Features
Ottawa police detective Akiva Geller and the case of the famed purloined Yousef Karsh photograph
By MYRON LOVE It had all the elements of a novel, heist movie or televison episode – a brazen art thief and forger, an iconic work of art, secret storage lockers, DNA and an international trail of crumbs to follow ..and Ottawa police service detective (also a former Winnipegger) Akiva Geller was right in the middle of the action.
The case revolved around the theft from the Fairmont Chateau Laurier Hotel of an iconic photograph of Winston Churchill, taken in 1941, \by the world famous photographer Yousef Karsh. Karsh and his wife, Estrellita, lived at the classy hotel for 18 years. Toward the end of his life, the photographer donated that print – “The Roaring Lion” – along with several others to the hotel. The print, valued at $20,000, was hung in the hotel’s reading room. It was reported stolen – and replaced with a forgery – in the summer of 2022.
Geller joined the Ottawa police force in 2012 following a 14-year career in the Canadian military.
He recalls that he initially considered becoming a pharmacist. He was inspired to change his plans by the yeoman work of the Canadian soldiers who helped stem the tide during the great flood here in 1997.
“That kind of community service resonated with me,’ he says. “I appreciated the hands-on aspect of it all.”
He enlisted the next year.
While serving in the military largely in a series of administrative and teaching capacities, Geller began taking classes at Algonquin College in security management that led to his taking a criminology program – and degree – at Carleton University.
He left the military in 2012 to join the Ottawa police force. He began his policing career as a patrol officer. He was promoted to the investigative branch in 2020.
Now, unlike what we may see on television, being a police detective is not a case of investigating the murder of the week. Geller notes that much of his time is spent looking into suspicious deaths – including overdoses. A high profile case such as the Karsh photo heist comes along once in a lifetime for most police detectives.
This articular story begins, according to Geller, somewhere between late December 2021, and mid-January 2023, when an individual who has since been identified as Jeffrey Wood,walked into the hotel, removed the framed portrait print from the wall, and replaced it with a copy on which Wood had forged Karsh’s signature. At the time, the hotel was largely shut down due to the Covid lockdowns; thus few people were around.
The switch wasn’t discovered, Geller reports, until the following August, when hotel engineer Bruno Lair noticed that the framed print was a little off kilter. When he went to straighten it, he saw that the portrait was hung by a wire – with holes in the wall where screws had held the portrait in place.
“Wood was identified as the seller after we obtained the response to a ‘Mutual Legal Assistance Request’ sent o the United Kingdom,” Geller recalls. “In the response, Sotheby’s London gave us his information, including scanned copies of his passport and IDs.”
The Hotel GM and staff contacted the Yousuf Karsh estate and spoke to the director, Jerry Fielder, who, it was assumed, could verify whether the fraudulent portrait signature was forged, Geller continues. He was sent a picture of the signature and fake portrait, confirmed it was forged and that the portrait was a fake. The hotel reported the theft of the authentic Roaring Lion to Ottawa Police, at which time
Geller began his investigation. Geller goes on to say: “In searching for the authentic portrait I sourced two photos of the authentic portrait on the wall before it was stolen, one from Trip Advisor and the other from Twitter. Both had the portrait signature clearly visible so I could compare them to other signatures I found.
“I came across the Sotheby’s London Auction from May 2022 in which a portrait with a very similar size and signature was sold,” Geller says. “I compared the signature to the ones I sourced from online and determined they were the same. I asked Library and Archives Canada to assist in examining the fake print and also in comparing the signatures. While signature analysis is not in their expertise, they were able to advise that it was highly probable that they were the same. With this I was able to complete a Mutual Legal Assistance Request to the United Kingdom for assistance in obtaining the details of the Sotheby’s Auction. London Metropolitan Police assisted in obtaining the information on the auction and sent it back to me here in Canada. This took almost a year to obtain because of the levels of approvals, editing and paperwork involved.”
Sotheby’s London’s documents identified the seller of the Roaring Lion portrait as well as details about him, communications they had with him and photographs of the portrait before it was obtained by Sotheby’s. Wood was identified as the seller.
“I wrote numerous production orders to all of Wood’s known bank accounts, phone numbers, and credit cards,” Geller recalls. “Once I received the return from his phone company I had to go line by line through his phone bills. There I found a phone call to a storage unit here in Ottawa.”
I wrote a search warrant for the storage locker and a production order for the information on the locker and owner. I executed the search warrant and, in the locker, we found a second fake Churchill print,” he reports. “We also found a toothbrush which we believed would have Wood’s DNA on it. We sent the toothbrush directly to the Centre for Forensic Sciences in Ontario. They compared the DNA from the toothbrush to DNA obtained from inside the fake portrait which was put up in the real one’s place.”
The next piece of the puzzle was to reclaim the portrait to return it to the Chateau Laurier. The drawback here that the buyer of the portrait was an Italian lawyer – one Nicola Castinelli. In Italy, Geller notes, if you buy stolen items in good faith – in other words, if you didn’t know the item was stolen – you have a legal claim to the property, which would mean that you would have to be taken to court to have you relinquish it.
