Metro Police say there's not enough evidence to pursue a criminal investigation against a controversial Ryerson journalism professor who advocates sex with children.
The probe was launched after Gerald Hannon told a nation-wide television audience last Saturday that he witnessed an adult man and 12-year-old boy having sex in a tent in the country.
The incident formed the basis for a controversial article, Men Loving Boys Loving Men published in 1977 in a gay newspaper. The story led to criminal charges and eventual acquittal of Hannon and two other principals of the newspaper.
"We've reviewed both the article written in 1977 and the tapes of the CBC Newsworld show in which he says he witnessed a sexual assault on a young boy," said Det. Sgt Chris Hobson of the Special Investigative Services unit. "But in the absence of a victim or complainant and hard evidence that a sexual assault actually took place and without knowing when or where, there's little we can do at this time."
He said a close examination of what Hannon actually said he saw does not make it clear he witnessed sexual activity because the man and boy were in a sleeping bag at the time.
Hobson said given the length of time since the incident, which pre-dates the 1977 article, there is "a question of whether the public interest would be served by pursuing a criminal investigation at this time."
Hannon has long advocated that sex between adults and children is permissible, even warranted in some circumstances, calling it "intergenerational sex."
The issue came to a head again last week when Toronto Sun columnist Heather Bird raised questions about the proprietry of Hannon's teaching position at Ryerson.
Most recently Hannon wrote in a 1994 article: I could never understand ... how children's hockey differed from an organized child-sex ring. Both involve children and adults. Both involved strenuous physical activity ... both involved danger. Both involved pleasure. Yet we approve of children's hockey and deplore child-sex rings."
Ryerson is also reviewing whether his controversial views are consistent with his teaching position.