The Scottish artist at the centre of an extraordinary court case over a painting he claims he did not paint, has spoken of his dismay at a row which has "bigger implications" beyond himself.
Peter Doig, an acclaimed artist born in Edinburgh, is at the centre of a £3.8m court case in US.
READ MORE: One in five Scots don't know who will care for them in old age
He says he feels "personal injustice" at the case, a "senseless litigation" which has left him baffled.
The artist, the subject of a lauded retrospective at the National Galleries of Scotland in 2013, has firmly stated a landscape painting, owned by a Canadian former corrections officer, is not by him.
The officer, Robert Fletcher, claims it is by Doig and now both sides will meet at a trial next month at the United States District Court for Northern Illinois.
Mr Fletcher's case contends that Doig's denial has scuppered a plan to sell the work - a large landscape - for what would likely be a sizeable amount of money.
At auction, Doig is one of Scotland's most successful artists, with his dream-like paintings selling for up to £16m.
Doig said he feels the case could set a dangerous precedent.
The artist said: "After four years of this lawsuit, plaintiffs have not presented a shred of evidence that I created the painting and instead, we found and conclusively identified the real author of the painting, a deceased man named Pete Doige.
"Apart from the personal injustice of this case, it has bigger implications: most artists lack the resources to defend against attempts to bully them into acknowledging works not of their creation as their own by unscrupulous plaintiffs willing to abuse the US legal system."
He added: "As a UK citizen, it baffles me that the US Court has allowed these opportunists' to pursue this senseless litigation...and set this dangerous precedent."
The painting is signed Pete Doige 76.
Mr Fletcher, 62, claims it is by Doig, and was painted when he was a teenager, whereas Mr Doig says it is by another painter with a similar name.
"I am 100 percent convinced that this is the man and that this is the painting I own,” Mr. Fletcher has said.
Mr Fletcher said he bought the painting from Doig after he was a teenager incarcerated for drug possession at Thunder Bay Correctional Center - a claim Doig also denies.
Mr Fletcher says he became Mr Doige's parole officer and also helped him find a job.
READ MORE: One in five Scots don't know who will care for them in old age
He and a gallery in Chicago believe the painting contains many similarities to Mr Doig's other work, including landscape, water, logs sticking out of the lake, and white lichen on the trees.
Mr Doig lived in Toronto in 1976 and says he has never been to Thunder Bay or been in prison.
"I did not begin to paint on canvas until late 1979. (Before that, I had done some pencil and ink drawings on paper),” he has said in court papers.
The sister of the other Mr Doige, Marilyn Doige Bovard, said she believes Mr Fletcher has made a mistake.
"I believe that Mr. Fletcher is mistaken and that he actually met my brother, Peter, who I believe did this painting,” she said in a court declaration.
She said the work’s desert scene may show the area in Arizona where her mother moved after a divorce and where her brother spent some time.
Doig spent the first year of his life in Edinburgh before his family moved to Trinidad.
In 1966, they moved again, to Canada.
READ MORE: One in five Scots don't know who will care for them in old age
He returned to the UK, to London, in 1979 and in the early 1980s studied at Wimbledon School of Art and Central Saint Martins.
A move to Montreal followed in 1986, three years later he returned to London and in 2002 went back to Trinidad.
He also spends time in Germany, where he is a professor at the fine arts academy in Dusseldorf.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here