🔗 Share this article

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study trends in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a series of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or materials than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to steal expensive jewellery are entering a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” stated Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their security in recent years, with armed guards on their premises and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Cultural institutions, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, authorities across the world have reduced spending on police and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the robbers left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably been compared with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the recent theft of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 robbery of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of thefts of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“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, experts say, the thieves would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable 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, especially given the cultural authorities has released images of the items. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before handling such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant 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 keeping and selling of stolen art is dangerous for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a Picasso, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to conceal it, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner telling the police to collect a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an art detective said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been commissioned. “Stolen to order is something from Hollywood movies,” he said. “Nobody would touch this. It’s all around the world and in all the newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot bequeath it to your family.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary methods give gems a larger and brighter surface area, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a concealment.

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

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be published next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were lacking in multiple areas. But specialists say showing valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are more difficult to secure,” explained Erin Thompson. “They often have large accessible windows that allows for thieves to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with secure windows.”

The most solid protective measures for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, noted Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced surveillance systems or integrated vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Laser scanners can be hard to install to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, 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 effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can raise the alarm more quickly and efficiently, but it has also given robbers new methods with which to circumvent protections. In the city, the thieves reached the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

An author said the discussion in France about the 232-year-old building had mostly centered on visitor management in recent years, and less on protection.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about 50 full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to protect the artworks from blazes and flooding. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and money, and at present the nation simply has no resources.”