Geller reports that the Italian carabinieri in Rome sent officers to visit the buyer in Genoa and persuaded him to return the portrait in return for what he paid.
Wood was arrested last April. At his hearing on March 14, he pleaded guilty.
Geller reports that, although the maximum sentence is 14 years in prison, the prosecution is requesting of the court a two year sentence while his lawyer is asking for a suspended sentence.
As for the portrait, it was reframed and remounted at the chateau Laurier in the former reading room, which has been converted into a lounge. He adds that the hotel now has a lot more security in place.
“It was a nice reinstallation ceremony,” Geller says.
Mrs. Karsh (who is in her 90s) even wrote a letter to the hotel expressing her appreciation about the portrait being “back home”, he adds.
Features
Hair straightening at Sets on Corydon
Features
Ontario Online Casinos Let Players Set Daily, Weekly and Monthly Deposit Limits
A deposit limit sets a ceiling on how much money someone can add to an online gambling account. In Ontario’s regulated market, players can choose limits covering 24 hours, seven days and one month, with the website’s system enforcing the amounts they select.
The settings are straightforward, but the timing deserves attention. A daily allowance may sit within weekly and monthly caps, while an increase can involve a waiting period. For adults using Chrome on a Chromebook, understanding these account rules starts with knowing where to find them.
Finding the Settings and Choosing a Period
Deposit controls sit within the gambling website’s account menus. The Tooniebet Ontario responsible gaming page is an operator-specific resource readers can consult alongside their account settings. ToonieBet is operated by Canadix Limited and regulated by the AGCO under an agreement with iGaming Ontario.
Ontario’s standards require an easy and obvious way to set financial and time limits during registration and afterward. Players must be offered deposit and loss limits when signing up, and the controls must remain easy to reach and change once an account is open.
Menu names differ between sites. Published examples place deposit limits under account settings or responsible-gaming tools, where players can select an amount and a period.
Each type of limit measures something different. Deposit limits cap money added to the account. Loss limits restrict net losses after winnings are taken into account, while time limits govern playing time. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance explains all three.
For Chromebook users, these settings are managed through the website’s account interface. Chrome’s own permissions handle separate browser functions, such as access to location information.
How Several Limits Apply to One Deposit
Players can have daily, weekly and monthly limits running together. A deposit must fit within every active cap.
Take a hypothetical account with limits of CAD $40 daily, CAD $100 weekly and CAD $250 monthly. These figures illustrate the process.
If someone has already deposited CAD $90 during the weekly period, the remaining weekly allowance is CAD $10. That becomes the most they can add, even when the daily limit has more room. Reaching the monthly cap would likewise block another deposit until some monthly allowance becomes available.
This is why checking all active limits matters. A new day may bring fresh daily capacity while the weekly or monthly total remains close to its ceiling. The longer periods continue to apply as the shorter one refreshes.
When Money Drops Out of a Rolling Window
The next question is when previous deposits stop counting toward a cap. Some sites use rolling periods, which track elapsed time from individual deposits.
Published Ontario policies include daily windows of 24 hours, weekly windows of 168 hours and monthly windows of 720 hours, equivalent to 30 days. Under that approach, each deposit frees up its corresponding allowance once it falls outside the window.
Suppose someone has a CAD $100 rolling weekly limit and deposits CAD $25 on Friday, followed by CAD $75 on Saturday. Seven days after Friday’s deposit, CAD $25 becomes available again. The other CAD $75 returns seven days after Saturday’s deposit.
Leaving the restored Friday allowance unused means it combines with Saturday’s restored amount. At that point, the full CAD $100 is available. Reviewing deposit dates and times helps explain how much room remains within a rolling period.
Changing a Cap Takes a Separate Step
A limit refreshing follows the schedule already attached to the account. Raising that limit requires a request and a wait.
Ontario’s standards require at least 24 hours before a player’s request to relax or remove an established limit can take effect. The existing limit remains enforceable during the cooling-off period.
Operators publish their own timings. Documented examples include a seven-day wait for deposit-limit increases or removals. Another published schedule allows increases after one day for a daily cap, seven days for a weekly cap and 30 days for a monthly cap.
Lower limits take effect immediately under these published policies. Some policies also restart the waiting period when a player requests another increase while an earlier change is pending. The effective date shows which amount currently applies.
Other Controls and Support
Deposit limits work alongside loss limits, time limits, short breaks and self-exclusion. Together, these give players ways to restrict account funding, gambling activity or access.
Ontario-regulated online casino play is restricted to adults aged 19 and older who are physically in Ontario. Gambling involves financial risk.
For concerns about your gambling or someone else’s, ConnexOntario offers free, confidential information and referral support around the clock. Call 1-866-531-2600 or text CONNEX to 247247. Standard message and data rates may apply.
Features
What “Best Odds” Really Means When Comparing Gambling Review Websites
The phrase best odds appears frequently in gambling discussions, but it is surprisingly easy to use imprecisely. MonsterBetList is primarily a casino review and rankings website, not a dedicated live sportsbook odds comparison terminal. That difference is central to evaluating what its reviews can and cannot establish. A casino rating may explain payout conditions, licence information and bonus restrictions, while a claim about the best available price on a sporting outcome requires a different kind of evidence altogether.
