85

Member of Ontario premier’s transition team faces child porn charges


 

TORONTO – A former Ontario deputy education minister, who was also on Premier Kathleen Wynne’s transition team, has been charged with child pornography offences.

Benjamin Levin, 61, of Toronto, is facing five charges, including two counts of distributing child pornography and one count of making child pornography.

Levin, who is also a professor at the University of Toronto, was arrested Monday after police executed a search warrant at his home following an online child exploitation investigation.

He is also charged with counselling to commit an indictable offence and arrangement of a sexual offence against a child under 16.

The premier’s office has confirmed Levin served on Wynne’s transition advisory team but won’t comment on the charges.

Wynne’s office says the transition team met for the last time June 12, when she thanked members, including Levin, for their work helping her take over the reins from outgoing premier Dalton McGuinty.

Levin served under McGuinty as deputy minister of education from late 2004 to early 2007.

He also served as Manitoba’s deputy minister of advanced education and deputy minister of education, training and youth between 1999 and 2002.

According to his resume posted online, Levin has a bachelor of arts degree from the University of Manitoba and a master of education degree from Harvard. He is currently a professor and research chair in education and leadership at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto.

Toronto police Const. Wendy Drummond says the investigation had been going on for “at least a couple of months” prior to the execution of the warrant.

Police say they do not know whether there could be more victims.

“The investigation is ongoing and the potential is there for us to discover more, but at this point we have the charges that we’ve got,” said Drummond.

Toronto police say they were assisted by police in London, Ont., and the Department of Internal Affairs in New Zealand.

“It is common for us to come into contact with people that other services have also had contact with,” Drummond said.

Levin’s resume states he had given numerous presentations and seminars in New Zealand.


 
Filed under:

Member of Ontario premier’s transition team faces child porn charges

  1. mmmm what does a lesbian and a pedophile have in common?
    (insert answer below)

    • Not a damned thing.

      • Now wait a minute, Keith. If I recall correcting Bruce Carson’s and Tom Flannagan’s (former aides to a politician you happen to disdain) have been bandied about on here in regard to how THEIR behavior reflects on said politician. Please do not be so hypocritical as to suggest to you have different standards for those you abhor compared to those you adore?

        • I took the statement to be a comparison of lesbians to pedophiles, in the same way that many in the public incorrectly link gay men & pedophiles – I wasn’t reading it as a political statement at all.

          • I will take your word for it.

    • Flaunting your ignorance?

      • it is a question… didnt your teacher tell you the only bad question is the one that is not asked…
        So no ignorance on my part…

        • A deliberately misleading, inferential question. If not ignorant, then malicious.

          • Is one not a lesbian? Is one not a pedophile? Ok maybe like this then.

            What does a self proclaimed proud lesbian and a closet pedophile have in common?

          • They’re both members of the same species. OK? Now, give it a rest, bozo.

          • They are both members of the Liberal Party!, but I do like your answer too, well played… well played!

          • So your inference is that Liberals are pedophiles?

          • You left out being gay and straight and bi-sexual. I just inferred that a morally rotten person is so close to the Premier of Ontario… kinda makes you wonder what other things that Wynne was so wrong about.
            Lefties are so worried about Hudak and Harper (hidden agenda and all). Yet morally bankrupt people can have such a close ear to the Preem of Ontario.

          • Yes, the lesbian remark was rude but the inference that somehow Ms. Wynne’s conduct should be tied to her former aide’s illegal behavior…..gosh, I recall this happening in the past and I remember a group on here REPEATEDLY “inferring’ in an at times “ignorant” and sometimes “malicious” way that the politician should be metaphorically if not literally, tarred and feather based on the actions of his former aides (ala Carson and Flanagan). Correct me if my memory is faulty.

          • I agree: sliming someone by association is…well…slimy.

            But what’s really offensive here is not the association of two public figures; it’s the insidious insinuation that pedophilia is associated with homosexuality.

          • I never ever even hinted that pedophilia is associated with being gay… That is something it seems you jumped to all on your own. My only hint is that they are both in the Liberal party and it kinda makes you wonder if she can be so wrong with this guy’s morales, then what other things/choices politically that she has done wrong.

          • I agree. Part of the issue here is the dilemma of whether or not so much attention should be paid to the fact that Ms. Wynne is gay. If we truly want to erase the stigma attached and enlighten people, we are going to have to stop treating this “biological fact” of her makeup as exceptional. How her sexual orientation possibly affects her ability to govern is beyond me and why it should be an issue is unfathomable. If we in Canada are serious about gay and lesbian rights, we are going to have to start as we mean to go on. Who cares if someone is gay or lesbian? There is nothing wrong with it. It doesn’t affect the work they do and we need to move the conversation forward like we mean that. Anyone foolish enough to think that lesbians have a higher association with pedophilia is completely misinformed. These kind of people likely have bigotries coming out of their ears and Ms. Wynne just happens to represent one of those groups they dislike.

