 euros Tamara had from the robbery. She had hidden the bills in a vacuum cleaner.

Questioned by police, Tamara at first claimed to have been home alone at the time of the robbery. After hours of interrogation, she changed her story. She had participated in the robbery, she admitted, but under duress. Implausible details spilled out of her: Two masked men had threatened to kill her nephew and her former lover, Heinz, if she didn’t help them commit the robbery—which she had done, reluctantly. The investigators were skeptical. Sliding across photos of a number of Loomis employees, they asked Tamara if any of them were her accomplice, reminding her that the court would look favorably on her cooperation. Feeling hopeless, she finally told the police the truth.

Gabriel had wondered whether Tamara might turn on him. After she was arrested, Heinz had called to let him know that she was in custody. Gabriel didn’t think Tamara would withstand the pressure of an interrogation. He told me he kept hoping he’d suddenly wake up and realize that the robbery had been a ridiculous dream. He wondered if there was some way to return the money without getting into trouble.

On the night of January 11, Gabriel and his wife were in bed when they heard a rumbling on the street below. Gabriel got up and looked out the window. He saw a swarm of officers, some of them former colleagues in WEGA who were now working for the federal police. Turning to his wife, Gabriel calmly explained that he’d been responsible for the Loomis robbery and was about to be arrested. He gave her a kiss, then invited the officers inside and allowed himself to be handcuffed. “It was a huge relief when I was arrested,” Gabriel wrote me later. Breaking the rules had knocked him off his axis, but the law had reasserted itself, and he could begin to live with the consequences.

Both Tamara and Gabriel pled guilty to two charges: unlawful deprivation of liberty—for restraining the guards—and aggravated robbery. At their sentencing six months after the heist, they learned that the crime had not been as victimless as they’d imagined. The guards testified that they were terrified, fearing Gabriel would shoot them in the back of the head at any moment. They remained traumatized; the female guard had taken a leave of absence.

In court, Gabriel and Tamara covered their faces with file folders to avoid being photographed. Both hoped they would be shown leniency. Tamara, for her part, told the court that she “was in a deep hole at the time,” and that Gabriel was her lifeline. She trusted him completely. While admitting responsibility, Gabriel told the judge that he was driven to commit the crime by the awful poverty he had witnessed in Gabon and the refusal of Austria’s rich to fund his vision for Blue Sky Village.

The judge, Claudia Zöllner, was unmoved by claims of noble motives. The abstract idea of saving children, she said, was “not a reason worthy of respect” for committing a serious criminal offense. Gabriel and Tamara were both sentenced to eight years in prison—severe by Austrian standards.

Through tears, Gabriel told the court, “I was so obsessed with my dream of helping children that I didn’t even consider my family anymore.” The fallout was painful. When Gabriel’s brother, who had become a lawyer for the Austrian state police, read about the case, he cut off Gabriel completely. During his incarceration, Gabriel’s second wife would divorce him, and he would have only limited contact with his children. “One minute I want to hug him,” his son Florian told me one day at Café Schwartzenberg, “the next I want to hit him.”

Gabriel and Tamara were able to exchange brief snippets of conversation in court, but Gabriel cut off communication with his accomplice soon after sentencing. Tamara sent him Christmas and Easter cards but received no response. Gabriel had come to blame her for talking him into the crime, even as she maintained that he had been the one to persuade her.

On some level, Gabriel remained puzzled about his own reasons for staging the robbery. In a letter he sent me from prison, he wrote that he could only conclude he had been temporarily crazed by “eine sozialen uberwahn”—a social delusion. “I was blinded by the ‘good deed’ to help other humans and unfortunately did not realize the scope of my unjust and indictable actions,” he explained. “I did not see that injustice cannot be resolved by further injustice.”

Gabriel said that he had been motivated purely by altruism, by a wish to do maximal good. But while his fantasy of Blue Sky Village was one of saving children, it was also about being needed—about building an entire community to which he could give, endlessly. Schmidbauer, the psychologist who defined helper syndrome, noted that while those afflicted with the condition enjoyed the social approval of selfless acts, there was also a hint of narcissism in their charity—the need to have a fragile sense of self continually burnished by good deeds.

Though he had modeled his actions on Robin Hood, upon closer examination Gabriel more closely resembled the vexed protagonist of a Joseph Conrad novel: mortified by colonial—or, in this case, postcolonial—horrors, but also, in helping train the police force in an authoritarian country, perpetuating them. In seeking to do what he believed was right and good, Gabriel seemed to have cast himself in the patronizing role of the white savior.

I once asked Gabriel if he regretted taking the job in Gabon, for what it had done to him. He shook his head. He said the experience had showed him that if he could “get a lot of money,” it was possible to “give something back to people.” To his mind, the logic was simple: Austria is rich, and people in Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, and other African countries would benefit from having that wealth redistributed. The problem was that no one seemed willing to do it but him.

“A crime remains a crime, even if the intention behind it is noble,” Gabriel wrote.

Throughout their confinement, both Gabriel and Tamara recounted to me, proudly, of having given food and clothing to fellow inmates. Tamara drew on her athletic skills to provide fitness classes for other prisoners. Gabriel was transferred from Josefstadt to Stein, another high-security prison, after his sentencing. There he was assigned to keep the books for inmate commissary accounts. He often drew on his personal savings, he told me, to loan money interest-free to those who needed it.

Incarceration was difficult for the ex-cop, however. The prisoners at Stein considered him a traitor. This put him in constant danger, and it was nearly impossible to make friends. Eventually, he was transferred to a minimum-security prison an hour outside Vienna, situated in the countryside among Riesling vineyards.

When I visited, the facility’s design—low-slung dormitories surrounded by a whitewashed parapet—reminded me of an Italian inn. Gabriel and I decided to sit on the lawn in the summer sun; after ducking into the communal kitchen, he emerged with a bottle of sparkling water and two coffees. I remarked that security seemed only notional. The prison’s exterior bulwark appeared squat enough that it could almost be jumped. “The walls,” Gabriel replied, squinting, “they are really for the eyes.” He explained that the prison operated according to an honor system—incarcerated Austrians were trusted to follow the rules and not run away.

