🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Specialists who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have cut back on police and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – featuring necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant comparisons may be the 2019 theft of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a series of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“It's a clear trend here,” said Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as quickly as possible.”

If the items were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, maybe by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because modern methods give gems a bigger and lighter surface area, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a leaked official review expected to be released next month criticising “significant” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say showing precious items in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are much harder to secure,” explained Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that makes it easy for thieves to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best security systems for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to repel attackers.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but historic institutions may be reluctant to uglify their appearance. Laser scanners can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am local time, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when security rotate and before the museum is crowded who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can raise the alarm more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the robbers accessed the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and breached a glass pane with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the conversation in the country about the 232-year-old structure had primarily centered on visitor management in recent years, and less on security.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about 50 permanent firefighters, but their mission is mainly to protect the collection from blazes and flooding. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all depends on political will and funding, and currently the nation lacks sufficient money.”