🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe trends in international art crime, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to steal expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A spate of violent retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their security in recent years, with security personnel on their premises and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the world have reduced spending on law enforcement and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the recent robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of collector items from US mining museums.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to remain intact, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “It's impossible to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see documentation confirming legal possession before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the past, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, the storage and sale of stolen art is risky business for any criminal.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner telling the police to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give gems a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, dismantling or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the items to places with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as close as a city, and locate an expert to remove the gems,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a leaked official review expected to be published soon criticising “considerable” and “persistent” delays in updating equipment and noting that surveillance were lacking in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying valuable objects in older structures with a steady stream of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” said an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for criminals to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The most solid security systems for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, said a security advisor. “There should be several layers to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to stuccoed ceilings. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The timing of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why robberies tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can raise the alarm more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the thieves reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old building had primarily centered on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and at present France lacks sufficient resources.”