That's an interesting story that corrects a misconception I had after reading somewhere about the "ice pick" said to be the murder weapon (without a photo). I had assumed they meant the spike with a small wooden handle:
About how the "ice axe" was found, the additional details in this recent news story were also interesting:
"...he had authenticated the artefact beyond doubt and by several methods. There is a paper trail confirming that it passed into Salas’ possession. It bears the stamp of the Austrian manufacturer, Werkgen Fulpmes, a detail that was not made public; it is of the same dimensions as those recorded in the police report and it still bears the rust mark left by assassin’s bloody fingerprint, identical to the one in the photograph from the 1940 press conference."
from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/13/trotsky-ice-axe-murder-mexico-city
An earlier article from 2005 describes how Trotsky's grandson wanted Ana Salas to give the "ice axe" to a museum, following her announcement that she had it in her possession. She reportedly declined to donate it to the museum, saying she was looking for some financial benefit from it.
"One of the most notorious murder weapons in modern history, the ice-pick that killed Leon Trotsky, appears to have been found, 65 years after it was apparently stolen from the Mexican police. The daughter of a former secret service agent claims she has the steel mountaineering instrument, which is stained with the blood of the Russian revolutionary...
Trotsky's grandson Seva Volkov, who lived with his grandfather at the time and still lives in Mexico, is willing to provide samples for a DNA test against the blood on the handle only if Salas donates the pick to the museum in the house where the murder took place.
But she said: "I am looking for some financial benefit. I think something as historically important at this should be worth something, no?"
from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/jun/16/past.russia
So I'm interested in how this was authenticated "beyond doubt". The evidence listed in the Guardian article consists of:
(1) a paper trail leads to Salas' possession
(2) the "ice axe" has the stamp of manufacturer Fulpnes, which was not public knowledge
(3) it has the same dimensions as in the police report
(4) it has rust marks identical to those seen in the 1940 photo
Some background to my upcoming question: At this axe forum, we hear about fakes made to fool collectors. To make a few hundred dollars, some people will take a plain axe head (from the same period) and painstakingly duplicate the elaborate embossing and other details found on a collectible axe. This effort is done for a gain of just a few hundred dollars, compared to the thousands of dollars that I presume the historic Trotsky "ice axe" is worth.
So my hypothetical question regards the possibility (or not) of a duplicate "ice axe" being made in Mexico to fool the American buyer, with the original being sent to a higher bidder in Russia for a private collection squirreled away somewhere.
It's not so far-fetched-sounding as some "true life" spy stories. The paper trail exists for the possession of the authentic weapon. The profit motive seems to be there. Details that are not public knowledge (like the manufacturer) would be irrelevant, since the original would be on hand to copy. The same dimensions (as in the police report) could be duplicated by starting with a similar model "ice axe" found for sale on an auction site (see example below). And, the rust marks could be passably copied since the authentic "ice axe" would be on hand for duplication (even easier than trying to duplicate from a newspaper photo).
Here are photos from an online auction site, for a similar ice axe that could make a good starting point for a faked Trotsky "ice axe" (complete with the stamp of the same maker). This item was sold in 2015, obviously too late for the scenario, but it's evidence that these specific ice axes are still available.
Is there any proof of the provenance that couldn't be duplicated, as in this scenario?
