FRANCE, Paris, Robbery at the Louve, Oct 19, 2025

[LittleSeaTree]

Details are sketchy but French media are reporting that three masked men broke into the Louvre shortly after opening time this morning.

They’re said to have used a goods lift to get access to the Apollo Gallery, on the Seine River side of the museum. (my note: I think a "goods lift" is a forklift?) Oops, I think it's actually a freight elevator.)

This ornate room is where what remains of France’s crown jewels are kept.

The thieves are said to have been carrying small chainsaws.

They made off with nine items of jewellery and they escaped on a motor-scooter. The value of the haul is being evaluated.

Louvre museum in Paris closed after robbery, French minister says - live updates

France's Culture Minister Rachida Dati said the incident happened as the museum opened this morning.

www.bbc.com

Pink Panther strikes again??

Or Lupin

 

[LittleSeaTree]

I understand that Inspector Clouseau is on the scene now, and is examining the wax. "Wax is not wax."

Does your dog bite? No. (Dog bites) I thought you said your dog doesn’t bite? That’s not my dog…. That scene was a family favorite, often quoted

 

[Spyralflare]

Interesting that most posting here believe the pieces were stolen for a collector while all of the art experts interviewed for news stories I read today think the pieces will be dismantled and melted down.
I really hope for the sake of history that they do indeed remain intact, even if they don’t resurface for years.
We live in sad times. It’s just “stuff,” but it’s unique and historic stuff that many people enjoy being able to see.

 

[Charlot123]

I believe the Minister said they were not insured in part because their value "was astronomical." So I was not quite correct. But, of course such premiums would be very high. Given what we see of security now, I would assume any insurance company would deem them "uninsurable" at this point. If insurance were provided, said insurer would dictate far more stringent security.

If these items are found to be replicas, then I guess the joke is on the thieves. But there would be catastrophic fallout for the Louvre as well.

We may never know if they were replicas or not. I think the fact that they were stolen is the biggest fallout. I have already seen so many jokes about it.

 

[Charlot123]

Interesting that most posting here believe the pieces were stolen for a collector while all of the art experts interviewed for news stories I read today think the pieces will be dismantled and melted down.
I really hope for the sake of history that they do indeed remain intact, even if they don’t resurface for years.
We live in sad times. It’s just “stuff,” but it’s unique and historic stuff that many people enjoy being able to see.

I read an interview of the ex-gangster that stole, with others, from a diamond bourse of Amsterdam. I shall try to find the article but he said that there was a “mole” inside the Louvre. That we only think that the security in Louvre was bad, but in reality, the thieves hit a convenient “time window”. He also said that the best strategy for the thieves would be to “sit” on the items and while he respects them a lot, everyone makes mistakes. The one he mentioned about his gang was that one inexperienced member threw garbage from Amsterdam in a tiny Belgium village.

 

[Charlot123]

Here is what Leonardo Notabartolo thinks:

Key takeaways from Notarbartolo's comments:
The thieves were well-prepared professionals. Notarbartolo characterized the culprits as a "very experienced team that acted very, very quickly". Their brazen use of a crane during opening hours and their rapid escape point to an organized criminal gang rather than amateurs.
The heist was likely an inside job. The swiftness and apparent ease of the robbery suggest the perpetrators had detailed, pre-existing knowledge of the museum's weaknesses. Notarbartolo himself relied on inside information for his heists, and he recognizes similar patterns here.
The valuables were likely quickly broken up. Notarbartolo, whose expertise is in jewel theft, pointed out that unlike paintings, jewels have a high intrinsic value that can be realized by breaking them down and selling the component parts. This makes them harder to trace than unique art pieces.
The thieves made critical errors. Despite their professional approach, Notarbartolo criticized a key mistake the robbers made: dropping the Empress Eugénie crown during their escape. As an experienced thief, he would consider this an unacceptable error that left behind a crucial piece of evidence.
The motivation was likely financial, not for a private collector. While acknowledging the possibility of a private buyer, Notarbartolo suggested that the thieves' actions were motivated primarily by financial gain rather than passion for art. The fact that they targeted easily deconstructed jewelry over the less-valuable but historically significant Regent Diamond supports this theory.
In summary, Notarbartolo viewed the Louvre theft as a sophisticated operation that exhibited professional planning but was ultimately marred by a few critical mistakes. His insights highlight the difference between stealing easily liquifiable gems and uniquely identifiable works of art, offering a perspective only a veteran thief could provide.

This is Leonardo Notabartolo’s own, Antwerp diamond heist

Antwerp diamond heist - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[SLouTh]

Allegedly a helmet was left behind…. Which may help with DNA ….

BBC Audio | The Global Story | The Louvre daytime heist that shocked the world

How thieves stole France’s crown jewels and what they could do with them

www.bbc.com

 

[Dotta]

Here is what Leonardo Notabartolo thinks:

Key takeaways from Notarbartolo's comments:
The thieves were well-prepared professionals. Notarbartolo characterized the culprits as a "very experienced team that acted very, very quickly". Their brazen use of a crane during opening hours and their rapid escape point to an organized criminal gang rather than amateurs.
The heist was likely an inside job. The swiftness and apparent ease of the robbery suggest the perpetrators had detailed, pre-existing knowledge of the museum's weaknesses. Notarbartolo himself relied on inside information for his heists, and he recognizes similar patterns here.
The valuables were likely quickly broken up. Notarbartolo, whose expertise is in jewel theft, pointed out that unlike paintings, jewels have a high intrinsic value that can be realized by breaking them down and selling the component parts. This makes them harder to trace than unique art pieces.
The thieves made critical errors. Despite their professional approach, Notarbartolo criticized a key mistake the robbers made: dropping the Empress Eugénie crown during their escape. As an experienced thief, he would consider this an unacceptable error that left behind a crucial piece of evidence.
The motivation was likely financial, not for a private collector. While acknowledging the possibility of a private buyer, Notarbartolo suggested that the thieves' actions were motivated primarily by financial gain rather than passion for art. The fact that they targeted easily deconstructed jewelry over the less-valuable but historically significant Regent Diamond supports this theory.
In summary, Notarbartolo viewed the Louvre theft as a sophisticated operation that exhibited professional planning but was ultimately marred by a few critical mistakes. His insights highlight the difference between stealing easily liquifiable gems and uniquely identifiable works of art, offering a perspective only a veteran thief could provide.

This is Leonardo Notabartolo’s own, Antwerp diamond heist

Antwerp diamond heist - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Re the possible breaking up the stolen items

This is disgusting.
Greed has no limits
These jewels are part of CULTURAL HERITAGE.
For the French and others
(Art and History lovers).
Art has no price.
It is priceless as things that really matter.

JMO