Suspects are caught, the loot remains missing. In police circles they talk about “cursed jewelry.” Where are the investigations six months after the break-in at the Paris museum?
April 19, 2026, 11:20April 19, 2026, 11:20
Has some of the loot from the famous museum already been sold or melted down? Was there a client – or a fence structure in the background?
After the jewel robbery in the Louvre, investigators are faced with unanswered questions about how the loot will be used.Image: keystone
Contradictions in the case
The investigators initially had no lack of clues after the robbery on October 19th. A source spoke of a planned handover of the jewelry from the Second Empire in a hotel room. Another claimed that the perpetrators wanted to flee from Lognes airfield in the east of Paris in a small private plane. Speculations about possible Russian influence also made the rounds early on – but they turned out to be unfounded.
Conflicting statements from the suspects caused additional confusion. By the end of November, investigators identified four suspected main perpetrators who are now in custody. One of them has several previous convictions, including for serious pimping and receiving stolen property.
Empress Eugénie’s crown was also stolen first.Image: x
A suspect initially stated that the loot had been taken from him immediately after the crime; he was “manipulated” and didn’t know it was the Louvre. He later changed his statement and spoke of alleged “Slavic” clients. However, the investigators found no evidence of this.
A central track?
According to information from investigators in the French daily newspaper “Le Parisien”, an internal security audit from 2018 is said to have played a decisive role. It is said to have detailed vulnerabilities in the museum’s security system. It is unclear how the suspects obtained the document.
According to the newspaper, from the perspective of the judiciary, a simpler scenario is now emerging: the coup could have been entirely planned and carried out by the alleged perpetrators themselves.
Amateurs or professionals?
In the early morning of October 19th, the perpetrators struck the Louvre – and disappeared again after just around seven minutes. They enter the building via a window reached with a lifting platform, break open display cases in the Galerie d’Apollon and specifically remove pieces of jewelry from the collection of French queens and empresses.
Empress Eugénie’s tiara.Image: Stéphane Maréchalle/Musée du Louvre
But the precise entry contrasts with the escape: a failed attempt to burn the escape vehicle, numerous traces – and the crown of Empress Eugénie (1826–1920), wife of Napoleon III, which the perpetrators left behind near the museum. It has been damaged but can be fully restored.
The Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau warned “Le Parisien” against hasty judgments. Although the procedure is often described as unprofessional, the perpetrators actually demonstrated coordination and efficiency.
The head of the unit in Versailles that specializes in organized crime, Philippe Franchet, also classifies the case in a differentiated manner. “I wouldn’t necessarily call it amateurism. The perfect, brilliant coup – there is no such thing,” he told the German Press Agency.
The open trail of the clients
If the coup may have been entirely planned and carried out by the alleged perpetrators themselves, one question remains unanswered: What role did the environment in the later exploitation play?
For Franchet, the crucial point lies less in the break-in itself than in what happens afterwards. Because even if there was no classic client structure behind the crime, the question arises as to how such loot gets onto the market.
In many cases, it is not the perpetrators themselves who ultimately benefit, but the structures behind them. Fences organize resales, have international contacts – and, if in doubt, decide not to enter into a transaction at all. “The more media coverage a case has, the more likely the loot becomes a problem,” explained the police commissioner.
“Cursed jewelry”
In such cases, the scene speaks of “cursed jewelry”: too well-known, too risky, hardly sellable anymore. This could be exactly the case for the missing jewels from the museum. Even a wealthy collector would do little to change this. Such pieces cannot be shown or sold unchanged – their shine makes them valuable and at the same time unsaleable.
What happened to the jewels?
For Franchet, it is conceivable that the pieces of jewelry no longer exist in their original form – dismantled and melted down. “Smelting gold is not a major technical challenge. With simple means, jewelry can be robbed of its shape and thus its origin.”
This photo, provided by Interpol, shows the jewels stolen from the Louvre in Paris.Image: keystone
In his view, money laundering also plays a role. The traces of the case could be lost in financial systems for years – and only become visible again later. “Perhaps in 15 or 20 years someone will be caught for large money laundering movements in this case.” (fwa)