Paris Museum Heist Shines Focus on Security Concerns

Breaking into the planet's most popular museum in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable Napoleonic jewellery and vanishing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe trends in international art crime, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as something more prosaic: the latest in a string of quick-hit thefts focused more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the historical importance, perpetuating a trend that has appeared over the last ten years in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance to the thieves.

“You may ask why criminals who want to take valuable jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because nowadays a Cartier store is better protected.”

A spate of violent jewellery shop thefts mean that many outlets have strengthened their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, partly because of the inherent factor of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and partly the current economic climate in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the globe have reduced spending on police and the culture sector,” noted Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how at risk our institutions have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – including jewelry pieces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the tiara of a historical figure containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once possessed by a royal that the robbers dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, performed by the Italian handyman the thief.

Better comparisons may be the 2019 theft of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m gold toilet from Blenheim Palace the same year, the 2017 heist of a valuable item from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of thefts of collector items from American institutions.

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

If the items were to stay whole, specialists say, the criminals would struggle to sell them. “There’s no way to sell something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has released images of the pieces. Even a private collector or an auction house would want to see documentation confirming legal possession before touching such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to announce publicly about the loss of famous art pieces and would stay silent out of embarrassment. These days, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and selling of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a famous painting, it has to remain intact or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, maybe by moving it among dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the danger of an accomplice 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 newspapers. If you buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Altering taken items by dismantling or reshaping does lower the worth. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary methods give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a concealment.

Crucially, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the proof of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the items to places with gem knowledge like Israel, India or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps at the museum, with a unauthorized state auditor report expected to be released soon pointing out “significant” and “ongoing” delays in modernizing systems and observing that surveillance were lacking in multiple areas. But security experts say displaying precious items in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” said Erin Thompson. “Many of them have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to escape, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The most solid protective measures for buildings should be designed “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “There should be several layers to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or in-built vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in immediately, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter 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 timing of the robbery, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, 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 change their shifts and prior to the museum is full of visitors who actually act as additional security staff.”

Technological progress may have thrown up new devices that can notify more rapidly and efficiently, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a glass pane with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in France about the 232-year-old structure had primarily centered on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to protect the collection from fires and water damage. “There is no quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and at present the nation lacks sufficient money.”