The second day of Ben Levin’s sentencing hearing coincided with a huge rally at Queen’s Park, where thousands of angry parents protested against the perverted sex education curriculum that the Liberal Government is going to force on the Ontario schools next fall. The rally was so big that all newspapers and radio stations had to cover it (they have ignored such rallies in the past).
In a way, I felt guilty that I had to miss that event and instead sit in a half-empty court room with noisy air conditioner, which made it very hard to hear what people were saying. However, it occurred to me that sitting through those lengthy discussions of sex with children, rape fantasies and porn pictures gave me the unique opportunity to peek into the working of the minds of those who designed that curriculum. Ben Levin, as one of its architects, is a fine specimen of the people forming the circle around Kathleen Wynne and their horrific ideas for a new education where parents have no say in issues affecting morality. The horrifying disregard for people’s opinions displayed by Wynne’s clique becomes easier to understand when you see how Levin conducted his activities for years without any fear of getting caught. The same arrogance is displayed in Wynne’s contempt for parents’ opinions and especially in her sinister attempt to present the disagreement as a hatred for the fact that she is lesbian (that’s an old homosexual trick, which usually works in our politically correct society – everybody is scared to death of being called “homophobic”).
Understanding how that high-level perversion works is worth the time spent listening to stories about sickening abuse. In yesterday’s installment I probably shocked many people by including the description of Levin’s child porn picture collection.
Today things will be worse – the whole day was spent on analyzing his “real strength,” his writings in the chat forum, where he was an important figure. The prosecutors read long excerpts from his posts, but I am sure that the mainstream journalists would never publish them. The advantage of being a blogger is that you don’t have to self-censor yourself.
Since today’s post would be more disturbing than yesterday’s, the same warning applies – if you are too sensitive, don’t read it.
The plan today was to present the submissions of the Crown and the defense regarding the sentencing. However, the Crown’s presentation took the whole day (Ben Levin left a huge footprint on the internet). Crown attorney Allison Dellandrea began with a procedural issue. She talked to Justice Heather MacArthur about the numerous letters that she and the main Crown attorney Ms. Garcia received from the public. Many people shared their opinions about Levin and disagreed with his actions, demanding punishment. She urged the judge to ignore the letters, because otherwise justice will turn into a popularity contest. Justice MacArthur acknowledged that she saw such letters and many of them emphasized the stigma suffered by Levin by disgracing his previous high position.
Ms. Dellandrea said again that the public interest in the case is high, but that shouldn’t influence the process of serving justice. Here the judge noted that most of those letters were actually form letters, which mention Levin’s previous position and discuss his role in preparing the new sex education curriculum. The Crown immediately added that there is no evidence that he participated in the creation of the curriculum. In the end the judge admitted that the letters have no relevance, but she mercifully decided to admit them into the court materials.
(I guess the high-level Liberals always win even in court.)
Ms. Dellandrea started her submission with an opinion of the punishment. The Crown considered an appropriate punishment for Ben Levin a jail sentence of 3 years and 6 months. The most serious crime was counselling an adult to commit a sex act with a child, which accounted for 2 years of the proposed sentence.
Then she went through the evidence to justify the proposal. Levin participated for years in a disturbing online forum. He was not an ordinary player, but a leader in discussing issues related to child abuse. He tried to influence women with underage children and even implicated his wife, who had no knowledge about his activities. One of the most dangerous parts of his participation was that he coached other people to commit sado-masochistic sex acts with children – he advocated spanking, bondage, vaginal penetration, etc. It is true that he owned just a few images with child pornography, but his major field of interest were the chats where he expressed himself fully.
A recurring phenomenon in his chats was the desire to hear more about the sex contacts of the participants with their children. An outstanding example were the long conversations he had with a “mother” (actually impersonated by a police officer) who claimed she had a young daughter. The suggestions made by Levin are very graphic – he wants the child to suffer for the sexual gratification of her mother. He advises the latter to pinch child’s nipples, spank her, and if she cries, she must be slapped while the mother yells “Shut up, bitch!” Levin recommends inserting sex toys in child’s body cavities or inserting several fingers in her mouth until she gags. The girl must be tied up regularly to keep her still, preferably with her legs spread, but not too tightly – just until she starts to cry.
After a recess, Ms. Dellandrea discussed some of the opinions in Dr. Gojer’s report (presented yesterday). Levin confessed to him that he met several individuals online and discussed child abuse. His predominant online theme was incest with interest in a few sub-fields: enjoyment of hearing about child abuse; providing direction on how to perform abuse, and describing the forms of sex contacts he claimed he had with his own and other children.
