Louvre Heist Shines Spotlight on Protection Concerns

Entering the world’s most-visited art institution in the middle of the day, grabbing eight pieces of priceless historical gems and disappearing into the city traffic on humble scooters may seem like the boldest of crimes, carried out for global fame and subsequent movie adaptations.

Specialists who observe patterns in international art crime, however, see Sunday morning’s robbery at the Louvre as a more practical matter: the latest in a string of smash-and-grab thefts focused more on the material value of valuable gems or metals than the artifacts’ significance, perpetuating a trend that has emerged over the last decade in Europe, Britain and the US. The venue, they propose, would have been of lesser importance 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 high-end boutique is more secure.”

A spate of aggressive jewellery shop thefts indicate that many outlets have beefed up their security in the past few years, with security personnel on their premises and wares no longer shown overnight. Cultural institutions, on the other hand, look more exposed, in part because of the inherent reason of being public-facing institutions in historic buildings, and also the financial situation in many western countries.

“After the pandemic, governments across the world have cut back on law enforcement and the arts funding,” noted Marinello. “With criminals entering the Louvre, it shows how vulnerable our institutions have become. This is a horrible time to be a museum.”

The robbery of the items – featuring necklaces made up of eight sapphires and 631 diamonds, the crown of a historical figure featuring thousands of diamonds and a hugely valuable crown once owned by Napoleon III’s wife that the thieves left by the roadside on their way out – has naturally drawn comparisons with the historical theft of the famous painting from the same museum, carried out by the worker the thief.

More relevant points of reference may be the 2019 burglary of valuables from a German institution worth over €113m, the taking of a £4.75m valuable object from Blenheim Palace the that year, the recent robbery 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. “Break in, take items, and dismantle them as rapidly as possible.”

If the artefacts were to remain intact, experts say, the criminals would find it hard to find a buyer. “There’s no way to trade something as immediately identifiable as the Louvre’s jewels on the licit market”, said an art crime researcher of the a relevant organization.

“They would be immediately recognised, especially given the Ministry of Culture has published photos of the items. Even a private collector or an sales venue would want to see paperwork establishing proper ownership before handling such remarkable pieces.”

In the previous years, institutions were often reluctant to go public about the loss of famous works of art and would remain quiet out of shame. These days, as cultural robberies are more widely publicised, the keeping and selling of taken items is dangerous for any criminal.

“Taking a Picasso, it has to stay complete or it becomes valueless, and you have to conceive of a scheme to keep it in hiding, perhaps by passing it around difficult criminal actors,” noted Marinello. “There's ongoing risk to the risk of an partner informing authorities to cash in a ransom.”

For comparable factors, an investigator said it was vanishingly unlikely that the robbery had been commissioned. “Stolen to order is something from films,” he said. “No one would handle these items. It's global news and in all the newspapers. If you acquire these, if you are apprehended, you end up in prison. You cannot show it to your friends, you cannot leave it to your children.”

Modifying taken items by dismantling or re-cutting does lower the worth. When it comes to diamonds, it also comes with significant danger because contemporary cutting techniques give gems a bigger and lighter appearance, and older-style stones would either attract notice or barter the price down for a coverup.

Crucially, however, dismantling or reshaping eliminates the proof of the crime. “My guess is that the robbers will try to take the stolen goods to locations with diamond expertise like a country, another nation or even as nearby as Antwerp, and find someone to cut out the gems,” suggested Marinello.

The heist at the Louvre has already brought up concerns about security measures at the institution, with a leaked state auditor report expected to be published soon pointing out “considerable” and “persistent” delays in modernizing equipment and observing that security cameras were missing in many rooms. But security experts say showing valuable objects in historic buildings with a constant flow of visitors comes with dangers that are not possible to eliminate completely.

“Historic buildings are much harder to protect,” explained an art crime professor. “They often have nice big street-facing windows that allows for thieves to get away, and there may be building protection statutes in place that mean you are unable to install them with secure windows.”

The most solid protective measures for structures should be conceptualised “like a fortress”, said a security advisor. “There should be multiple levels to repel intruders.”

Contemporary structures are equipped with advanced external CCTV cameras or in-built vibration sensors that alert about a smashed window in real time, but historic institutions may be hesitant to alter their appearance. Laser scanners can be hard to install to decorated surfaces. Motion and sound detectors may also have to be turned off during the day as hordes of visitors walk through a museum.

The timing of the Louvre raid, which occurred between morning hours in Paris, was common of modern robberies, Stürmann said. “There’s a good reason why thefts tend to happen at either opening or closing times. It’s often when guards change their shifts and before the museum is full of visitors who effectively act as additional security staff.”

Advances in technology may have introduced new gadgets that can notify more rapidly and effectively, but it has also given thieves new methods with which to bypass protections. In Paris, the robbers reached the museum’s upper level with a vehicle-mounted ladder and cut through a window with a electric tool.

Elaine Sciolino said the discussion in France about the historic building had primarily centered on crowd control in recent years, and less on security.

The museum has an on-site brigade of about fifty full-time firefighters, but their purpose is mostly to safeguard the collection from fires and flooding. “There is no rapid-response unit,” Sciolino said. “Ultimately, the safety of the Louvre all comes down to government support and funding, and currently the nation simply has no money.”