Building Security: High "Touch" Beats High Tech

Spy vs. Spy... In the last Dispatch, Surveillance: Now Appearing at an Attraction Near You (Feb 16), I described London's "ring of steel," a series of closed-circuit video cameras tracking the movement of people and cars. And I mentioned (facetiously!) that I would test this security system myself soon.

Mission accomplished. My wife and I arrived in London on February 22 and traveled by underground to our hotel. I'm assuming that multiple cameras captured my image numerous times en route. But I slipped through.

Camera surveillance has its limits. That became wildly clear the same day as police reported the theft of $92 million (£50 million) in cash from a highly secure "money storage depot" thirty miles southeast of London during the night and early morning of February 21/22.

A highly coordinated gang had pulled off Britain's largest heist by using "muscle" (kidnapping and terrorizing the manager and his family) to thwart all sorts of high-tech protections.

Security cameras, burglar alarms and trained personnel naturally provide more security than otherwise. But they are not perfect. The human "touch" is powerful.

For an intriguing look at how related security measures and countermeasures impact museum real estate, read The Rescue Artist: A True Story of Art, Thieves, and the Hunt for a Missing Masterpiece by Edward Dolnick about the theft and recovery of Edvard Munch's The Scream in Oslo, Norway.

The message: You can improve security in your building. But, if you provide access to the public, you cannot deter determined criminals. (BTW, the fine art market makes the real estate market look positively pristine. It's quite a colorful collection of dealers, appraisers and customers, all operating totally outside any government regulation.)