Gabriel and Tamara were both released on probation at the end of 2018, to lives that looked very different than before the robbery. Gabriel got a job working for an old client from his private-security days, manufacturing upholstery for luxury SUVs. He threw himself into work, seeking to earn enough to support his children and occasionally donate to charities. He’d had a change of heart about such organizations; his favorite was called SOS Children’s Villages, dedicated to building orphanages in, among other places, Africa.

After Tamara was released, she moved to a small town and began working in funeral services, preparing bodies for burial. She enjoyed the job, helping families in a moment of need. When refugees from Ukraine streamed into her community after Russia’s invasion in 2022, she organized distributions of donated clothing. Today she helps care for a neighbor in a wheelchair and finds homes for stray cats, many of which she tends to herself, selling odds and ends at flea markets to pay for their food. “Saying no, unfortunately, still doesn’t exist for me,” she wrote to me. “A friend of mine helps me coordinate my helper syndrome so that it’s done in a healthy way and I’m not exploited.” If Tamara starts giving too much, the friend steps in.

In 2022, Gabriel suffered severe burnout from overwork, and was later briefly hospitalized. People with helper syndrome, Schmidbauer noted, were particularly vulnerable to workaholism, because they hid difficult feelings under actions. Gabriel told me he had come to realize that he’d spent years running from his past. He took some time to rest and saw a therapist.

When last we communicated, he said that he felt nothing but regret about the heist. “A crime remains a crime, even if the intention behind it is noble,” he wrote. Nor were the personal costs worth it. In seeking to give as much as possible, he ended up losing “many valuable and beautiful things.” Still, he found himself looking for ways to assist others. “Helping poor and vulnerable people will always be a part of me,” he wrote, “only now a little more distanced and with less emotion toward the situations of those affected.”

But Gabriel had still not given up on his plans for Blue Sky Village. He continued to put aside money in the hope of one day seeing it come to fruition. “It’s my lifelong dream,” he wrote. “Only when it’s fulfilled will I leave this planet.”


© 2026 The Atavist Magazine. Proudly powered by Newspack by Automattic.
Privacy PolicyOpt-out preferencesPrivacy Notice for California Users

The Talented Mr. Bruseaux

The
Talented
Mr. Bruseaux


The Atavist Magazine, No. 165


Matthew Wolfe’s writing has appeared in the New York Times Magazine, The Atlantic, Harper’s, National Geographic, and The New Republic. His first book, about the Earth Liberation Front and radical environmentalism, will be published by Viking in 2026. His previous Atavist story, “The Ghosts of Pickering Trail,” was written with Will Hunt and appeared as issue no. 51.

Editor: Jonah Ogles
Art Director: Ed Johnson
Copy Editor: Sean Cooper
Fact Checker: Emily Injeian
Illustrator: Mark Harris

Published in July 2025.


Early in the evening of April 10, 1928, the day of Chicago’s municipal primary, a candidate for alderman named Octavius C. Granady was pulling up to a polling station, choked with voters fresh from work, when a man dressed in a gray overcoat and a fedora strolled up to his car, drew a pistol, and fired a volley of shots through the back window. Amazingly, the would-be killer missed his target. Granady’s driver slammed his foot on the gas, sending the vehicle, hung with campaign banners, burning rubber down Washburne Avenue. The gunman hopped onto the running board of a nearby Cadillac, which promptly gave chase.

The weeks leading up to the city’s election had been marked by a frenzy of political violence. Chicago’s flamboyantly amoral mayor, William “Big Bill” Thompson, who had recently won office on the populist slogan “America First,” enjoyed the backing of local gangsters, including the infamous syndicate kingpin Al Capone. To push through Thompson’s ticket of loyal supporters, Capone’s henchmen adopted a blunt approach to canvassing. Houses of political officials were bombed, poll workers beaten, and the citizenry intimidated by club-wielding thugs. Tabloids dubbed the election the Pineapple Primary—“pineapple” being slang for a hand grenade.

Listen to the audio version of this story from Apple News

A brave coalition of civic reformers, however, was fighting back against the corruption afflicting the city. Among them was Octavius Granady. A Black lawyer and World War I veteran, Granady had volunteered to run against a longtime Thompson ally named Morris Eller, who was white, for the city council seat representing Chicago’s 20th Ward. The heavily contested race soon became the front line in the battle for the soul of the city. Fearing for his life as primary day approached, Granady had asked for protection from the police department. The request was denied.

After the attempt on his life, Granady’s car careened wildly for more than a mile through the crowded streets of the South Side, trying desperately to lose its pursuers. The hit man, still hunched low on the running board and clutching the Cadillac’s steel frame for balance, continued to snap off rounds. Then, while trying to maneuver a turn, Granady’s driver lost control and crashed into a curb.

Dazed, the candidate stumbled from the wreck, only to be met by a trio of attackers exiting the Cadillac. Squaring up, they brought him down in a spray of shotgun fire. As Granady lay dying, the assassins sped off, a banner for his opponent flapping from their vehicle’s chassis.

Nearly a decade into Prohibition, Chicagoans had become inured to a certain amount of murder and mayhem. But the daylight execution of a principled political reformer shocked the populace. A special prosecutor was appointed to bring the perpetrators to justice. His first task was to hire someone to lead the investigation into the killing—someone fearless and independent, free from influence by the city’s notoriously troubled police department. A series of reputable investigative agencies, however, failed to make any headway in the case. Frustrated, the prosecutor turned to an unlikely choice—a Black man, one who had been blazing an extraordinary path through the world of criminal investigation: Sheridan Bruseaux.

A little less than a decade before, Bruseaux had become, by all extant records, the United States’ first Black licensed private investigator. The industry was, at the time, a white man’s enterprise, with illustrious agencies such as Pinkerton and Baldwin-Felts marketing their services to the country’s moneyed elite. Bruseaux pitched his to Chicago’s growing Black bourgeoisie, who were beginning to suffer the same messy divorces and estate battles as their white counterparts. While Bruseaux snooped into embezzlement and infidelity—a private eye’s bread and butter—he also moonlighted as an avenger of racial violence, hunting perpetrators of lynchings and bombings. His advantage over his white competitors, Bruseaux would later claim, was his vast network of informants, hidden in plain sight: Black cooks and cleaners and doormen, an army of service workers who received no second glances but were privy to the city’s whispers and confidences.