          • ” How her sexual orientation possibly affects her ability to govern is beyond me and why it should be an issue is unfathomable”
            Then does this mean that you think a pedophile or someone into bestiality should be able to lead and not have their “sexual orientation” questioned? Seeing as it is so irrelevant to their ability to govern.

          • Are you not aware that pedophilia and zoophilia are both against the law in Canada? Obviously, any politician caught indulging in those behaviors will be serving time and won’t be governing.

            However, sexual orientation, as it is traditionally defined involves only the attraction of an adult human toward other adults, male or female or both. Given that this is in no way illegal or considered abhorrent in OUR country, what exactly is your point?

          • ” If we in Canada are serious about gay and lesbian rights, we are going to have to start as we mean to go on”
            Question…How are “gay and lesbian rights” different from heterosexual rights? How does where someone sticks their appendages have anything to do with “rights”?
            This is the problem, everyone wants their “rights” – gay rights, women’s rights, minority rights, etc…There are “human rights”, full stop. Dividing everybody into aggrieved groups perpetuates the “otherness” and, quite frankly, I believe plenty of groups love the “special” status of being “oppressed” and so hard done by. If we didn’t bother with sorting everyone into a little box then these controversy baiters wouldn’t be able to thrive and force us into this ridiculous PC, mamby-pamby, make-believe world. We’d just get on with the business of living.

          • You believe groups love their “special status”. Do you think Matthew Shepard loved getting tortured and murdered because he was gay? Do you think teens love being bullied to death because of it? Yes everyone should have equal human rights FULL STOP! The problem is that white males are the only ones getting the full and “equal” rights at present. So would suggest we just pretend that everyone else is getting them? Yes, as I women, I really love the attention I garner because jobs traditionally favored by women receive less pay than those done by men. I would far rather have the special status of being oppressed than the cold hard cash. Right!!!

          • Exactly!

        • You may not like Ms. Wynne’s politics but it is neither ethical nor palatable for you to: 1) discuss her in terms of her sexual orientation….despite the attention it has garnered, it does not matter nor does it have any relevance to the situation and 2) link her to what is an alleged egregious crime committed by a former work colleague. I am sure you have some work colleagues that are doing things in their private lives that you neither have knowledge of nor condone. No thinking person would expect that you would be made to answer for whatever bad or illegal choices they might make.

          • I only stated a fact… she is gay and open and nothing wrong with that. I suspect she is not too happy about her choice of this dude as a closed pedophile… Facts are just facts..

          • mmmm what does a lesbian and a pedophile have in common?

            That’s not a hint? Don’t be disingenuous. Go and do your creepy work somewhere else.

          • its surprising how those that make the jump are the ones that are so quick to accuse the others of pushing them…

          • It’s obviously a mistake to pay attention to the likes of you. Get lost.

          • tsk tsk… someone is in a foul mood. I guess pointing out the obvious hurts!

          • You’re right. Your absolute idiocy was obvious with your first comment. I won’t repeat the error.

          • You only repeated your error 7 times it seems. Fetch boy fetch!

          • I am glad you know there isn’t anything wrong with being gay.

          • Isn’t there? I don’t wish harm to any of my gay friends and I don’t condemn them or wish them to be different but it is most certainly not “right” or “normal” in any true sense of those words. Sex is designed a certain way for a reason, humans added all the bells and whistles.
            I would say the inability to reproduce would show what is “wrong” with gay sex. And the sodomy, straight or gay, can’t truly be considered “normal”.

          • Sounds like you have a very limited sex life.

          • Well than I guess that all those straight couples that for some reason are unable to reproduce should just face the facts that there is something “wrong” with them being together and break up now because if things were right or normal, they would be able to have offspring.

          • ” discuss her in terms of her sexual orientation….despite the attention it has garnered, it does not matter nor does it have any relevance to the situation ”

            So I assume then that you wrote angry letters to all the media outlets that proclaimed “Ontario’s First Openly Gay Premier”? How dare they be so unethical and unpalatable!

