Skip to main content

Jewelry worth millions of dollars stolen from French museum

▶ Watch Video: Four more people arrested in Louvre jewel heist, prosecutor says

Burglars stole millions of dollars worth of jewelry from the museum of French luxury glassmaker Lalique in a daring early-morning raid on Sunday, just months after a stunning gem heist at the Louvre in Paris.

A gang of masked thieves broke in to the museum in Wingen-sur-Moder in northeastern France around 5:30 am, forcing a door before heading for the jewelry room and smashing open six display cases, a source close to the investigation told AFP.

“Around twenty pieces of jewelry were stolen. The loss is currently being assessed but could amount to several million euros, likely close to four million (over $4.5 million),” the source said.

Another source close to the investigation said the stolen jewelry was crystal, without precious gems, and could not be melted down.

The museum said on its website that it will be closed for several day because of the burglary.

“An alarm went off, but by the time the security company had completed its checks, it was a cleaning lady who arrived first on the scene and called the police,” the first investigation source added.

The CCTV footage is currently being examined.

The museum, dedicated to the Art Nouveau and Art Deco jeweler and glassmaker Rene Lalique, was opened in 2011 near the company’s factory.

FRANCE-ART-GLASS-EXHIBITION-LALIQUE
The making process of a crystal piece is shown at the Lalique museum in Wingen-sur-Moder, eastern France, on June 23, 2011. 

PATRICK HERTZOG/AFP via Getty Images

It houses over 650 “exceptional works” including Art Nouveau jewelry, Art Deco glass and contemporary crystal, according to the museum website.

“Well informed” suspects

The mayor of Wingen-sur-Moder, a town of 1,500 inhabitants about 37 miles northwest of Strasbourg, told local newspaper Les Dernieres nouvelles d’Alsace (DNA) he was angry about the burglary.

“All the alarms went off, just as they should. And then with the security company, apparently, there was a major failure on their part: they didn’t intervene right away, they didn’t inform the gendarmes,” Christian Dorschner said.

“They were surely well informed to carry out this job in that way; they must be … specialists,” the mayor also told DNA.

The Lalique museum was seen as a “sensitive” site, receiving special attention in the wake of the dramatic daytime heist at the Louvre museum in Paris in October last year, which put security at French museums and galleries under the spotlight.

Thieves made off with $102 million worth of jewelry, including some of the old French crown jewels, from the Louvre in a raid lasting less than eight minutes.

The suspected thieves have been arrested and charged, but none of the jewels have been recovered except for a crown that was dropped as the group escaped. 

A security audit found that 35% of the rooms in the Denon Wing, where the stolen jewels were displayed, were not monitored by security cameras, according to Radio France. The gems were also not privately insured, in accordance with French law.

Museums targeted in France

France’s museums have suffered a spate of break-ins in recent months.

Last October, a woman was arrested and charged over the theft of gold from the Natural History Museum in Paris.

In September, thieves snatched three porcelain works worth millions of dollars and classed as national treasures in a heist at the Adrien Dubouche National Museum in Limoges in central France. 

In November 2024, four men with axes and baseball bats smashed the display cases in broad daylight at the Cognacq-Jay museum in Paris, making off with several 18th-century works. That heist resulted in an insurance payment of over $4 million to the Royal Collection Trust, BBC News reported.

The next day, jewelry valued at several million dollars was stolen during an armed robbery at a museum in Saone-et-Loire in central France.