Though Bruseaux has since been neglected by history, he was once a household name in the Black community. But as he prepared to take on the Granady case, the biggest of his career, his public persona revealed only part of his story. He had become wealthy and famous by unearthing other people’s secrets, but the man known as Sheridan Bruseaux was keeping a few of his own.

William “Big Bill” Thompson

On April 26, 1890, Sheridan Bruseau—the second to last of fifteen children, nine of whom survived past adolescence—was born in Little Rock, Arkansas. Sheridan’s father, Alexander, had been born into slavery on a sugar plantation in Louisiana, a land of serpentine bayous and long fields of swaying cane. In harvest season, cutting gangs waded into the tall grass, hacking at the stalks with flat, double-sided knives from dawn to dusk. Among Southern slaves cane plantations inspired terror, so frequent was death from exhaustion, disease, or industrial accidents. (The famed abolitionist Frederick Douglass dubbed captivity on such plantations a “life of living death.”)

During the Civil War, when the Union Army marched into Louisiana, thousands of slaves dropped their blades and fled, many choosing to enlist with their liberators. In the summer of 1863, Alexander Bruseau, then 25, joined up and was mustered into the U.S. Colored Troops 79th Infantry. Following the Union’s final victory in 1865, Bruseau received $249.60 in military benefits from the Freedman’s Bureau and headed north to Arkansas. By the late 19th century, Little Rock was home to a thriving class of Black entrepreneurs and craftsmen. Most former slaves, though, had few marketable skills, and they were forced into menial work and subsistence incomes. Bruseau became a gardener. In 1877, he married a woman, Nancy, from North Carolina, with whom he had several children, including Sheridan. Their home, a simple frame shack near the city limits, sat in sight of a cemetery honoring the Confederate dead.

Under Jim Crow, Black Southerners were frequently subjected to spectacular violence. In 1904, when Sheridan was 14, the town of St. Charles two counties over became the site of one of the largest mass lynchings in U.S. history, in which 13 Black men were shot to death. Such brutal vigilantism often received the tacit support of journalists. Little Rock’s Arkansas Democrat once printed on its front page that a “black brute”—an alliterative phrase the publication had a special fondness for—accused of assaulting a “highly respected lady” was hanged from a telephone pole in the town of Tillar. The report noted that he had been left strung up for much of the next day. The alleged assailant was 17, only a year older than Sheridan.

After attending a local high school, then the recently established Arkansas Baptist College, Sheridan faced a cruelly delimited future. He took a series of low-paying service jobs—day laborer, messenger, porter. But soon an opportunity presented itself. With the onset of World War I, factories in northern cities began stamping out munitions and canned food. Word of higher wages and fairer treatment spread south. Between 1916 and 1919, around half a million Black Americans departed the rural districts of their birth for the North’s industrialized sprawl and hope of a more profitable, less frightening tomorrow. Sheridan, his mother, and many of his siblings were among them.

When Sheridan reemerged in Chicago, his last name was entered into the public record with an x on the end. Viewed one way, the addition was a simple embellishment—attempted evidence, perhaps, of an unprovable claim Bruseaux would later make to a journalist that he was of French descent. But it was also an act of reinvention. In the comparative safety of the North, Bruseaux was free to fashion a new self.

The Chicago Defender, the city’s leading Black newspaper, boasted that Keystone was the first detective agency to be run by “our group.”

If Bruseaux thought he was leaving racial violence behind in moving north, his optimism was quickly dashed. Across the nation, racial tensions were beginning to erupt. When the United States entered World War I, millions of white working men were sent overseas, many to fill the trenches of the Western Front. After the Armistice was signed at the end of 1918, many returned home to find their jobs and apartments filled by Black faces, newly arrived from the South. A violent backlash ensued. During the Red Summer of 1919, white residents of dozens of U.S. cities launched a program of attacks on Black homes and businesses, terrorizing and slaughtering hundreds of people. The Ku Klux Klan, an organization moribund for over four decades, was not only revived but became a political force.

Chicago did not escape the national mood. The city’s Black population had doubled between 1916 and 1919, and workers of all extractions furiously competed for shifts in packing houses and abattoirs while crowding into cramped apartments with exorbitant rents. The welcome received by migrating Black families, once so hopeful about a better life above the Mason-Dixon Line, was made no smoother by local newspapers. “Half a Million Darkies from Dixie Swarm the North to Better Themselves,” blustered a headline in the Chicago Tribune. In the months leading up to the summer of 1919, white mobs assaulted Black citizens in the streets and firebombed their properties. “It looks very much like Chicago is trying to rival the South in its race hatred against the Negro,” wrote the famed muckraker Ida B. Wells-Barnett in the Tribune in July 1919.

Just weeks later, on a sweltering late-July afternoon, a handful of Black teenagers, cooling themselves on a homemade raft, accidentally drifted into a zone of Lake Michigan considered off-limits to people of color. From the sandy shore, a white man began lobbing rocks at them. At first it seemed to the boys like a game: The vessel was a good distance from the beach, and their assailant’s aim was lazy. But then, just as 17-year-old Eugene Williams, who was swimming alongside the raft, popped out of the water, one of the rocks hit him in the forehead. Stunned, Williams sank to the bottom of the lake and drowned. When his distraught friends reported the incident to a white police officer, he refused to make an arrest. A brawl broke out, and the violence spread into the worst race riot in Chicago history. In a matter of days, 38 Chicagoans were dead and 500 were injured. The bloodshed only ended with the arrival of thousands of state militiamen and a chilling rain.

It was in this very moment, when the hot days of Red Summer were easing into autumn, that Sheridan Bruseaux hung a shingle for a new detective agency in Chicago’s Bronzeville neighborhood, then a center of Black life. Promoting his services in Black newspapers alongside ads for “High-Brown Face Powder,” Bruseaux, now 29, claimed an impressive pedigree. He proudly stated that, since leaving Arkansas, he’d earned a law degree from the University of Minnesota and spent the war years in Europe working for the government’s Secret Service, which ran a vast counterintelligence network. After a stint with an investigative firm in Chicago, Bruseaux had decided to go into business for himself.

