🔗 Share this article

Entering the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight pieces of priceless Napoleonic jewellery and disappearing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who observe patterns in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of valuable gems or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a trend that has appeared over the last decade in Germany, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of secondary concern to the criminals.

“You may ask why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are breaking into a world-famous museum rather than a Cartier store,” said an expert in art recovery. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with armed guards on their locations and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built factor of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many western countries.

“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 shows how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the items – featuring necklaces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the crown of Empress Eugénie featuring nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once possessed by a royal that the robbers dropped by the street on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the Italian handyman Vincenzo Peruggia.

Better comparisons may be the recent burglary of jewellery from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the same year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from a European museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the items were to stay whole, specialists say, the criminals would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable 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 cultural authorities has published photos of the pieces. Even a individual buyer or an auction house would want to see documentation establishing proper ownership before touching such striking pieces.”

In the past, museums were often reluctant to announce publicly about the loss of well-known art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as art thefts are more widely publicised, the keeping and sale of stolen art is risky business for any criminal.

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

For similar reasons, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “Commissioned theft is something from films,” 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.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern cutting techniques give stones a bigger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping 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, another nation or even as close as a city, and find someone to remove the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “considerable” and “ongoing” slow progress in modernizing systems and noting that surveillance were missing in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of guests comes with risks that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are more difficult to protect,” explained Erin Thompson. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to escape, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “like a fortress”, said a security advisor. “It should include multiple levels to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or in-built seismic detectors that raise alarm about a broken glass in immediately, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the daytime as crowds stomp through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which occurred between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when security rotate and prior to the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new devices that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also provided robbers new tools with which to circumvent protections. In Paris, the thieves accessed the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and cut through a glass pane with a battery-powered disc cutter.

An author said the discussion in the country about the historic structure had primarily focused on visitor management in recent years, and not as much on protection.

The institution has an in-house brigade of about fifty permanent emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to protect the artworks from fires and flooding. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all depends on political will and money, and currently the nation simply has no money.”