Louvre Robbery Shines Focus on Protection Concerns

Entering the world’s most-visited museum in broad daylight, taking eight pieces of priceless historical gems and vanishing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the most audacious of crimes, executed for international notoriety and ensuing Hollywood film treatments.

Experts who study trends in international art crime, however, see the recent heist at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the most recent in a series of quick-hit thefts centered more on the material value of precious stones or materials than the artifacts’ significance, continuing a pattern that has appeared over the last ten years in Europe, Britain and the US. The location, they propose, would have been of secondary concern to the thieves.

“You may ask why thieves who want to take expensive jewellery are breaking into a globally renowned museum rather than a Cartier store,” stated an expert in art recovery. “It's straightforward: it’s because these days a Cartier store is better protected.”

A series of aggressive retail store thefts indicate that many stores have beefed up their protection in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and wares no longer kept on display overnight. Museums, meanwhile, look more exposed, partly because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in older structures, and also the current economic climate in many developed nations.

“Since Covid, governments across the world have cut back on police and the arts funding,” said Marinello. “If thieves can get into the Louvre, it demonstrates how vulnerable our museums have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the objects – including necklaces made up of precious stones and hundreds of gems, the crown of a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a extremely expensive crown once possessed by a royal that the thieves dropped by the roadside on their way out – has inevitably drawn comparisons with the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa from the same museum, performed by the worker the thief.

Better points of reference may be the 2019 theft of valuables from Dresden’s Green Vault Museum worth over millions, the taking of a £4.75m valuable object from a UK landmark the that year, the 2017 robbery of a large gold coin from Berlin’s Bode Museum or even a series of robberies of sports memorabilia from American institutions.

“There’s a simple pattern here,” explained Marinello. “Smash, grab, and melt it down as rapidly as possible.”

If the items were to stay whole, specialists say, the thieves would struggle to find a buyer. “It's impossible to trade something as recognizable as the Louvre’s jewels on the legal marketplace”, said an art crime researcher of the Association for Research into Crimes against Art.

“They are too well-known, particularly given the cultural authorities has published photos of the pieces. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see paperwork confirming proper ownership before handling such striking pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often hesitant to announce publicly about the disappearance of well-known art pieces and would remain quiet out of embarrassment. Now, as art thefts are more reported on, the keeping and sale of stolen art is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes worthless, and you have to devise a plan to conceal it, maybe by passing it around dangerous individuals,” said Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the danger of an partner telling the police to cash in a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was highly improbable that the robbery had been ordered. “Commissioned theft 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 are apprehended, you go to jail. You can't display it to your acquaintances, you cannot leave it to your family.”

Altering stolen works by dismantling or re-cutting does reduce the value. When it comes to gems, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a larger and brighter appearance, and antique-cut stones would either draw unwanted attention or barter the price down for a concealment.

Importantly, however, melting down or re-cutting removes the evidence of the theft. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the items to locations with gem knowledge like a country, India or even as close as Antwerp, and find someone to remove the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The robbery at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about protective steps at the institution, with a unauthorized official review expected to be released next month pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” slow progress in modernizing equipment and noting that security cameras were lacking in many rooms. But security experts say displaying valuable objects in older structures with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are impossible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to secure,” explained Erin Thompson. “Many of them have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to get away, and there may be preservation laws in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The best security systems for structures should be designed “like a fortress”, said Peter Stürmann. “It should include multiple levels to deter intruders.”

Modern buildings are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built seismic detectors that alert about a broken glass in real time, but old museums may be reluctant to alter their exteriors. Detection devices can be difficult to fit to stuccoed ceilings. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be disabled during the day as crowds walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which took place between morning hours local time, was common of recent thefts, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. Frequently when guards rotate and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as extra protection.”

Advances in technology may have thrown up new gadgets that can notify more quickly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new methods with which to bypass protections. In the city, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a mobile equipment and breached a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in the country about the 232-year-old structure had primarily centered on crowd control in the past decade, and not as much on security.

The museum has an in-house brigade of about fifty permanent firefighters, but their purpose is mainly to protect the collection from blazes and water damage. “There isn't a rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to political will and money, and currently France lacks sufficient resources.”