Paris Museum Heist Puts Spotlight on Security Issues

Breaking into the planet's most popular art institution in broad daylight, grabbing eight items of invaluable historical gems and disappearing into the city traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for global fame and subsequent Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study trends in global cultural theft, however, see the recent robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts centered more on the material value of valuable gems or metals than the historical importance, perpetuating a pattern that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“One might wonder why criminals who want to steal valuable jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “It's straightforward: it’s because nowadays a high-end boutique is better protected.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have strengthened their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their locations and wares no longer shown overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look vulnerable, in part because of the in-built reason of being accessible institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have cut back on law enforcement and the culture sector,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a difficult time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the crown of Empress Eugénie containing nearly 2,000 diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by a royal that the thieves dropped by the roadside on their way out – has naturally been compared with the historical theft of the famous painting from the Louvre, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

Better comparisons may be the 2019 theft of jewellery from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the theft of a £4.75m gold toilet from a UK landmark the same year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a spate of robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“It's a clear trend here,” explained Marinello. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, specialists say, the thieves would find it hard to sell them. “There’s no way to trade something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the licit market”, said Lynda Albertson of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, particularly given the cultural authorities 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 past, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of well-known works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, 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, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner informing authorities to collect a reward.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the theft had been ordered. “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 buy this, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You can't display it to your friends, you cannot bequeath it to your children.”

Modifying stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with considerable risk because contemporary cutting techniques give gems 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 proof of the crime. “My guess is that the Louvre thieves will try to take the stolen goods to places with diamond expertise like Israel, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the stones,” said Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already raised questions about protective steps 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 missing in multiple areas. But specialists say displaying valuable objects in historic buildings with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Older structures are much harder to secure,” said an art crime professor. “They often have large accessible windows that makes it easy for criminals to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you can’t fit them with proper bulletproof glass.”

The best protective measures for buildings should be designed “like a fortress”, said a security advisor. “There should be several layers to deter attackers.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with state-of-the-art surveillance systems or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a broken glass in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be turned off during the day as crowds stomp through a museum.

The schedule of the Louvre raid, which took place between 9.30am and 9.40am in Paris, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. Frequently when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who actually act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more quickly and efficiently, but it has also provided thieves new tools with which to bypass security measures. In the city, the robbers 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 conversation in France about the historic structure had mostly focused on visitor management in recent years, and less on security.

The institution has an on-site team of about 50 full-time emergency personnel, but their mission is mainly to protect the collection from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the security of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and at present France simply has no money.”