TELL US: Should Level 1 Sex Offender Information Be Public?

Last week, news spread quickly about the indictment of a Wakefield couple for numerous charges stemming from an illegal day care operation where graphic child sexual abuse occurred.

The Middlesex County District Attorney's office alleges that at least 13 children were abused while under the care of John Burbine, 49, at the Waterfall Education Center, which offered tutoring and day care.

Burbine was a level 1 sex offender, which means he had been convicted of a sex-related crime but was deemed least likely to re-offend. In Wakefield, at least one mom reported to Wakefield Patch that she tried to do a routine check on Burbine when she brought her child for tutoring at the former Waterfall Education Center a couple of years ago, but found nothing because of his Level 1 status.

Since then, lawmakers and public officials have begun to consider what, if any, reforms should be made to the sex offender notification system - especially in regard to dealing with information about Level 1 offenders.

Sex offenders are classified according to the degree of dangerousness they pose to the public and their likelihood to re-offend. A Level 1 offender has been classified as a “low risk.” A Level 2 offender has been classified as a “moderate risk.” A Level 3 offender has been classified as a “high risk.”

Offenders classified as a Level 2 or a Level 3 offender have his or her sex offender registry information available to the public. Level 1 information is not public.

Does this case affect how you feel about the Sex Offender Registry? Would releasing more information about all levels of sex offenders prove helpful? Or, do you think level 1 offenders don't deserve to have their information made public? Tell us in the comments.