🔗 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 humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe trends in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“You may ask why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is more secure.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, in part because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“After the pandemic, governments across the globe have reduced spending on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows 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 631 diamonds, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker Vincenzo Peruggia.

More relevant comparisons may be the recent burglary of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a multi-million pound valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the recent heist of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern 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 find a buyer. “It's impossible to sell something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, commented 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 proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of taken items is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a plan to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among 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 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 media. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you go to jail. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give gems a larger and lighter surface area, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a coverup.

Importantly, however, melting down or reshaping removes the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to bring the stolen goods to places with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to remove the stones,” said Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released soon pointing out “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing systems and noting that surveillance were lacking in multiple areas. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “They often 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 most solid security systems for buildings should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “There should be multiple levels to deter attackers.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that raise alarm about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their appearance. Detection devices 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 morning hours local time, was typical of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when security rotate and prior to the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

An author 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 security.

The institution has an in-house team of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the artworks 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 funding, and at present France lacks sufficient resources.”