How the Louvre robbers stole the show

The public prosecutor of Paris, Laure Beccuau, has stated that the jewellery heist at the Parisian Louvre museum in October was carried out by local petty criminals, rather than organised criminal professionals. The announcement has added to the global fascination surrounding the robbery, underlining the questions at the centre of the confusion: how was it possiblem for a band of amateur criminals to break into an institution as well-regarded as the Louvre, which holds some of the most recognisable works of art ever made, and steal the French crown jewels? And why do we care so much?

To try to answer the first question, security (and the lack of it) has been a hot topic in discussions surrounding the theft. The thieves took only four minutes in the Louvre to make away with the jewels (taking only seven minutes for the entire heist), and the museum’s security cameras did not even cover the balcony the thieves entered over. The entire CCTV system has been described by the director of the Louvre museum, Laurence des Cars, as weak and “aging”. She also suggested there had been a “chronic under investment in equipment and infrastructure.”

Even before a public statement on October 22, des Cars had warned of the obsolete system when she became director in 2021. Why, then, was this not remedied in the four years since? From 2018 to 2024, Louvre funds had been primarily committed to purchasing new artworks and exhibition spaces. According to a report by the Court of Auditors, over the six-year period, the museum spent €‎105.4m on new artworks and €‎63.5m on exhibition spaces. In comparison, only €‎26.7m had been spent on maintenance, and €‎59.5m on the restoration of the palace building. Maintenance and improvement of the museum had been the lowest priority, and the consequences are evident. It has taken the theft of the French crown jewels to spur the beginning of work to improve security, scheduled to begin in 2026.

This contrast, between meaning much to a select few people and nothing at all to the rest, positions the Louvre heist perfectly for online mockery

Social media attention was captured by the heist in a way that happens only a few times a year. The huge scale of public interest in the robbery was evident in the plethora of Louvre robber Halloween costumes, people pretending to “sell” the jewels on Vinted, and, my personal favourite, the running joke of “Louvre heist OC headcannons”. Public fascination was further captured by the appearance of a “Louvre heist detective”, a 15-year-old boy dressed in a suit and fedora, who was spotted on the scene soon after the robbery. The boy had no connection with the incident or the investigation at all, but his presence was enough to get people talking, and, most importantly, joking.

In hindsight, it is easy to see that the Louvre heist had everything it needed to become a viral sensation: a recognisable location, a cast of colourful characters, and a subject that lends itself very easily to jest, the theft of crown jewels. Despite being worth €‎88 million, the heist had very little impact on ordinary social media users, making it the perfect butt of a joke that most people could take part in.

That is not to say nobody cared at all; French President Emmanuel Macron called the theft an “attack on a heritage that we cherish”, National Rally (NR) leader Jordan Bardella called it an “intolerable humiliation”, and NR’s leader in the National Assembly, Marine Le Pen, described it as a “wound to the French soul”. Though some likely do grieve this loss deeply, most people, and especially international onlookers, simply don’t have the same connection with a history they have only heard in passing, about jewels in a museum they have never been to. This contrast, between meaning much to a select few people and nothing at all to the rest, positions the Louvre heist perfectly for online mockery.

Perhaps these new facts will begin to unravel the very pop culture-influenced perceptions most of us have of organised crime

Jokes that romanticised the unknown identities of the thieves were popular on social media, as well as counter-jokes that poked fun at their likely banal, mundane true identities. The announcement by the Parisian public prosecutor has somewhat vindicated these jokes; three men and a woman, all in their mid to late 30s, were arrested in connection with the robbery, and have all been charged with theft and criminal conspiracy. The thieves were all suspected to be from the same locality, the impoverished areas of the northeast Parisian suburbs. This, and their previously tame criminal records, has only made the heist a more surreal event. The Louvre heist, with its slick evasion of security, ingenious use of machinery, and efficient in-and-out nature, seemed at first glance to be the work of professionals, rather than seemingly ordinary Parisians. The DNA evidence was absolute, however, and thus four people sit in custody at this very moment.

Perhaps these new facts will begin to unravel the very pop culture-influenced perceptions most of us have of organised crime: of slick and professional career criminals “hacking the mainframe”, dodging lasers, and dangling from the ceiling to seize the treasure (think Mission Impossible and Ocean’s Eleven). One of the arrested worked as an unlicensed taxi driver, another was unemployed, and two were in a relationship and had children. All were completely unremarkable as individuals, yet ascended to infamy through one of the largest heists of the century.

The portrayal in entertainment media may eventually have a greater impact than the swarm of press which currently dominates the conversation

Newspapers still have the words “Louvre heist” hot on their printing presses, even a month removed from the event itself, and this is likely to remain the case for a while longer, especially in France. As investigations and trials progress, and new information is revealed over time, those words will continue to pop up in viral news. Perhaps, in a couple of years from now, some shocking tidbit of information will be revealed in one of the suspects’ trials, and you’ll once again see this topic amongst your daily headlines. Social media trend-hops much faster, however, and has already moved on from Louvre heist jokes.

We have yet to see how long-form coverage and entertainment media will portray the thieves and the theft. The public understanding (or misunderstanding) of organised crime stems in large part from the media we consume, and upcoming documentaries or movies about the Louvre heist have the potential to contribute to this, or to instead capture the reality of the situation. The portrayal in entertainment media may eventually have a greater impact than the swarm of press which currently dominates the conversation.