🔗 Share this article

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and ensuing movie adaptations.

Experts who study patterns in international art crime, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a series of quick-hit thefts focused more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, the UK and the US. The location, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their protection in recent years, with security personnel on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the financial situation in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how at risk our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and hundreds of gems, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by a royal that the thieves dropped by the street on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the theft of a multi-million pound gold toilet from a UK landmark the that year, the recent robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a spate of robberies of collector items from US mining museums.

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

If the artefacts were to stay whole, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to sell them. “It's impossible to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, commented an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

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

In the previous years, institutions 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 widely publicised, the storage and selling of taken items is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a scheme to conceal it, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been commissioned. “Commissioned theft is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It’s all around the world and in all the media. 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 contemporary methods give stones a bigger and lighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either attract notice or reduce value for a coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the evidence of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to bring the items to locations with diamond expertise like a country, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” delays in updating equipment and observing that surveillance were missing 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 eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” 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 are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best protective measures for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to repel attackers.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with advanced external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be hard to install to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security change their shifts and prior to the museum is crowded who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new gadgets that can notify more quickly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to circumvent protections. In the city, the robbers accessed the museum’s first-floor window 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 structure had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and not as much on security.

The institution has an on-site brigade of about fifty full-time emergency personnel, but their purpose is mostly to protect the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and currently France simply has no money.”