          • Frankly, what I find unethical and unpalatable in the commenters comment, is his reference to her being a lesbian and asking what a lesbian and a pedophile have in common. I find the reality of her sexual orientation unremarkable and unworthy of note in regard to her role as a premier. We can only hope that in the future a persons sexual orientation would not be considered exceptional enough to garner attention because after all, what does it have to do with their ability to lead a province? As for my sending angry letters. I am not sending an angry with regard to this comment so why would I have done so then? I have, however, made remarks several times, asking people why they make negative comments about rumors about politician’s sexual orientation when in fact there is nothing wrong with being gay or lesbian.

    • Ummmmm…neither will likely have sex with an adult male?
      Did I win?

      • You are the Winner!
        Well played.. well played fine sir!

  2. Cue the appearance of Tom Flanagan’s media critics in 3…2…um…3…2…now where are they? Should be along any minute I guess.

    Probably right behind those who pointed out how having a person like Bruce Carson around the PM showed questionable judgement on the PMs part.

    • Oh no, they won’t do that. They can’t have it both ways you see. If they admit that a corrupt aide is a good way to judge that you have corrupt politician, then they will have to admit that Ms. Wynne is just as corrupt as Mr. Harper. NO, they will be aghast that people would suggest that her former aide’s bad behavior in any way reflects upon her and they won’t respond to suggestions that they ever claimed a causal relationship existed in the past. You might notice Emily One who is always first out the gate, is no where to be found on this thread and Aaron Wherry of course WILL NOT be writing a column on this topic.

    • There is a huge difference between holding offensive opinions (Flanagan) & (alleged) criminal behavior!

      • Okay but the real question IS…..is it fair to label a politician guilty by association? How can the behavior of another “adult” individual ever be the fault of someone who works with them unless you can prove they colluded/conspired in a wrong-doing somehow? This willingness to judge you because your co-worker allegedly did something illegal is asinine. It could never be proven in a court of law and it doesn’t belong in the court of public opinion.

        • is your last sentence,not what MSM is all about?

          • If I understand correctly, you are saying the mainstream media “is all about” reporting allegations in the court of public opinion which would never stand up in a court of law. Further, that these allegations when made in the court of public opinion can result in irreparable damage to innocent people’s lives and reputations, despite the lack of any real evidence as to the veracity of the allegations.

            Sadly, it certainly appears that way at times. You only have to think of instances where people were proven to be innocent after the fact but were proven guilty by media coverage and obsessed police or prosecutors. I can think of two such cases off the top of my head…the Jonbenet Ramsay murder and the Duke University lacrosse scandal.

    • Over a long time, it’s been a revelation for me how the partisans are such extreme hypocrites.

      The same people who made a big deal about Harper and a communion wafer are the same people who say nothing about a Liberal pedophile.

      The same people who claim Harper is personally responsible for the improper financial claims by a Conservative senator are the people who think there is no connection between Wynne and her pedophile colleague in government.

      Over a long time I’ve learned that such people are fundamentally dishonest about pretty well anything and everything.

  3. Bruce Carson was convicted for activities uncomfortably close to his line of work.

    Unless anyone is asserting the leadership transition of Ontario is really an elaborate child abuse ring (and please, let us not go there), anyone drawing the comparison is very very stupid. Yes, this means you if you have already done so.

    Until it’s shown otherwise the safest assumption is that any instances of unspeakable behaviour were kept extremely quiet and out of his professional circle. (If this is not the case, there may be difficult issues later, but for now please try to stay reasonable).

    • It sends chills up my spine how closely your “talking points” resemble those most often spewed by your friend, Emily One….”for now please try to stay reasonable.”
      Hey, I’ll give you reasonable. I am not the one who tries to play guilt by association games. I have never done that and I certainly would not start now. I can see how someone like you might think everyone would stoop to your bad behavior and assert that the “leadership transition of Ontario is really an elaborate child abuse ring” but given that unlike yourself, I have NEVER gone on a site about your province and spewed bigoted BS about your citizens or your provincial government, you can save your chastisement of me. That behavior is much more indicative of yourself and the other mean girls you hang with.

      • I see you have been bad mouthing me on a thread on which I did not even comment. That’s pretty cowardly in my book. If you have a problem with something I say I would appreciate you take it up with me, on that thread.

        • WTF? So is JanBC the same person as EmilyOne?

          How many personas is EmilyOne posting under here?

          • Calm down, Tinfoil. Colby has a thread about how well Alberta is weathering the flood, and I commented that CAnada is overall very resilient and rises to challenges, but the prairies think they can be the only ones and how it fits their cowboy small-gubmint mentality. Sure it was kind of insulting, and I deliberately went there after a time of a big disaster (where there was fortunately very little loss of life), I don’t think it was necessarily unjustified from the firewall province.

