The Michigan sex-offender online registry was official deactivated yesterday after being found unconstitutional last week by a Federal Court judge. The registry, which had been available on the Internet since 1999, allowed community members to access a list of sex offenders living in their area and raised statewide conflict between prisoner rights and public safety.

The issue arose when Daniel Fullmer, a Royal Oak resident, brought a case against the Michigan State Police in which he claimed the registry process denied his right to due process. A former state corrections officer, Fullmer pleaded no contest to 4th degree sexual conduct after he admitted to engaging in a consensual relationship with a female inmate.

State Senator Bill VanRegenmorter (R-Georgetown Township) said that in the Fullmer case, the judge ruled that the registry put a stigma on sex offenders and affirmed that Fullmer's due process rights had been "adversely affected." He said contrary to Fullmer's argument, that it was not the registry that was at fault. "Their reputation stigmatizes the offenders themselves," he said.

VanRegenmorter said the purpose of the registry was to provide information to parents and others and that without it, there will be more victims.

"It will impose danger on existing victims and increase victims of sexual assault," he said. "The issue of victims is something that is so often forgotten."

He also said he agreed that the registry needs work in the area of minors and should offer some discretion when labeling them as sex offenders, especially where dating issues are concerned.

Frank Ochberg, the former mental health director for the state of Michigan, said he feels it makes sense to have a "good registry."

"If there were a known sex offender in the neighborhood, my family would want to know," Ochberg said, although he said he feels there are some dangers attached.

"It is always a problem to generalize too much and have a society-wide approach."

He said people have to be careful about grouping those charged with sexual offenses together into one category of "sex offender." Instead, he said it is important to focus on adequate care and treatment for sex offenders so that they can defeat that part of themselves that leads them to commit sex crimes.

"I think it's important to have the opportunity to pay your debt to society and lead a civilized life," Ochberg said.

Like Ochberg, Kary Moss, the Michigan American Civil Liberties Union executive director, said she found fault in the registry because it lumped together many degrees of sexual crimes.

"It publicly broadcasts names (of sex offenders), many of whom don't pose a danger to society," which leads to vigilantism, she said.

Moss said there needs to be hearings to decide individually whether each person poses a danger to society.

"People have served their time and then they're forever branded," she said, adding that there is no need to "punish people for their entire lives."

The idea for the registry is derived from Registration and Community Notification Laws, also known as Megan's Law, which was enacted by the New Jersey State Legislature in 1994.

Chuck Davis, a spokesman New Jersey Attorney General, explained that Megan's Law creates three tiers for categorizing sex-offenders. Tier one is for those less likely to become repeat offenders; tier two is for moderate offenders and tier three is for the most dangerous offenders and those most likely to repeat the crime.

The current law allows the state to provide pictures and relevant information, such as driver's license number and county of residence, of sex-offenders classified either as tier two or tier three offenders.

"The intent of the law is to help parents protect children by identifying sexual predators in the area," Davis said.

"I think its effective."

Last year, a federal judge limited the amount of information available to New Jersey residents online, a decision that was appealed in January and is now awaiting argument in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals.

Despite the limited amount of information currently available, Davis said he felt there was statewide support of the law. "It's been upheld in both the state and federal court (and) it's certainly accepted within New Jersey," he said.