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 from all over the world.

ART has no price.

It is priceless
as things that really matter in life.

JMO

 

[Hexe]

We may never know if they were replicas or not.

One might think that if it were replicas France would scream that from the rooftops to save itself at least a bit of humiliation...

 

[Dotta]

"Tel Aviv-based Israeli business intelligence and consulting firm CGI Group
reportedly cooperated with Parisian authorities in the investigation of the spectacular burglary at the Louvre.

The company issued a statement on Monday announcing the request from the famous museum:

'In this extraordinary situation,
the Louvre has asked us
to identify those involved in the theft and assist in recovering the stolen jewels,
given our experience and success in solving a billion-euro theft in Dresden in 2019',
head of CGI Group told AFP.

However,
representatives of the Louvre issued a separate statement
in which they denied the words of the Israeli entrepreneur.

The Louvre management denied that it asked an Israeli company for help in recovering items stolen during Sunday's robbery,
an employee of the legendary Parisian museum told AFP on Monday.

French Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin
described Sunday's robbery as a 'failure'
for the French authorities and security services."

Link from my country's MSM:

Zwrot ws. kradzieży w Luwrze. Muzeum wydało oświadczenie

 

[Hexe]

Find it interesting they did not take the Regent or Sancy diamonds, or basically anything but the jewellery of Napoleonic empresses and queens (minus Josephine, it seems). I do not think they were grabbing things at random. The fact they dropped Eugenie's crown while fleeing, missed one earring from the Maria Amalia set and failed to burn the monte-meuble makes me think they were not that professional, or seasoned. Brazen, nevertheless.

 

[Dotta]

Find it interesting they did not take the Regent or Sancy diamonds, or basically anything but the jewellery of Napoleonic empresses and queens (minus Josephine, it seems). I do not think they were grabbing things at random. The fact they dropped Eugenie's crown while fleeing, missed one earring from the Maria Amalia set and failed to burn the monte-meuble makes me think they were not that professional, or seasoned. Brazen, nevertheless.

" 'It was most likely an inside job',
says one expert.

According to the investigation,
the thieves gained entry to the Louvre through a construction site.

'This clearly indicates they had helpers',
he says.
'Perhaps someone from the museum
or the construction companies involved in the work'.

(Yep,
they took advantage of Museum's temporary weakness in security IMO,
temporary window of opportunity which might indicate insider's knowledge.
JMO!!!)

Every group has a weak link

Even if the theft was carried out in a matter of minutes which demonstrates the thieves' considerable professionalism,
all is not yet lost:

'The decisive factor is always the human factor.
In every group, there's a weak link,
and if that link makes a mistake,
it can lead to an arrest',
explains the expert.

'But for that,
you need Inspector Chance'

[a character from a series of German-language publications
describing real-life crime cases
in which chance played a key role]."

Inspector Chance - I love it

No museum is safe

No museum can guarantee 100% security for its exhibits.
'Therefore,
it would be wrong to point the finger at the Louvre',
says an art law expert.

'Every museum faces a dilemma between ensuring security
and making exhibits accessible'."


More from my country's MSM
which follow this case closely:

Kradzież w Luwrze. Ekspert: To robota kogoś z wewnątrz. Jedno wyraźnie wskazuje, że złodzieje mieli pomocników

W ciągu zaledwie kilku minut złodzieje ukradli biżuterię o "nieocenionej wartości" z jednego z najsłynniejszych na świecie muzeów — paryskiego Luwru. Szwajcarski konsultant i ekspert w dziedzinie prawa dotyczącego sztuki Andrea Rascher wyjaśnia, kto i dlaczego może stać za tym zuchwałym napadem...

wiadomosci.onet.pl

 

[Inthedetails]

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.

My hunch is they either were stolen for an underground collector or they were stolen to hold as ransom. I hold either motive as equally possible.

I do not think the items will be melted down.

jmopinion

 

[OldCop]

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

I agee with a lot of his thoughts on this, but if this jewelry was snatched to be broken down into stones that could be sold individually, why not take a moment to grab to broken crown which held many valuable stones?

 

[Charlot123]

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

According to the newspapers, they left DNA on the crown, the helmet, one jacket, and the tools. They wanted to burn the lift, but didn’t have the time. I personally wonder about the threads on the window through which they entered.

 

[Charlot123]

My hunch is they either were stolen for an underground collector or they were stolen to hold as ransom. I hold either motive as equally possible.

I do not think the items will be melted down.

jmopinion

I paid attention to the fact that the items were uninsured. But - were they?

Of interest, in the Antwerp diamond heist, the stones were never recovered, but according to one theory, they were over insured by the owner, and then, stolen.

Half of these “heists” are insurance scams.

I think one has to look at the insurance situation. Were the items never insured? Or did they use to be insured and then the Louvre stopped insuring them?

 

[PrairieWind]

I paid attention to the fact that the items were uninsured. But - were they?

Of interest, in the Antwerp diamond heist, the stones were never recovered, but according to one theory, they were over insured by the owner, and then, stolen.

Half of these “heists” are insurance scams.

I think one has to look at the insurance situation. Were the items never insured? Or did they use to be insured and then the Louvre stopped insuring them?

I am guess that since these items were owned by the government and in the possession of the government, that insurance was deemed unnecessary (sort of self-insured) and insuring them would just cost the taxpayers a lot of money. Is anything in the Louvre insured (that is owned by France itself) ? I have no idea.

 

[Dotta]

My guess is
it was commissioned by a weird/mad collector
fixated on these particular items
(for whatever reason).

The criminals waited for the specific moment in time,
when security was at its lowest and some repairs were being conducted adding to chaos.

It indicates IMO!!!
there is a possible "associate" within the Museum itself or the builders.

But it gives me hope,
the Jewels will be recovered
(as the brazen perps seem to be sloppy)
and put into their Museum place
to be admired again

I will visit Louvre one day
to look specifically at them

JMO

 

[Dotta]

"Louvre reopens ​

three days after French crown jewels stolen.​

Visitors were welcomed back to the Louvre
from 09:00 local time (07:00 GMT) on Wednesday,
but the museum said its Apollo Gallery
- where the heist took place -
remained closed.

President Emmanuel Macron
urged ministers to speed up the introduction of security measures at the Louvre as it reopened,
a government spokeswoman said.

'We failed to protect these jewels',
the museum's director Laurence des Cars told the French Senate's culture committee on Wednesday afternoon.

She highlighted the Louvre's 'real structural issues',
and said she would like to close parts of museum for refurbishment to make it more secure.

Museums 'are not and never will be fortresses - they are by their very nature open',
she said.

This was the first time the director spoke publicly about the robbery,
which Macron has described as an attack on the country's heritage."

Louvre reopens three days after French crown jewels stolen

The world's most-visited museum shut its doors after jewels worth tens of millions were stolen on Sunday.

www.bbc.com

 

[Dotta]

Museum Director Answers Questions

Louvre jewels heist live updates: Museum director answers questions

Laurence des Cars is speaking for the first time since a gang of masked thieves - who remain at large - carried out Sunday's robbery.

www.bbc.com

Summary

- The only camera covering the balcony where thieves broke into the Louvre on Sunday was facing the wrong way,
the museum's director tells French senators.

- The museum failed to protect the irreplaceable jewels from "brutal" criminals,
Laurence des Cars says,
as she outlines how the brazen daylight robbery unfolded.

- She raises issues with the Paris museum's equipment, ageing infrastructure, and security cuts.

- Des Cars says she offered to resign, but it was rejected.