In September 1919, Bruseaux opened the doors of the Keystone Detective Agency at 3333 South State, a popular address among Black entrepreneurs. The agency was the first of its kind to be owned by a Black man. The Chicago Defender, the city’s leading Black newspaper, boasted that Keystone was the first detective agency to be run by “our group.”

Tall and broad shouldered, with his short hair conked and split into a stylish side part, Bruseaux cultivated an air of old money, wearing the finely cut suits favored by bankers. (He’d one day be included on a list of the city’s best-dressed men.) Along with other investigative services, Bruseaux offered to shadow unfaithful spouses and locate lost relatives—a common concern for families whose members had been separated during the migration north. His agency made use of emerging technologies like fingerprinting, listening devices, and hidden cameras. Ambitious from the start, Bruseaux made it known that he was available for jobs anywhere in the country, publicizing his business with the slogan “We Cover the World.”

Drawing clients from the city’s growing Black middle class, Bruseaux assembled a diverse docket of cases. Investigations ranged from retrieving stolen jewels and catching currency forgers to debunking confidence men and quacks. In an early success, Keystone made the front page of the Chicago Whip for catching the trafficker of a 15-year-old girl “lured into the underworld.”

Bruseaux’s big break came a month after his agency’s founding, though it wasn’t exactly an investigative coup. The editor of the Chicago Defender hired him to set up the Black nationalist leader Marcus Garvey, who had incurred the integration-minded Defender’s wrath by urging Black Americans to return to Africa and establish their own state. At the editor’s behest, Bruseaux bought two shares of stock in Garvey’s Black Star shipping company. By selling them, Garvey violated an obscure Illinois law forbidding the sale of equities without a state license, and he was briefly jailed. The arrest of a prominent activist was controversial—Garvey had plenty of supporters in the city—but it transformed Bruseaux into a boldface name. In just a few months, he’d have enough business to move from his humble Bronzeville office into two spacious suites decorated with oil paintings and panel mirrors.

Discovering that many of the prejudices that afflicted his family in Arkansas and Louisiana had followed him to Chicago, Bruseaux took on a sideline gig investigating racial violence. He dug into bombings of Black family homes on the South Side, the burning of a Black church, and the murder of a Black 16-year-old by a white druggist from whom the boy had tried to purchase pomade. By investigating such crimes, Bruseaux’s agency offered an alternative path to justice for Black Americans shunned by the legal system.

Bruseaux also began interrogating the root causes of social problems. One client hired him to look into the conditions causing Black unemployment in the Midwest. In a letter to an official at the Department of Labor, Bruseaux asked “why the Negro is constantly being discharged from positions, and even the commonest labor at which he has previously been employed.” Bruseaux frequently drew from interviews, surveys, and first-person observation—mirroring the pioneering work being done by sociologists at the University of Chicago. He waded into public debates, and once used statistics to dispute charges that Black men were responsible for a disproportionate amount of the city’s crime.

As Bruseaux’s profile grew, his work took him farther afield—to investigate a lynching in North Carolina; to reexamine the killing of a Black teenager by a policeman in Gary, Indiana; and to locate a Creek Indian girl in Oklahoma who claimed that she was coerced by a group of white men to sign over a deed to valuable oil lands.

Though Keystone promised in its ads that all client business would be kept “strictly confidential,” Bruseaux’s exploits were breathlessly covered by the press. When hired by attorneys to testify in court, he often delivered sensational evidence on the stand. In 1923, during the scandalous divorce proceedings of Williams Stokes, a millionaire real estate heir, and his second wife, Helen, Bruseaux was brought in to rebut a maid’s accusation that Mrs. Stokes had been seen in the apartment of another man. After the maid’s testimony, Bruseaux shocked the court by producing an affidavit from her mother stating that she was lying, forcing the witness to break down and admit that she had perjured herself. The move, one newspaper noted, “puts Mr. Bruseaux on record as one of the cleverest detectives in the country, not only of his own race, but any race.”

Not all coverage was favorable, however. The following year, Bruseaux earned the enmity of the Black-owned Chicago Whip after investigating its publisher for the theft of $8,000 in bonds. In an angry article, the paper dismissed Bruseaux as a “joke” and a “dining car detective.” It mocked his Arkansas accent, writing that “one could easily picture the sleuth trailing a plough in the southern cotton fields.” The Whip’s attack displayed a condescension commonly directed at new Black arrivals in the city. “Securely established Negro citizens were perturbed by the avalanche of their rustic brethren whose manners and personal appearance were not always so prepossessing as they might be,” noted Arna Bontemps in Anyplace But Here, a book about the Great Migration. “Feet used to a plowed field found it hard to steady themselves on a lurching streetcar, so that migrants stepped on toes and jostled their fellow passengers.” Some members of the Black professional class even complained that, in their uncouthness, Southerners such as Bruseaux were responsible for the new tension with white citizens, having upset a hard-won equilibrium—blaming them, in effect, for dragging racism up from the plantations.

Perhaps seeking to overcome this class prejudice, Bruseaux hosted extravagant parties. In 1923, after several years of public bachelordom, Bruseaux married Ethel Sewell, who the Chicago Defender reported was from a prominent Philadelphia family. The paper hailed her as one of the “most charming young matrons in Chicago.” By that time, Bruseaux was wealthy. Together the couple threw opulent soirees in their fashionable home on Grand Avenue, where they were neighbors of the champion boxer Jack Johnson (whose wife, it was reported, had once retained Bruseaux to probe her marriage). Guests of the Bruseauxs—among them actor Paul Robeson and jazz legend Louis Armstrong—were presented with expensive gifts like gold watches, glassware, and traveling bags.

By the mid-1920s, Chicago’s Black residents had built a thriving enclave, with its own stores, churches, theaters, newspapers, literary societies, and professional class. The latter half of the decade, as St. Clair Drake and Horace Cayton observe in their 1945 study Black Metropolis, would be “the Fat Years”—the most prosperous in the community’s history. And Sheridan Bruseaux sat atop that plenitude, scraping cream from the scandals of the affluent. But as Bruseaux would soon discover, his position, based on perception as much as deed, was a precarious one.

