NEW YORK – Just days after the stunning robbery of the Louvre in Paris, speculation is growing over the whereabouts of the luxurious stolen jewels that once adorned members of France's royal family.
Several experts warn that artifacts worth more than $100 million (88 million euros) could soon – if not already – be melted or broken into pieces. Some say that if successful, these smaller pieces can later be put up for sale as part of a new necklace, earrings or other jewelry without drawing too much attention.
“You don't even have to put them on the black market, just put them in a jewelry store,” said Erin Thompson, a professor of art crime at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. “It could be sold down the street from the Louvre.”
Thompson and others say this is becoming increasingly common with stolen jewelry and metal items, noting that it is a way for thieves to try to cover their tracks and make money. That doesn't mean anyone can publicly wear one of the French crown jewels stolen on Sunday — and finding a market to sell all the artifacts will be incredibly difficult after “everyone and their sister” has seen photos of them over the past week, said Christopher Marinello, a lawyer and founder of Art Recovery International.
Jewelry can be difficult to monetize
“By breaking them into pieces, they will hide their theft,” Marinello said, adding that the items could become even more “traceless” if they were taken out of France through jewel cutters and reliable supply chains to other countries.
However, such items are often sold for a fraction of the value of the stolen items – due to their smaller size and because melting down or destroying high-profile items will rob them of their historical value.
This is not a simple process.
“The real art in art heist is not the theft, but the sale,” explained Robert Wittman, former senior investigator for the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Art Crimes Team. Wittman, who has since opened his own private practice, said the people behind such robberies are usually “better criminals or thieves than businessmen.”
Unlike others, Wittman is skeptical of the Sunday thieves successfully monetizing artifacts they stole from the Louvre, including an emerald necklace and earrings, two crowns, two brooches, a sapphire necklace and one earring worn by 19th-century royalty. He notes that gemstones can still be identified by their purity, for example, and gold that was refined when the pieces were made hundreds of years ago is not as pure as what is typically in demand today.
“Because of what they are, there's really no point in destroying them,” Wittman said, pointing out the risks associated with selling such high-profile stolen goods.
Scott Guginski, executive vice president of the Jewelers Safety Alliance, a nonprofit trade association dedicated to preventing jewelry-related crimes, also notes the age and quality of the artifacts' diamonds. He suspects they probably aren't being graded.
“It's not something you can sell on the open market. It's not something you can go through an auction house,” said Guginsky, who formerly led the New York Police Department's theft squad.
Given the extensive preparation the thieves likely put into this case, Guginsky believes they have a plan to sell the jewelry, even if they first decide to sit on the jewelry and wait out suspicions.
“I can’t imagine them stealing it without having any idea what they want to do,” he said. “There will always be someone willing to buy stolen jewelry. Whatever it is, someone will buy it.”
Sarah Youd, CEO and general counsel of the Jewelers Vigilance Committee, notes that most jewelry businesses have anti-money laundering programs in place and pay attention to red flags such as unusual orders, repeat purchases and secrecy requirements.
However, she and others say the age of some jewelry—if broken down properly—can actually make it difficult to trace. For example, new gemstones sometimes have a laser mark on the inside that can be evaluated in a laboratory. But “since these are historical works, it is unlikely that they have such distinctive features,” Youd noted.
Experts like Thompson say larger gems can be recut to the point of being unrecognizable. The challenge is finding people who have the skills to do it without asking too many questions, but it is possible, she said.
It is not known whether the people behind Sunday's robbery had those contacts or were specific buyers. But it's also important to note that “the guys who actually go into museums are usually all employees, and they almost always get caught in these cases,” Thompson added.
Chances of recovery seem dim
She and others say museums have increasingly seen a string of similar thefts in recent years. Thompson notes that theft from storage may go undetected longer: The British Museum in London, which accused a former curator of stealing artifacts and selling them online, is still trying to recover some of the 2,000 stolen items.
Some former thieves have demanded ransoms for stolen artworks in general or have been waiting for a potential “no questions asked” reward from the insurance company, which can amount to about a 10% discount for some insured works in Europe, Thompson says. However, the jewelry stolen from the Louvre on Sunday was reportedly not insured by a private company.
Sometimes a government offer of a reward for information about a high-profile robbery can also speed up an investigation, although the French government has not yet made such an incentive public. If the situation changes, or if promising leads emerge from the evidence left behind at the Louvre, experts like Wittman say it could increase the chances of the artifacts being recovered.
However, as time passes, others feel that the fate of historical treasure finds looks murky.
“I think they will catch the criminals,” Marinello said. “But I don't think they'll find them with the jewelry intact.”
Originally published:
