Law enforcement tightened their pursuit of the Louvre thieves Thursday. Authorities detained five additional individuals connected to the crown jewels robbery, including a suspect linked through DNA evidence, the Paris prosecutor announced, expanding the operation across the capital and surrounding areas.
Officials stated three of the four alleged “commando” team members, as French media have characterized the robbers, are now in custody.
The overnight operations in Paris and neighboring Seine-Saint-Denis brought total arrests to seven. Prosecutor Laure Beccuau told media that one detainee is suspected of belonging to the group that entered the Apollo Gallery during daylight hours on October 19; others held “may be able to inform us about how the events unfolded.”
Beccuau characterized the response as an “exceptional mobilization” involving approximately 100 investigators working seven days weekly, with roughly 150 forensic samples analyzed and 189 items catalogued as evidence.
Nevertheless, she indicated the latest arrests did not recover the stolen items, a collection valued around $102 million including a diamond-and-emerald necklace Napoleon presented to Empress Marie-Louise as a wedding gift, jewels associated with 19th-century Queens Marie-Amélie and Hortense, and Empress Eugénie’s pearl-and-diamond tiara.
Only one artifact has been recovered thus far: Eugénie’s crown, damaged but restorable, abandoned during the escape.
Beccuau renewed her public appeal: “These jewels are now, of course, unsellable… There’s still time to give them back.”
Specialists warn the gold could be melted and the stones re-cut to eliminate their provenance.
Authorities revealed significant planning details. Nine days before the robbery, a moving company owner with a truck-mounted lift, the type used to transport furniture through Parisian windows, was mysteriously hired for a “moving job” through the French classifieds platform Leboncoin, similar to Craigslist, Beccuau stated Wednesday.
When he arrived in the town of Louvres, north of Paris, around 10 a.m. on October 10, two men ambushed and stole the lift truck.
On the heist date, that vehicle was positioned beneath the Paris museum’s riverside exterior.
Observers have noted the remarkable coincidence: a plot beginning in Louvres culminated at the Louvre.
At 9:30 a.m. the basket lift ascended to the Apollo Gallery window; at 9:34 the glass shattered; by 9:38 the crew had departed, a four-minute operation. Only the “near-simultaneous” arrival of police and museum security prevented the thieves from destroying the lift and preserved crucial evidence, the prosecutor stated.
Security recordings show at least four men forcing a window, cutting into two display cases with power tools and fleeing on two scooters toward eastern Paris. Investigators indicate no evidence of insider assistance currently, though they haven’t ruled out a broader network beyond the four captured on video.
French police have acknowledged significant gaps in the Louvre’s security systems, transforming an audacious theft executed as visitors toured the corridors into a national discussion about how France protects its treasures.
Paris police chief Patrice Faure told senators the first police notification came not from the Louvre’s security systems but from an outside cyclist who called emergency services after observing helmeted men with a basket lift. He acknowledged that aging, partially analog cameras and delayed repairs created vulnerabilities; $93 million of CCTV cabling work won’t complete before 2029-30, and the Louvre’s camera authorization even expired in July. Officers responded quickly, he stated, but the delay occurred earlier in the notification chain.
Former bank robber David Desclos characterized the heist as textbook and claimed he had warned the Louvre about glaring vulnerabilities in the Apollo Gallery layout. The Louvre has not responded to the assertion.
Two earlier suspects, men aged 34 and 39 from Aubervilliers, north of Paris, were charged Wednesday with theft by an organized gang and criminal conspiracy after nearly 96 hours in custody. Beccuau stated both provided “minimalist” statements and “partially admitted” their involvement.
One was stopped at Charles de Gaulle Airport with a one-way ticket to Algeria; his DNA matched a scooter used in the getaway.
French law typically maintains active investigations under confidentiality to protect police work and victims’ privacy. Only the prosecutor may speak publicly, though in high-profile cases police unions have occasionally shared partial details.