Octavius Granady

The death of Octavius Granady happened, in part, by chance. When deciding who would run against Morris Eller, Granady and another reformer had flipped a coin; Granady lost.

Taking on Eller brought with it considerable risks. During his campaign, Granady’s staff were harassed and sabotaged, their headquarters raided and the telephone lines cut. A chilling rumor spread that, even if Granady won, he’d never serve a day in office. On the morning of the primary, one of Granady’s poll monitors was kidnapped by three men, who forced him into a car and bashed his head with a revolver. Chicago police stood around, the monitor later recalled, “watching in amusement.”

Danger was not unique to the alderman’s race. The Second City felt increasingly lawless. Its murder rate had skyrocketed and its governance was in decline—both thanks to Prohibition. One local sociologist described “an unholy alliance between organized crime and politics” that allowed criminality to flourish, an environment where Al Capone could reportedly raise $200,000 for mayor Thompson’s campaign in exchange for the freedom to run a violent empire.

Thompson was an opera buffa demagogue, a loud, self-styled cowboy who once set his 300-pound frame atop a horse and rode it into a city council meeting. In 1927, he’d staged a debate against two live rats: stand-ins for his political opponents. The Chicago Tribune later declared Thompson “a byword for collapse of the American civilization” and his political career synonymous with “filth, corruption, obscenity, idiocy, and bankruptcy.”

According to the New York Times, the city’s police department, under the command of a Thompson-appointed commissioner, accomplished little in its investigation of Granady’s murder. Fed-up state officials summoned a special attorney to look into the killing and the broader lawlessness plaguing the election. The man they chose for the job was the legendary square-jawed crime fighter Frank Loesch.

Loesch was a veteran Chicago prosecutor with an unimpeachable reputation for honesty and integrity, an eminence grise whom one newspaper compared to the Roman Republic’s Cato, waging a relentless battle against the city’s foes. He struck a profile that the Los Angeles Times described as “erect, snowy-haired and unafraid.” But Loesch, now 76, was too old to work alone. To find Granady’s killer, he would need a reliable deputy, someone to do the heavy lifting the investigation would require. Loesch didn’t trust Chicago’s usual authorities—he believed the police to be untrained, prosecutors ignorant, and judges corrupt. To build his case, Loesch needed a true outsider, someone unafraid of making enemies.

At the time of Granady’s killing, Sheridan Bruseaux’s practice was busier than ever, with operatives all over the country. He had become a community hero of sorts—a crusading sleuth fighting hatred and exploitation. Loesch offered him the job, and Bruseaux accepted. He was given a detail of three Black police officers to assist him, and charged with assembling a criminal case Loesch could bring to trial.

From the beginning, Bruseaux faced long odds. Finding witnesses wasn’t difficult; hundreds had observed either the initial attack on Granady, the frantic chase through the streets of Chicago, or the murder itself. But Capone’s thugs were said to be cruising the South Side, warning residents that they’d be killed if they testified in the case and offering $1,000 for the location of witnesses so the goons could intimidate them. Meanwhile, the New York Times reported that the criminal underworld had created a defense fund, levying a tax on gamblers, hoodlums, and saloonkeepers, to assist anyone who might be arrested for the crime.

Bruseaux was undaunted. He announced that his investigation would cover the whole city, leaving no complicit party untouched by the hand of justice. “Every man who comes within the scope of the inquiry will be investigated regardless of his political standing or his position within the police department,” Bruseaux told reporters. “And all such information gathered through the investigation will be presented to the grand jury without fear or favor.”

Persuading bystanders to reveal what they’d seen required all of Bruseaux’s skill and charm; keeping them alive posed more significant challenges. Weeks into the investigation, gangsters with shotguns, posing as insurance salesmen, tried to break into the home of James Huff, a Granady campaign worker and a passenger in the candidate’s car when it was attacked. Huff’s wife slipped out the back and notified Bruseaux, who dispatched a member of his detail to rush the witness and his family to safety.

Bruseaux soon realized that even his colleagues couldn’t be trusted. While he employed his own staff, he also received assistance from state investigators and local police. At one point, suspicious of a Black detective assigned to his detail, Bruseaux followed him from work. After trailing him through the city, Bruseaux watched as he knocked on the door of Oscar DePriest, an influential Black boss in the Thompson machine. Bruseaux kicked the detective off the case. By way of revenge, the police commissioner pulled the rest of Bruseaux’s detail. Loesch assigned Bruseaux a bodyguard, and after that only Bruseaux knew the names and locations of cooperating witnesses.

As Bruseaux dug deeper, he began to unearth a monstrous conspiracy. Witnesses told him that Granady had been pursued by not one but two cars—the Cadillac and, a short distance back, an olive-green Buick. (Bruseaux would eventually track down the former, sold two days after the assassination.) The Buick was said to have been driven by men in police uniforms—the same ones who then responded to the scene of the murder.

After weeks of work, Bruseaux finally identified the shooters: Harry Hochstein, Johnny Armando, and Sammy Kaplan. The men were not only freelance goons for Capone, they were also on the payrolls of powerful people associated with Granady’s rival, Morris Eller, whose banner had been affixed to the killers’ car. In fact, Hochstein and Armando worked directly for Eller’s campaign. What’s more, Bruseaux found evidence of far-reaching electoral fraud. On the day of the primary, gangs of Eller supporters had driven from polling place to polling place—venues often staffed entirely by America First clerks and judges—where they stuffed ballot boxes. Hundreds of “voters” who resided in vacant buildings or at nonexistent addresses cast ballots; some did so from beyond the grave.

In other instances, election officials appeared to have altered the ballot tallies to give Thompson candidates the edge. Bruseaux found too that, in the weeks leading up to the election, hired thugs extorted tribute from speakeasies, craps games, and brothels to finance Eller’s campaign. A gambling operator, for example, was taxed $600 per week—the equivalent of about $10,000 today.

At times during interviews, suspects seemed to be having Bruseaux on. The notebook of one reputed gangster showed multiple payments of $100 to police. When asked about them, the man claimed he liked to play “policy games,” or illegal lotteries, on the South Side. “And how do you spell policy?” asked an investigator assigned to the grand jury. “P-O-L-I-C-E,” he replied.

