Skip to main content

Barely a week after Maine police defended their on-line sex-offender registry following a shooting rampage that left two men dead, legislators in the New England state are now reassessing the public list.

As more details emerge about how Cape Breton dishwasher Stephen Marshall tracked and killed two Maine sex offenders earlier this month, politicians have begun a public debate on whether these offenders' names and pictures should be publicized.

"I think the question we have to look at is: Is [the sex offender registry]in fact still functioning the way it was designed to?" said Senator Bill Diamond, chairman of Maine's criminal justice and public safety committee.

Story continues below advertisement

Yesterday, Colonel Craig Poulin, Maine's state police chief, told a justice committee which is re-examining the registries that Mr. Marshall, 20, had created his own list of 29 Maine sex offenders.

The names were culled from Maine's on-line registry and were among the 34 names he researched before embarking on the Easter Sunday shootings. The young man later killed himself on a passenger bus outside Boston.

Mr. Marshall came to the United States on April 13, ostensibly to visit his father, who lives in Houlton, located on the Maine-New Brunswick border.

But early on April 16, he took his father's pickup truck and three weapons and drove first to Milo, Me., where he shot Joseph Gray, 57, then to Corinth, where he killed William Elliott, 24.

Col. Poulin told the committee that police still have no motive.

Investigators have discovered that Mr. Marshall was also looking at sex offenders registered in New Hampshire, Vermont and on the national U.S. registry. It's also not clear if he made any contact with others on the list.

The killings have sparked a debate in the United States about on-line sex-offender registries, which are available in nearly every state to anyone with Internet access.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Diamond defended the registries. "I think [sex offender registries]serve their purpose," he said in a telephone interview. "But having said that, I want to make sure it's still working the way it was designed to work. Lots of people use them."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.