Odds and ratings answer different questions
Sports betting odds represent a price offered on a specified outcome. A review rating is an editorial judgement built from multiple criteria. These two numerical systems cannot be substituted for one another. A bookmaker rated highly for service may offer a less competitive price on a particular match, while a service with a more attractive price may impose different limits or verification rules.
Similarly, a casino review can discuss return-to-player statistics, but RTP is not the same as sportsbook odds. RTP describes a theoretical long-run percentage built into a game model. It does not tell a reader what will happen in one session and it is not an individually negotiable market quotation.
What makes sports odds comparable?
A fair odds comparison starts with identical selections: the same event, outcome, market rules and settlement conditions. Comparing a three-way football result with a draw-no-bet price is invalid because the products pay under different circumstances. The observation time also matters; displayed prices can change quickly as market information or trading decisions evolve.
The numerical format should be standardised. Decimal odds provide one convenient representation, but American and fractional formats express the same underlying idea differently. Converting these formats is straightforward. What matters is the net price, the operator’s rules and whether the quoted offer remains available when reviewed.
Overround explains the hidden cost of many markets
In a simplified two-outcome market, dividing one by each decimal price produces an implied probability. If the implied probabilities add to more than 100%, the excess is commonly described as the bookmaker’s overround. It is one way of understanding the margin embedded in prices, although individual market structure and adjustments can complicate the interpretation.
This concept explains why the word best should not be attached to a price without context. A strong headline may look appealing yet represent an ordinary margin after calculation. More importantly, any single quote is time-dependent. Genuine comparison requires a dated observation and equivalent market rules; broad editorial praise is not enough.
What casino rankings can establish instead
MonsterBetList publishes casino reviews and guides addressing licences, bonuses, payout experiences and responsible gambling. Those topics are relevant to evaluating consumer risk and service quality. A report about the length of a withdrawal process, for example, can be useful if its methodology is transparent. A bonus review can help identify restrictive wagering requirements that marketing headlines omit.
However, a casino ranking should not be presented as evidence that its highest-rated operator consistently offers the best sports prices. Unless a site publishes repeated market-by-market comparisons, that conclusion is not supported. Readers benefit when publishers clearly distinguish what was measured from what readers might assume was measured.
Bonuses can complicate comparisons
A sportsbook may offer free-bet tokens, cashback or other promotions. Their effective value depends on conditions rather than the largest number printed in a banner. Some credits are not withdrawable as cash; others require qualifying selections, minimum odds or a deadline. Casino welcome bonuses often introduce wagering requirements, game-contribution rules and limits on withdrawals. Combining these products under one generic promotional score can hide important differences.
For instance, a large matched deposit might require extensive play before bonus-related funds become eligible for withdrawal. The required betting volume is not a promise of profit. The presence of a promotion may therefore make comparisons more complex instead of simpler. Clear disclosures should precede any judgement about value.
Editorial independence and methods
Review sites sometimes state that rankings are editorially independent. Such a statement is relevant but does not replace evidence of consistent testing. Readers should look for the criteria used, the date of each review, whether real transactions were examined and how negative findings are treated. If one platform receives detailed testing while another is scored on marketing copy, the ranking loses comparability.
Commercial incentives should also be visible. Referral relationships or sponsorships do not automatically make every observation inaccurate, but they create reasons to ask how rankings are insulated from revenue. A publication that explains its methodology and corrections process gives readers a stronger basis for trust than one that simply declares its winners.
Licensing and dispute rights before price claims
A marginally attractive price is of limited value when the operator is not legally available to the reader or does not provide meaningful avenues for redress. Regulations vary by jurisdiction, and a licence in one country may not authorise service in another. It is prudent to verify the legal entity behind a brand and the current status of any licence through official records.
Consumers should also review identity verification, account restrictions and dispute resolution procedures. These operational conditions influence the actual experience of using a gambling service. A sensible evaluation includes them before discussing promotions or theoretical market advantages.
Why guaranteed-profit language is a warning sign
No ordinary review or odds list can guarantee that an individual will win money from gambling. Claims of certain returns often omit the fact that results are uncertain, prices move and transactions are subject to restrictions. Casino games generally incorporate a house advantage, and sports outcomes remain uncertain regardless of a persuasive analysis. The safest response to absolute promises is scepticism.
Readers should also avoid treating gambling as a means of addressing financial problems. Chasing previous losses and increasing stakes to recover money can deepen harm. Consumer-oriented coverage is more valuable when it explains risk and offers realistic options for stepping away.
Conclusion: define the claim before ranking the service
“Best odds” is a specific comparative proposition, not a synonym for a high casino rating. MonsterBetList can be examined for its published casino research, review structure and risk disclosures, but those materials should not be stretched into claims they have not tested. Clear definitions, dated evidence and honest limitations are the foundations of trustworthy comparison journalism.