Judge in Don Lemon indictment asks to see grand jury records, adding to growing scrutiny of Justice Department cases

By CNN
(CNN) — A federal judge in Minnesota will probe this week whether grounds exist to toss the Justice Department’s case against journalist Don Lemon. It’s the latest example of judges’ growing skepticism of whether the department is behaving ethically behind closed doors in grand jury proceedings.Judges across the country have signaled they are willing to give far less deference to federal prosecutors than in previous administrations and have raised concerns about DOJ’s apparent abandonment of regular practices.Federal judges in Wyoming, Illinois and Virginia have either thrown out charges or seriously admonished federal prosecutors for missteps in front of the grand jury. The botched grand jury presentments have prompted a historical review of cases in Chicago and, in some courts, new rules requiring defendants to be notified when a grand jury declines to indict.On August 18, Minnesota federal Judge Laura Provinzino issued a short but extraordinary order demanding the Justice Department provide her a wide swath of grand jury materials related to Lemon and his co-defendants, including presentations made by prosecutors and case agents, and the totality of communications prosecutors had with grand jurors resulting in their indictments.Provinzino set a Tuesday deadline to provide her with the presentation by federal prosecutors and case agents related to grand juries empaneled in January and February. Further, Provinzino told DOJ to provide any introduction, legal instructions, witness testimony, closing arguments, and answers to questions from grand jurors.Lemon’s team has aggressively pursued obtaining grand jury materials and had asked for either grand jury records to be provided to the defense or, at a minimum, reviewed by the judge privately, citing “irregularities” in the grand jury that resulted in his indictment.“There is substantial evidence of grand-jury irregularities in this case,” Lemon’s team wrote in a recent filing.“Multiple judges, including at the Eighth Circuit, found there was no probable cause to charge Lemon” and his co-defendant Georgia Fort, the filing said.Mark Wolf, a former Massachusetts District Court judge and federal prosecutor, said it is rare for defense attorneys to ask for grand jury transcripts in federal court. It is even more rare that judges grant the motions, he said.“There is a high bar to getting grand jury materials,” Wolf said. “You have to have some direct or circumstantial evidence that there has been some defect in the grand jury proceeding.”In her two-page order, Provinzino wrote that she weighed the necessity of maintaining grand jury secrecy against whether grounds may exist to dismiss the case due to a “matter that occurred before the grand jury.”She did not say she had already found evidence of any misconduct.The Justice Department’s initial attempt to charge Lemon in January for appearing alongside protestors who disrupted a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota, was rejected by a federal magistrate judge, which “enraged” then Attorney General Pam Bondi, according to a source who spoke to CNN at the time.Lemon, a former CNN anchor, was later indicted by a grand jury along with several other defendants, including independent journalist Georgia Fort. Lemon has been charged with conspiring to violate someone’s constitutional rights and violating the FACE Act, which prohibits the use of force or threats to intentionally interfere with someone expressing their First Amendment right to practice religion.Lemon has pleaded not guilty to both charges. His team has aggressively pursued obtaining grand jury materials throughout the case, and earlier this month filed a motion to dismiss the case altogether.Justice Department losing credibilityWolf told CNN he does not believe the Justice Department’s credibility remains intact.“For good reasons, the Department of Justice’s reputation with judges generally has been injured,” Wolf said.In Chicago, defense attorneys urged Judge April Perry to release grand jury transcripts in the highly publicized case against protestors at an ICE detention facility outside the city.After reviewing those transcripts, Perry found federal prosecutors engaged in inappropriate actions, such as interacting with grand jurors outside the proceeding, ordering some jurors to leave in another hearing, and “vouching” to the grand jurors.Vouching is a practice where prosecutors present their own reputation while delivering their case to a grand jury. It is forbidden in grand jury proceedings because the practice effectively asks jurors to trust the prosecutor personally rather than only on the merits of evidence.“I have never seen the types of prosecutorial behavior before a grand jury that I saw in those transcripts,” Judge Perry said during a May 21 hearing.US Attorney Andrew Boutros then dropped the case against the protestors. Later, after reviewing the prosecutor’s conduct, Boutros opted to drop at least two more criminal cases, ordered a historical review of more than 100 grand jury transcripts, and launched reforms such as more training on grand jury presentations.