            HC, who I have been mercilessly ragging in the past little while for swallowing the “Nigel Wright bailed out Duffy because of his destitute wife” bit and propogating it as if it were not ludicrous, became angry and listed things he does not like about several posters, of which those other two were mentioned.

            It’s the internet, it happens. In my online persona i dont’ suffer foolishness gladly.

          • I don’t know but JanBC does “follow” EmilyOne’s posts and JanBC does “upvote” all the nasty crap that either EmilyOne or GFMD spews about conservative voters and Albertans. I think they are three nasty women but they could certainly be all one person because they do sound so much alike. There is also a new one named “Gayle” who is supposedly from Edmonton and she is another doppelganger.

          • In other words Gayle disagreed with you.

          • It wasn’t so much the disagreeing as the “talking points” that mirrored dear EmilyOne to a tee.

          • I don’t think those three are nasty to Albertans. They’re nasty to Albertans and lots of other people. It’s nothing personal about Albertans. They’re just nasty, in general.
            It’s funny though that on a couple of occasions people have assumed I’m an Albertan even though I’ve spent a grand total of three days in the province, and that was about 10 years ago. So it’s true that some people harbor a particular hatred of Alberta, but if it weren’t Alberta they’d simply choose some other preferred target.

          • Yes if you say something they don’t like, they accuse you of being a “Con from Alberta”. To them that is the ultimate put down. Emily pretends she has a PhD and a masters but there is no way that you can be in university for that amount of time and come out with so little enlightenment. It isn’t possible. I worked on my masters and the first philosophy course I took was all about respecting the influences that shape our “world views” and the differing world views of those around us.
            Emily got into it with Paul Wells today about the flood in Toronto. She cannot admit that the storm was somewhat extraordinary. In her mind, nothing bad happens in Ontario. Of course she has to say that because she claimed the floods in southern Alberta were “poetic justice” for Alberta “spewing pollution”. Now does that sound like someone with a PhD?
            Anyway, you are completely correct…..I do try to ignore them. I just have to be more diligent.

          • Well, I wasn’t saying to ignore them, there’s nothing wrong with calling out BS when you see it, sometimes ignoring is the better option, sometimes you need to push back. I was just saying that Alberta may be their preferred target, but in reality it’s really not about Alberta at all, it’s all about them.

          • The problem though is that once you “push back”, you tend to get mired down in some long BS back and forth that makes you regret that you engaged. Therefore, best not to engage at all if you can stop yourself.

          • In fact, I am every single poster EXCEPT you, John G.

            Come to think of it, can you really be sure I am NOT you? BWAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!

          • Notice to HCI – I just thumbed up GFMB.

          • Good for Emily!

          • I think therefore I am

          • Dammit! That means I’ve been arguing with myself again! Time for stronger meds ;-)

          • You mock but perhaps you should start observing the similarities.

          • I’ve been back & forth with Emily, Jan and GFMD enough to know they have their own personalities. If it’s one person he/she is either very talented or truly suffering from multiple personality disorder.

            There are some on here I’m suspicious of; they aren’t among them. (OK, well maybe Emily & Francien – they have differing political viewpoints but similar styles and rarely appear on the same threads…)

          • EmilyOne & Francien….Hahaha…you are a nasty one, Keith!

            I have seen them on the same thread, b*tch slapping one another. Wouldn’t truly be awesome if they were the SAME person. There is no such thing as a multiple personality disorder but there is a Dissociative Identity Disorder….

            At one point, I surmised you and EmilyOne might be the same person but then she went at you with her asinine stand on the seal hunt and I knew you were a true Newfoundlander when you defended the hunt. I have been to your lovely province and have seen the many fantastic seal products. How is culling cute little bunnies and eating them like they do in Germany any different than hunting seals and using their skins to stay warm? Listen, none of these international protesters seem to be outraged when someone cracks a bunny over the head or twists a chicken by the neck to kill it. I could really get behind a protest of the eating of dog or worse guinea pig but no one seems interested in organizing one. For some reason, they only care if seals are killed. Ah…I digress.

            I am not sure if JanBC, Emily and GFMD are the same person or not but their ‘mean girl’ pack behavior when it comes to spewing Alberta bigotry is relentless and annoying. As much as I tell myself to ignore it, I cannot help but address it when they participate in the slagging of so many of my undeserving fellow citizens. Frankly, I would rather not engage with unpleasant people at all.

          • Emily & I have had any number of nasty blowouts over the years. I sometimes get sucked down the rabbit hole of nastiness and name-calling with her but I like to think that, generally, I’m more civilized and more willing to concede when I’m wrong than she is.