On June 29, 1928, Loesch stepped forward to address a swarm of reporters. He unveiled a series of shocking charges: In all, 19 suspects were indicted by a grand jury as part of a vast conspiracy to murder Octavius Granady and meddle with the election for the benefit of Morris Eller. Among them were five Chicago detectives, including the leader of a squad assigned to the 20th Ward on election day. Eller and his son, Emmanuel, were accused of providing protection to criminals in exchange for votes. Two witnesses, a barber and a collector on Eller’s payroll, testified that it was Eller himself who had supplied the 20th Ward’s gangsters with guns on the day of the primary.

Charges were also filed against Oscar DePriest, the politician whom Bruseaux had seen a police detective visit, for election fraud. DePriest, a South Side power broker, was in the midst of a campaign to become the first Black official elected to Congress in almost 30 years. The indictment asserted that DePriest and others had collected money from liquor, vice, and gambling establishments in exchange for police protection—cash that was then routed to a slush fund in Mayor Thompson’s America First campaign.

Announcing the indictments, Loesch, who was usually grim faced, couldn’t help but break into a smile. “Gentlemen,” he informed reporters, “we have them.”

The indictments were built on the efforts of Bruseaux, who—overcoming what Loesch described as “insurmountable obstacles”—had secured the testimony of more than 100 witnesses. The detective estimated that he’d uncovered more than $5 million that had been illicitly collected for Thompson’s political machine from gangsters and corrupt politicians. Overnight, Bruseaux became a sensation, the daring gumshoe who stood up to corruption and sought justice for murder. Publications around the country rushed to interview him. The New York Amsterdam News, in a glowing profile, compared him to Sherlock Holmes. Even his journalistic bête noire, the Chicago Whip, which once had mocked Bruseaux’s unpolished style, reluctantly lauded his accomplishment.

Bruseaux was at the pinnacle of his career, his achievements sufficiently impressive that the NAACP took notice. Since 1915, the nation’s preeminent civil-rights group had awarded an annual prize recognizing the individual in America who best embodied Black excellence. The Spingarn Medal was its most prestigious honor, previously bestowed on such trailblazers as the Army’s first Black colonel, Charles Young, and agricultural scientist George Washington Carver. In early 1929, when the organization was considering nominees, Bruseaux’s name was at the top of the list.

Records show that W. E. B. DuBois, the NAACP’s cofounder and head of publicity, received dozens of letters from Black luminaries written on Bruseaux’s behalf—the most for any candidate. Among Bruseaux’s supporters was Ida B. Wells-Barnett, another NAACP cofounder now living in Chicago. “Every day for six months, I thrilled with pride over the tributes to this negro’s ability,” her handwritten note to DuBois read. “Because Mr. Bruseaux could neither be bribed nor bullied … he has won a signal victory for the forces of law and order, and the gratitude of the entire city.” Arthur Mitchell, a well-known Chicago lawyer, noted that the Tribune had been unstinting in its praise of Bruseaux—no small matter for a paper, Mitchell observed, that “heretofore had been thought to be most unfriendly to ambitious Colored men.… Winning the commendation of this paper for the race and changing its attitude on many racial questions is, within itself … worthy of the highest commendation.”

Soon, Bruseaux was reported to be in the running for a top post at the Justice Department, with an annual salary of $10,000 (around $187,000 today). While traveling for business, Bruseaux happened to pass through his erstwhile hometown of Little Rock, where he was feted by onetime neighbors. His picture was hung in his former high school, at a ceremony attended by the city’s Black elite—the high society from which, growing up, he had been excluded. Where Bruseaux’s horizons had once been stifled, his future now seemed limitless.

But just as Bruseaux was taking a victory lap, his life began to unravel.

The investigators working for Bruseaux faced danger, too—one of his deputies was stabbed in the back on his way home from work, leaving him bleeding but alive.

In retrospect, there were early signs that Loesch’s case against Granady’s alleged killers might run into trouble once it went to trial. Emmanuel Eller was an elected judge, and despite the criminal charges against him, it was in his court that the men accused of shooting his father’s political opponent first appeared, in July 1928. Judge Eller immediately cut their bond, allowing their release. A few weeks later, one of Morris Eller’s henchman suspected of participating in Granady’s killing was found murdered under a pile of rubbish in an alley—“a warning,” a city official declared, “from those pulling the strings that it isn’t healthy to squawk.” Soon after, a second suspect, wanted for questioning, was also found dead, his body slumped over a car steering wheel with eight shots to the head. The investigators working for Bruseaux faced danger, too—one of them was stabbed in the back on his way home from work, leaving him bleeding but alive.

That November, the Thompson machine was smashed in the general election, with every one of the mayor’s candidates soundly defeated, including Morris Eller. But the defendants in Loesch’s case had yet to be prosecuted. The date of the proceedings was repeatedly delayed, and by the time the first witness entered the courtroom to give testimony, 19 months had passed since Granady’s assassination. Readying for trial, Bruseaux became so stressed that he was hospitalized for ulcers. He was right to be anxious, because what transpired in the courtroom was, in the words of one journalist, a farce.

Bruseaux, Loesch, and the state’s attorney disagreed about whether to indict the police officers in the second car, the green Buick, that chased Granady. Ultimately, the cops faced trial, but Judge Joseph David appeared conspicuously preferential toward them, dismissing witnesses who claimed to have seen the men participate in Granady’s murder as “liars.” David even hinted that he would set aside a guilty verdict, should the jury reach one. Some witnesses’ testimony had changed since they were first interviewed—a bystander to the murder, asked in court to identify one of the shooters, pointed to a defense attorney.

Perhaps to some degree these shifting recollections were a result of the time that had elapsed since the crime is unclear. But witness tampering was also a specialty of Mayor Thompson’s most powerful supporter, Al Capone, and it would be another year and a half before he was charged with tax evasion and forced to cede his throne as king of Chicago’s underworld.