The audacious smash-and-grab inside the world’s most-visited museum stunned the heritage community. Four men, a lift truck and precise timing turned the Apollo Gallery into a crime scene and a test of how France protects its most valued possessions.
The five additional arrests bringing the total to seven suspects demonstrating the robbery’s complexity requiring multiple participants beyond the four-person entry team, with the expanded suspect pool suggesting roles including lookouts, getaway drivers, and planners who coordinated logistics without directly entering the museum.
The DNA-linked suspect representing the investigation’s first forensic breakthrough connecting a specific individual to physical evidence, with the genetic match likely obtained from the abandoned scooter or other items touched during the heist providing conclusive proof transcending circumstantial evidence or witness accounts.
The three of four alleged commando team members now in custody leaving one participant still at large, with the missing suspect potentially holding crucial information about stolen jewelry locations or representing the group’s leader who maintained distance from direct participation minimizing arrest risks.
The Paris and Seine-Saint-Denis overnight operations indicating investigators targeted specific addresses based on forensic evidence or informant intelligence, with the simultaneous raids designed to prevent suspects from warning accomplices and disposing of evidence once authorities moved against the network.
Prosecutor Beccuau’s statement that detainees “may be able to inform us about how the events unfolded” suggesting some arrested individuals held supporting roles rather than direct participation, with their knowledge potentially filling investigative gaps about planning phases, equipment acquisition, and post-robbery activities.
The “exceptional mobilization” involving 100 investigators working continuously represents massive resource commitment typical for high-profile cultural property crimes, with the staffing level indicating French authorities view the Louvre robbery as national priority justifying extraordinary expense.
The 150 forensic samples analyzed and 189 evidence items seized quantifying the investigation’s scope, with the volume suggesting thorough processing of the crime scene, vehicles, and locations associated with suspects generating substantial physical evidence requiring laboratory examination.
The failure to recover stolen items despite seven arrests indicating either the jewelry remains hidden in undiscovered locations or has already been transferred to fences or organized crime networks beyond investigators’ immediate reach, with the absence dampening celebration of the arrests.
The $102 million valuation representing the collection’s insurance and auction market worth rather than street value, with stolen historical artifacts typically worth far less to criminal buyers than legitimate purchasers willing to pay premiums for documented provenance and legal ownership.
The Napoleon necklace’s wedding gift provenance and association with Empress Marie-Louise providing historical significance beyond monetary value, with the artifact’s connection to French imperial history making its theft symbolically offensive to national heritage beyond the financial loss.
The Queens Marie-Amélie and Hortense jewels and Empress Eugénie’s tiara representing 19th-century French royal collections now held in public trust, with their theft depriving French citizens of cultural patrimony that belongs collectively to the nation rather than any individual.
The recovered Eugénie crown found damaged but restorable providing both evidence and hope, with the artifact’s abandonment during escape suggesting either the thieves deemed it too identifiable to fence or panicked during their flight dropping items to facilitate faster movement.
Beccuau’s appeal characterizing the jewels as “now unsellable” acknowledging that high-profile stolen art and jewelry become nearly impossible to sell legally, with auction houses and legitimate dealers refusing to handle items on stolen art databases and serious collectors avoiding purchases that could result in criminal prosecution or asset forfeiture.
The expert warnings about melting gold and re-cutting stones representing the worst-case scenario where historical artifacts are destroyed for raw material value, with the irreversible process eliminating cultural significance to extract only precious metal and gem worth that constitutes fraction of intact historical object values.
The nine-day advance planning timeline indicating methodical preparation rather than opportunistic crime, with the October 10 lift truck theft demonstrating forward thinking about equipment acquisition that would leave no ownership trail connecting vehicles to the perpetrators.
The Leboncoin classified advertisement luring the moving company owner representing deception sophistication, with the fake job posting creating plausible reason for the lift truck to appear at the meeting location without arousing suspicion until the ambush occurred.
The Louvres town ambush location creating the remarkable coincidence observers noted, with the geographic wordplay from Louvres to Louvre providing dark humor in an otherwise serious criminal investigation.