            I saw Spain’s annual running of the bulls on the news this morning, and as far as I know they still have bullfights. The French love their foie gras, and Italians their veal. And the EU hypocrites have the nerve to call the seal hunt cruel?

            But, we digress…

        • I noticed your “upvote” for a nasty comment from GFMD on a site about Alberta’s flood recovery and I am now starting to wonder if you, EmilyOne and GFMD are three nasty women or one woman who blogs under three different names.

          • As noted above, I am in fact ALL the posters.

            I am even healthcareinsider. (cue spooky music).

          • I agree. Who do you think “they” are? The funny thing is other than EmilyOne, they don’t say anything personal about themselves. I have told EVERYBODY than I am a nurse, I live in Calgary, etc. Has JanBC or GFMD EVER said anything about themselves? They just regurgitate EmilyOne’s “talking points”.

          • You’re starting to sound a little paranoid. It’s not all about you.

          • Oh yes, I am aware of who it is “all about”….I think she said she has a PhD and a masters?

          • More paranoia. By the way, I have just started to ‘follow’ you, in order to keep track of your back stabbing. I hope this doesn’t put you even more over the edge.

          • Back stabbing?! That is a truly interesting comment given that you had already been on the site and “upvoted” a particular nasty comment about Alberta. By the way, go back to the same site, I gave you and ‘your friends’ some unsolicited advice on helping your party (or at least not hindering it) to get elected. You are WELCOME to follow me. Be sure, I won’t be “back stabbing” you but doing a full frontal attack every time you say some nasty crap that is undeserved by the friendly and lovely people I happen to inhabit a province with.
            Now, I am very sympathetic toward those who are suffering in Quebec and I will be sending a cheque to the Red Cross for their benefit. I certainly hope you will do the same. I trust you have no bigotry toward that province.

          • I don’t brag about giving money to charity – I don’t do it to win brownie points. You really need to calm down.

          • Bragging…no! Rather I am ‘challenging’ you. You are slipping into EmilyOne persona with the “calm down” comment.

          • I finally looked up the ‘nasty comment’ that you have strung me up for up ticking. For God’s sake, it was a little joke about the NEP! Honest to God, how over- sensitive about your beloved province are you?

          • It was not about my “beloved province” but about GFMD’s sh*tty response to “Geoff’, a new commenter who was relaying his pride in experiences as a volunteer helping flood victims in Calgary. It was the way GFMD’s reacted with a snide comment about westerners and THEN came back with a nasty little NEP comment. Guess who “upvoted” GFMD on her two nasty comments? You and EmilyOne. This was after EmilyOne said it was “poetic justice” that southern Alberta flooded. Well, tonite Toronto is flooding so what kind of justice is that? The whole nasty rhetoric business is BS and it makes me ashamed for you “ladies”.
            Frankly, I meet people all of time who have moved to Calgary from other provinces and are pleasantly shocked at how friendly the people here are and how polite we are when it comes to driving in a city like Calgary. These people have moved from places like Montreal and Vancouver. They don’t find any prejudice or hostility here.
            “Geoff” is in all likelihood a “transplant” from somewhere else. 1/3 of the residents of this province have moved here from somewhere else and despite what Emily might insist, most do not leave Calgary except when they retire to warmer climes. Geoff is probably so young he wasn’t even born when the NEP happened. After all, it was 30 years ago. He didn’t understand the hostility and neither do I. Don’t you think it is time to give a rest?

          • Why don’t you park your imagination, it’s working overtime on not what people actually said, but what your fevered brain thinks they said and why. Stop playing hall monitor on here.

          • Bye, Jan

        • You, the master of the drive-by insult, is giving lessons on manners? Too funny.

  4. Where are all the Vic Toews critics today?

  5. The underlying question here goes back to the connections between Levin, Wynne, and the OISE (Ontario Institute for Studies In Education) and the radical sexualization of children that the OISE promotes in the name of “diversity.” That, my friends, is where this discussion needs to go. Is there a connection between Levin’s legal issues and the open desire of the OISE to sexualize ever younger children, and the overall “gay rights” agenda and Wynne’s participation in that movement? After all, why should I know, let alone care, about Wynne’s sexual proclivities?

    • “….the radical sexualization of children that the OISE promotes in the name of “diversity.”

      I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you Bill (yet), but this statement certainly smacks of exaggeration, fear-mongering, and paranoia.

      Could you please provide some evidence of OISE’s activities and policies that would support your accusations?

        • Ahhh yes……an anonymous blog and Sun News. At least now we have a better understanding of how you choose to inform yourself.
          Egad.

Sign in to comment.