“If I was a federal public defender or a private defense attorney, every case I get that’s indicted, I’m going to file a motion that is asking the judge to review the transcripts,” said Mike Fox, a current Cato Institute fellow and former Colorado public defender.“In my view, at this point, it doesn’t matter in which court it is, doesn’t matter if I have binding case law,” Fox said. “Every single case, the defense attorney should be filing, and the judge should be inquiring.”In May, a panel of three federal judges in Wyoming dismissed felony drug and gun indictments against nine defendants after the judges found the acting Wyoming US Attorney referred to defendants as “bad guys,” and “murderers,” and handed out business cards to jurors outside of the proceeding.Prosecutors opted not to appeal the judges’ order. Later, Wyoming federal prosecutors empaneled a new grand jury which issued a new indictment. The case remains ongoing.Fox believes the remedy is a more engaged judiciary where judges routinely witness grand jury proceedings.The current law doesn’t require judges to listen to proceedings, but some courts are issuing new local rules to ensure greater oversight. This spring, the Northern District of Illinois, where Boutros is US Attorney, enacted a rule requiring grand juries to alert a magistrate judge when a grand jury fails to issue an indictment.A spokesperson for the Justice Department told CNN in an email the executive office of the US Attorney provides training for prosecutors which includes grand jury practice.“On rare occasions where there is an issue, as noted in our Chicago US Attorney’s office, we took immediate corrective action and provided renewed, in-depth instruction on ethics and grand jury practice,” the spokesperson wrote.“Our US Attorneys will always follow the law and prosecute cases without fear or favor. Nobody is above the law, regardless of political affiliation. Beyond that, we don’t comment on pending litigation.”Grand jury presentments in the spotlight last yearLast fall, in the most high-profile and politically charged example of a problematic grand jury presentment, then-interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, took a proposed indictment against former FBI Director James Comey through a grand jury on her own. A magistrate judge in Alexandria, Virginia, reviewed the transcript and found Halligan may have incorrectly presented the law to the grand jury. The judge called the debacle “profound investigative missteps … to potentially undermine the integrity of the grand jury proceeding.”Halligan later admitted to a judge the grand jury hadn’t supported the initial version of the proposed indictment of Comey, and the full grand jury hadn’t signed off on the final charging document. That Comey case was dismissed for a separate reason, when a federal district judge determined Halligan wasn’t serving as a legitimate prosecutor. The Justice Department is appealing.But the grand jury handling in the Comey case and other cases continues to hover over prosecutors.Comey’s defense team, for instance, is attempting to pry into grand jury records in the separate, newer case against him, out of Eastern North Carolina. He is charged there with threatening the president by posting on social media a photo of the numbers “8647” written in seashells on a beach.The phrase 86 is sometimes used to say nix or get rid of something. Trump is the 47th president. Comey has denied wrongdoing in the case.“The highly irregular procedures that led to the indictment create a significant risk that the government misrepresented key issues of fact and law to the grand jury,” Comey’s lawyers wrote in a recent court filing, citing federal searches of Comey that they question.If Comey’s defense cannot gain access to the grand jury transcript, they at least want a judge to look at it to check the Justice Department’s work.Wolf said he is deeply troubled by the Justice Department’s recent actions and told CNN he believes it shows the American people that the department will use the law for partisan purposes.“It sends a message that a Department of Justice that should institutionalize our ideal of equal justice under law is not doing that,” Wolf said. “And that means anybody is vulnerable.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story

Related Stories

Latest News
A medida que se acercan las elecciones, Netanyahu presenta a Turquía como el nuevo enemigo de Israel
1 hour ago

A medida que se acercan las elecciones, Netanyahu presenta a Turquía como el nuevo enemigo de Israel

¿Por qué el francés se ha convertido en un punto conflictivo en la disputa comercial entre Canadá y EE.UU.?

A Black man once sentenced to death for murder fights for freedom after discovering his attorney defended the Ku Klux Klan

Michael Jordan’s ‘Last Dance’ 1998 Finals jersey could sell for over $10 million

EE.UU. afirma que tomará medidas enérgicas contra los países que hacen negocios con Irán. ¿Quién compra petróleo iraní?