The Granady trial was briefly halted when one of the prosecution’s star witnesses, Margaret Welch, was reportedly threatened with death. On November 1, 1929, the 23-year-old was set to tell the jury that she had overheard two of the defendants—John Armando, one of the alleged shooters, and James Belcastro, accused of driving the Cadillac—mention killing Granady in the days following the murder. On the morning of her testimony, according to the Tribune, Welch received an anonymous telephone call informing her that if she went through with it, she’d get her head blown off. To prove that they were serious, Welch’s harassers kidnapped her brother, reducing her to a state of hysterical collapse.

When she was finally coaxed into court a few weeks later, Welch’s hand shook as she took the oath. After giving her name and address, she fell to her knees and begged the judge to protect her. (“And some people pay $5.50 a seat to see a show,” mused a front-row spectator.) After being escorted to the county hospital, Welch never retook the stand. The charges against Armando and Belcastro were dismissed, and the men were set free.

Then, suddenly, a serious charge was leveled against Bruseaux. Under cross examination, several witnesses for the prosecution claimed that the detective had bribed them. A few said that Bruseaux had promised them jobs and paid their expenses in exchange for testimony, and one witness, a preacher named Joseph McMillan, declared that Bruseaux offered him $1,000 to identify Armando as one of the shooters. Though Granady’s own driver had already testified that it was Armando who fired off rounds from the running board of the Cadillac, Judge David was incensed, declaring the preacher’s allegation “far more serious than murder.”

Around the same time, an anonymous letter was mailed to the court accusing Bruseaux of a variety of crimes. The letter’s contents were never revealed; David, in a fit of rage, tore up the document, yelling that something should be done about the detective. “If the things they say about this man Bruseaux are true,” thundered the judge, “he ought to be in the penitentiary.”

Bruseaux vehemently denied the bribery charges, calling them “ridiculous,” but they weakened the prosecution’s case. After a series of unfavorable rulings, the judge dismissed the indictments against some of the defendants. Ultimately, the 15 of Eller’s henchmen who remained on trial escaped with fines after being found guilty of conspiracy.

Many of the broader corruption allegations also faded away. Morris Eller and his son were never tried in court, and both would remain active in law and politics for years. Loesch dropped the indictment against Oscar DePriest, and Bruseaux would claim publicly that DePriest, set up by political foes, was innocent of any crime. It’s unclear whether Bruseaux was bowing to political pressure or if he’d been hasty in his initial accusations. Regardless, DePriest, who had won his congressional race, becoming the first Black man elected to the House of Representatives since Reconstruction, had already had his revenge.

Archival records show that, in early 1929, one of DePriest’s associates, writing on the politician’s letterhead, mailed the NAACP a court document indicating that Bruseaux had been indicted for bigamy in 1917, two years before starting his detective agency. In 1906, while living in Arkansas, Bruseaux had married a young woman, and he’d never dissolved their union. The Spingarn Medal was awarded in the spring of 1929, well before the fiasco of the Granady trial. The NAACP presented it to the president of Howard University. Bruseaux had been passed over.

Al Capone

The accusations against Sheridan Bruseaux that aired during the Granady trial, though dubious, hinted at a larger pattern of lies and ethical shortcuts. The year before, in the midst of preparations for the case, the leader of a Black fraternal organization in Indiana claimed Bruseaux had tried to shake him down for $5,000. In 1930, the former head of the National Bar Association, C. F. Stradford, accused Bruseaux of extortion, stemming from a case in which Stradford had represented an abortionist. Bruseaux, he claimed, made himself “an involuntary, uninvited partner of anyone who receives or has an attractive sum,” adding that “money disappears quickly when one is making a bid for social position by giving expensive parties.” Nor was it the first time Bruseaux had been accused of trying to strong-arm clients: One Black newspaper stated that such a charge was “exactly in keeping” with its opinion of the detective and warned the public against associating with him.

His image tarnished, Bruseaux’s reputation within the Black community began to fade. Still, he worked steadily over the next several years. He exposed bank officers who used customers’ deposit to fund dog-race tracks; investigated the mysterious murder of the National Baptist Convention’s chief auditor, whose body was found in a river shot six times; and helped dismantle a prolific counterfeiting ring. Then Bruseaux’s desire to defend the Black community collided with his tendency to blur the truth, in a way that led to his undoing.

On June 19, 1936, the great boxer Joe Louis, then undefeated, was scheduled to fight German heavyweight Max Schmeling. The bout, with its inescapable political overtones—Schmeling was the pride of the Nazi Reich, Joe Louis a rising star of Black America—was an international spectacle. During the fight, staged in Yankee Stadium and broadcast to tens of millions over the radio, Schmeling, an eight-to-one underdog, launched a series of right crosses at Louis’s jaw, until finally, in the 12th round, the Brown Bomber hit the mat and was counted out. In the Black community, grief at the loss was apocalyptic. The poet Langston Hughes, who attended the event, described watching grown men sob like children on the streets of Harlem after the defeat. Hitler, meanwhile, cabled his congratulations to Schmeling.

Louis’s fans searched for an explanation as to how their hero came up short. In was in this sensitive moment that Bruseaux stepped forward to offer a hypothesis. Louis, he declared, hadn’t been beat, he’d been drugged. In an affidavit, Bruseaux claimed that, just before the fight, one of the boxer’s physicians had administered an injection that hindered Louis’s left arm—a story, Bruseaux said, related to him by Louis’s sister. Asked for comment, Louis and his managers angrily rejected Bruseaux’s theory. “I had no shot of any kind except a few hard rights from Schmeling’s glove,” Louis told the Chicago Tribune. Louis’s sister, for her part, said that she’d never told Bruseaux any such thing.

Whatever Bruseaux was attempting with the stunt, it backfired. He became an object of national ridicule, with one sportswriter labeling his affidavit “too screwy to be believed.” Louis’s managers claimed that Bruseaux had tried to extort them, threatening to go to the press with his accusation if they didn’t pay him off, and accused the detective of operating a “shakedown racket.” They filed a lawsuit against Bruseaux for libel, as did Louis’s physician. Bruseaux countersued, claiming defamation. The matter was settled out of court.