The Crown brought up another chat transcript where Levin discussed incest in a specific family. Comparing it to his own family, he states that he started “playing” with his daughters when they were 12, 13, and 16 years old (and regrets that he didn’t start earlier). He encouraged them to “suck him off.” An aggravating circumstance is the advocacy of child sharing for sex purposes, as he supposedly did with his own daughters. That would expose kids potentially to even more abuse. There are also homosexual tendencies expressed – in the same chat he expresses regret he didn’t have a son, though he boasted that he “played” with boys. He also regrets that his daughters don’t have their own children yet.
In another chat he advises a mother to touch her girl’s vagina while she is asleep. That is supposed to be one of the steps to prepare the girl for rough play. Another suggestion is showing soft porn to the girl and sexualizing her by masturbating in front of her.
After lunch Ms. Dellandrea warned that the material collected from the chats is extensive and it will take time to cover its most important aspects. She continued with another chat with the officer posing as a mother. The “mother” says that she exposes her child to porn. In Crown’s opinion, if what Levin did was just a fantasy, he should’ve stopped the person he was chatting with from doing that and told her that these are just fantasies and she shouldn’t go any further or he could simply break the contact, but he didn’t. On the contrary – in a new chat she tells him that she touched the child’s vagina and Levin tells her: “I want you to play with her and prepare her to be fucked.” In a series of instructions he then tells the mother to masturbate in front of the girl.
The Crown finds additional evidence that Levin didn’t see everything as a fantasy in further conversations. The mother sent picture of her child and also invited Levin to her home “to fuck her” and get acquainted with the daughter, she was even going to clean the house to please “her master.” Levin explained that he couldn’t make it.
Later they discussed the child – the mother claimed that she told her that Levin will be her master and she needs to learn about sex to please him. Then she expresses hesitation – did she go too far, what if the kid tells somebody about what they are doing? Levin calms her down – he says that he had before sex with a 12-year old girl with the consent of her parents. Again, he didn’t pull out of the situation, didn’t show remorse that things have gone too far and the kid could be harmed.
In their final exchange on July 5, 2013, Levin lectured the woman that she needs to obey her master and so does the girl, because he wants to “penetrate her ass.” He was still encouraging the abuse. It is important to note that in his list of the forum users (mentioned yesterday) he didn’t mark the woman as “fake.” He thought she was real.
Ms. Dellandrea mentioned again that a day before Dr. Gojer finalized the report Levin told him that he had a meeting in Amsterdam with one of the forum members. However, despite that significant admission, the doctor still insisted that all activities of Levin were limited to the realm of fantasy. Despite his opinion, a real meeting with another potential child abuser is important.
In the concluding part of the submission the Crown referred to some case law applicable in this situation. A 2007 decision of the New Brunswick court dealt with a certain Mr. Fisher, who was involved in internet sex chat. An officer posed as a mother with child and the accused suggested sex acts with the child. He was arrested and child pornography was found on his computer. His attorney used the fantasy defense, but the court rejected it and emphasized that real harm could result from his actions, moreover, the accused could not be sure that the child didn’t exist; the fantasy operates only to a point. He was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months for counselling an adult to have sex with a child. Levin should get more time than Fisher, because he was involved in more activities.
A similar case happened in Saskatchewan in 2008 – Mr. Houston, with no previous criminal record, was charged with one count of distributing child pornography. He also had over 1000 posts on a site dealing with sex between men and young girls. His posts described violent sex with girls and infants. Again, he used the fantasy defense, with which the prosecution disagreed, because if somebody acted on his writings, a child could be harmed. He also received 18 months for distributing pornography.
In conclusion, she mentioned that the Crown received many letters of support of Levin from family and friends. Many show disbelief, but they still support him – that’s not unusual for the criminally charged. Such letters came also from prominent members of the community. That’s important to the prosecution, they acknowledge the support, but they don’t want to overemphasize it.
The issue of Levin working again in the education is a sensitive one. He should suffer the consequences of his actions, but the backlash of the social media is stigmatizing him. Levin will need counselling. Also, the Crown recommends keeping him from being around children without supervision for 20 years. In the same way it is recommended that he use internet only under supervision for 20 years.
Tomorrow the hearing will continue with the submissions of the defense.
What can I say now?
I don’t know what I find more repulsive – that such despicable pervert like Levin was one of the highest bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education that developed the perverted sex curriculum (with his participation) or that there are still people who will voice their support for a person like him.
It seems that in the self-destructing Ontario of Kathleen Wynne everything is possible.
© 2015 Blogwrath.com