After the Theft: Why Camera Upgrades Should Begin with a Risk Assessment
Photograph of Henry Moore’s “Reclining Figure 1969-70” courtesy of Yair Haklai via Wikimedia Commons, shared under the license CC-BY SA 3.0.
Following the theft of a $7,000 student sculpture, Toledo School for the Arts (TSA) is expanding its outdoor security system. Thefts of large, monumental artwork in public spaces might seem like impossible crimes to pull off, but many will remember the successful thefts of various Henry Moore sculptures over the last two decades. In 2005, thieves appeared to have pulled up to the Henry Moore Foundation with a flatbed and crane, looking like routine construction workers, and removed the two-ton “Reclining Figure” sculpture, which was then sold for scrap metal.
Toledo’s recent loss presents a reminder of the need to strengthen protection without compromising public access to artwork. Although it’s imperative to have cameras and surveillance on site, they shouldn’t be the only protection in place. The presence of cameras is most effective when paired with a security plan that considers how previous public art heists have been conducted. Physically protecting outside or public artworks should also involve due diligence, including a thorough check into the people who have access to the location, as sadly, these individuals often provide access or insider information that assists the thieves carrying out the heist.
Start with a Risk Assessment
Identifying vulnerabilities and weak spots through an in-depth security risk assessment is key and is the first step to ensuring that investments in surveillance and other technical systems are well placed. A basic but informed assessment avoids unnecessary spending, reduces the chance of costly changes after the fact, and guides a thoughtful approach that balances deterrence with openness. After all, art in public spaces – whether at cultural institutions, schools, or private estates – is meant to be seen and enjoyed within a visibly cared-for environment, not a heavily guarded state.
Cameras are Essential But Aren’t Sufficient on Their Own
TV may have conditioned us to think that “CCTV” magically captures the crooks in the act. And to be sure, cameras are a foundational part of any outdoor security plan. However, for outdoor artwork, cameras work best as part of a layered approach that might also include discreet sensors, environmental alarms, and clear protocols for staff response and community awareness, increasing the chance of deterring opportunistic or organized theft and improving the likelihood of recovery if prevention fails.
Designing Security for Art Is Different
Security measures will be most effective if informed by how public and outdoor art thefts occur, what steps have helped prevent them in the past, and what specific measures typically increase the likelihood of both catching a thief in the act and recovering the artwork if a theft is successful. The goal isn’t just to respond to a theft – it is to establish the kind of quiet safeguards that allow creative work to remain shared and visible while limiting vulnerability to theft.
About Jordan Arnold
Partner and co-founder JORDAN ARNOLD has over twenty years of combined law enforcement and private consulting experience investigating theft, fraud, and related financial crime involving art and collectibles, and providing market participants with risk management and security advice. As a prosecutor with the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, Jordan’s art crime cases included the recovery of a 1949 Salvador Dali watercolor and the dismantling of a criminal enterprise distributing counterfeit Damien Hirst artwork. Jordan is also the former executive vice president of a global consulting firm and head of its private client practice, and the founding principal of Jetty Partners. Read more about Jordan’s career here.