As he fell from grace, his case load thinned, and Bruseaux became financially overextended. In 1937, he sent a pleading letter to Arthur Mitchell, asking to borrow $150 because a catering company was trying to seize his car. Then, in his mid-fifties, Bruseaux hit a new public low: He was arrested and charged with grand larceny and blackmail after a client’s husband alleged that Bruseaux attempted to extort $1,900 from him. Bruseaux claimed that the charge was retaliation for tracking down the husband, who had skipped town with much of his wife’s money.

Bruseaux was given one last opportunity to salvage his reputation. In 1943, the detective was quietly hired to investigate another incident of racial violence, a riot in Detroit. On a hot summer day—much like the one in 1919, when Chicago exploded into violence—a pair of false rumors spread through the city: that a group of Black men had raped a white woman, and that a mob of white people had thrown a Black infant from a bridge. When the smoke from the resulting riots cleared, 25 Black Detroiters were dead, most of them killed by police, as were nine white residents. Civic leaders prevailed upon Bruseaux to investigate what had happened. His detective agency, after all, had been founded upon the ashes of a similar incident.

Bruseaux arranged focus groups of Detroit residents and asked them about life in the city. With the help of a team of research assistants, he canvassed the city’s neighborhoods to better understand the context in which the riot erupted. His report blamed the violence and resulting deaths on social conditions, namely overcrowding and competition for jobs and housing.

Despite its insights, the report did little to restore the detective’s prestige. As Bruseaux got older, his fabrications intensified, even as he developed a late-life obsession with the use of polygraphs. In his last known interview, with Ebony magazine in 1949, he unfurled a sad tapestry of self-aggrandizing lies, claiming that he had personally handled some 4,000 cases, that he’d turned down J. Edgar Hoover’s job as director of the FBI, and that he’d led an investigation into a famous divorce case in which, records show, he played no part. The magazine printed his fabulations as fact.

In 1950, after a short illness, Sheridan Bruseaux passed away at Roosevelt Hospital in New York City, at the age of 60. Though he was once the toast of Chicago, his obituary in the Tribune consisted of only a single paragraph, buried in the back of the paper.

Emerging from nowhere, Bruseaux had fashioned himself into a Gatsby of Chicago’s ascendant Black bourgeoisie.

In the 75 years since his death, Bruseaux has mostly faded from history. Other than a few stray mentions in books about Marcus Garvey and Joe Louis, nothing of substance has been written about him. Bruseaux and his wife, Ethel, who passed in 1973, had no children together. Records show that Bruseaux had a daughter years before, from an extramarital relationship, and a single surviving great-granddaughter. When I reached out to her, though, she had little information to offer, noting that Bruseaux had not been involved in the life of her grandmother, who, to her recollection, never mentioned him.

Ethel, who was married to Bruseaux for 27 years, has numerous living relatives. She gave birth to a daughter before meeting her husband, when she was a teenager living in Baltimore. The daughter’s name was Dorniece; she was sent to live with cousins in southern Maryland.

I met Ethel’s great-grandson Damon Caldwell for coffee in Manhattan’s Columbus Circle, just a block from where Bruseaux died. Now in his sixties and retired, Caldwell graduated from Stanford University, followed by Harvard Business School, then enjoyed a long, successful career. As it turned out, his daughter, a doctoral student at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, was researching the changing nature of anti-Black violence during almost the exact years when her great-great-step-grandfather was investigating instances of that violence.

Caldwell had heard only vague accounts of Bruseaux, who, as a result of family lore, he’d always thought was a lawyer. Asked if Ethel had indeed hailed from a prominent Philadelphia family, as newspapers reported, Caldwell laughed: That was likely one of Bruseaux’s exaggerations.

Archival sources reveal that much of the professional backstory Bruseaux used to buttress the Keystone Detective Agency was bogus. During World War I, he was not employed in Europe by the Secret Service. According to his draft registration card, in 1917 he worked as a waiter on the Tacoma Eastern Railroad. He’d obtained an exemption from military duty by claiming that he needed to support his wife and mother. Nor did Bruseaux ever receive a law degree from the University of Minnesota—there’s no record he was ever even in the state. And while he was at one time employed by Chicago’s McGuire & White Detective Agency, it appears to have been in the role of telephone operator.

Bruseaux even appears to have been, at one time, the type of con artist he later investigated. In 1918, the year before he opened Keystone, a short article in the Chicago Whip reported that a “Sheridan Bruseau,” while pretending to be the head waiter at a local hotel, had fleeced a number of men by promising them jobs in the dining room in exchange for a fee. When the men realized they’d been deceived by Bruseau’s “smooth line of talk,” they threatened him. “Fellow employees testified to the unfaithful regard that Mr. Bruseau has for the truth, and seemingly are not surprised at this unlawful practice,” the article read. “It is also said that women have fallen prey to his beautiful word pictures to obtain them jobs as chambermaids.” (If Bruseaux added an x to his name to avoid association with his past misdeeds, it seemed to work—the Whip, which later set itself against Bruseaux, appears to have overlooked the fact that he had been in its pages before.)

Bruseaux, Caldwell and I agreed, was a complicated figure—a wealthy, charming man of tremendous talent who was also dishonest, profligate, and, at times, morally compromising. He stood as a paradox, someone who adopted advanced research methods in pursuit of justice, but also spread falsehoods when it suited him. Emerging from nowhere, he fashioned himself into a Gatsby of Chicago’s ascendant Black bourgeoisie. “It was refreshing to see that, at that time period, an African-American man could remake himself,” Caldwell told me. “He came from nothing and became something.” 

Would Bruseaux have achieved the same success if he had been honest about his past—if, while starting up his business, he’d copped to being, not a highly educated former government agent, but a mere porter with a two-year degree from a humble Baptist college? Almost certainly not.

Once he was established, however, his investigative skills were exemplary. By an act of will, Bruseaux became the very thing he’d claimed to be. Yet like the fictional Gatsby—a character who, Fitzgerald wrote, seemed to spring from his own Platonic conception—Bruseaux, though mastering a profession dedicated to seeking out obscure truths, hid himself in fiction. The raw facts of his own life seemed, perhaps, too shameful for candor.


© 2026 The Atavist Magazine. Proudly powered by Newspack by Automattic.
Privacy PolicyOpt-out preferencesPrivacy Notice for California Users