On the publication of a book presenting the statue and its reconstructed collecting history, both I and David Gill looked over the evidence of the origins of the the so-called Leutwitz Apollo currently in the Cleveland Museum of Art and came up with some pretty disturbing discrepancies and a number of quite specific questions were raised which require answers. Cleveland assured observers that they would be holding some kind of a symposium this year to discuss Bennett's book, so far no details have been announced, and the year has half gone.
Then there are the solder tests. They were a key part of CMA's and Bennett's story that the statue and the current base were joined over a century ago, yet ("for some reason" - ahem) those tests are being repeated after I queried them with the original analyst. The results should be available about now - what were they? Do they support Bennett's 'soldered with old lead' argument or not? Either way, they raise questions about the way the CMA handled the scientific reports of the first set of analyses (details of which were never released).
Then there is the really odd discrepancy between two accounts of the academic relied on as confirming the reconstructed collecting history, the whole story of seeing 'bits in a box on an old estate' is not what the person concerned had written in another, published, account - one cited without comment by Bennett in his publication.