🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Germany, Britain and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take valuable jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts mean that many outlets have beefed up their security in recent years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, authorities across the globe have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once possessed by a royal that the robbers left by the street on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better points of reference may be the recent theft of jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the taking of a £4.75m valuable object from a UK landmark the same year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of sports memorabilia from US mining museums.

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

If the artefacts were to stay whole, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to find a buyer. “There’s no way to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a individual buyer or an sales venue would want to see documentation confirming proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often hesitant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as art thefts are more reported on, the storage and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner telling the police to cash in a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the theft had been commissioned. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by melting down or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter surface area, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Importantly, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like a country, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and find someone to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released soon criticising “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were missing in many rooms. But security experts say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a constant flow of guests comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are more difficult to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that makes it easy for criminals to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “like a fortress”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a broken glass in immediately, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Laser scanners can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when guards rotate and prior to the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a window with a battery-powered disc cutter.

Elaine Sciolino said the conversation in the country about the historic building had primarily centered on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an on-site team of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to protect the collection from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”