Paris Museum Robbery Shines Focus on Security Issues

Breaking into the world’s most-visited museum in broad daylight, taking eight items of invaluable historical gems and vanishing into Paris traffic on simple scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Experts who study patterns in global cultural theft, however, see Sunday morning’s heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of quick-hit thefts centered more on the monetary worth of precious stones or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Germany, the UK and the US. The venue, they suggest, would have been of lesser importance to the criminals.

“One might wonder why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are entering a world-famous museum rather than a luxury jewelry store,” said Christopher A Marinello. “The answer is simple: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of violent retail store thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their protection in recent years, with armed guards on their locations and merchandise no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, on the other hand, look vulnerable, partly because of the in-built reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, governments across the globe have reduced spending on police and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The theft of the objects – featuring jewelry pieces made up of precious stones and 631 diamonds, the tiara of Empress Eugénie containing thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable diadem once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the robbers left by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, carried out by the Italian handyman the thief.

Better points of reference may be the recent theft of jewellery from a German institution worth over millions, the theft of a multi-million pound valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the 2017 heist of a valuable item from a European museum or even a series of robberies of collector items from US mining museums.

“There’s a simple pattern 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 find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the museum's gems on the legal marketplace”, said 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 released images of the items. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing legal possession before touching such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, museums were often reluctant to go public about the disappearance of famous art pieces and would remain quiet out of shame. Now, as cultural robberies are more reported on, the storage and sale of stolen art is risky business for any lawbreaker.

“If you steal a famous painting, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to devise a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “And you’re constantly exposed to the risk of an partner telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For similar reasons, an art detective said it was highly improbable that the robbery 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 newspapers. If you buy this, if you get caught, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Modifying taken items by melting down or reshaping does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with considerable risk because modern methods give gems a larger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either draw unwanted attention or reduce value for a coverup.

Importantly, however, dismantling or re-cutting eliminates the evidence of the crime. “I suspect that the robbers will try to bring the stolen goods to places with gem knowledge like Israel, another nation or even as close as Antwerp, and locate an expert to cut out the stones,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released next month criticising “significant” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But specialists say displaying precious items in older structures with a steady stream of guests comes with risks that are not possible to remove entirely.

“Older structures are more difficult to secure,” explained an art crime professor. “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 proper bulletproof glass.”

The best protective measures for structures should be designed “as a stronghold”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include several layers to deter intruders.”

Contemporary structures are fitted with state-of-the-art external CCTV cameras or integrated seismic detectors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but old museums may be hesitant to uglify their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to install to decorated surfaces. Sensors may also have to be disabled during the daytime as crowds walk through a museum.

The schedule of the robbery, which took place between morning hours in Paris, was typical of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “It's logical why thefts tend to happen at either start or end of day. It’s often when security change their shifts and before the museum is crowded who effectively act as extra protection.”

Technological progress may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given robbers new tools with which to circumvent security measures. In the city, the thieves accessed the museum’s first-floor window with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

An author said the conversation in the country about the historic structure had primarily centered on visitor management in the past decade, and not as much on protection.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about 50 permanent emergency personnel, but their purpose is mainly to safeguard the artworks from fires and water damage. “There isn't a quick reaction team,” Sciolino said. “In the end, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and funding, and at present France simply has no money.”