ALFRED, Maine — The state is expected to charge many of the people who are named in a “client list” obtained from an investigation into an alleged Kennebunk-based prostitution operation, according to a motion filed by the prosecution.

The motion filed by the Maine attorney general’s office seeks to prevent the public release of the names — which could number more than 100.

The prosecutor also has asked the court to impose a gag order to prevent the release of much of the evidence being turned over to the defense and to prevent the defense from discussing the information with people not involved in the defense preparation.

The only person charged thus far in the case is Mark W. Strong, 57, of Thomaston. He was arrested in July and charged with promotion of prostitution. His attorney, Daniel Lilley of Portland, has criticized the prosecution over its handling of the case, specifically on the delay in providing evidence to him and the failure to charge anyone else.

The prosecution has turned over some evidence and said in its motion filed in York County Superior Court that it would be delivering more to Lilley. Included is evidence seized from Strong’s computer and the computer of a woman who operated the Zumba dance studio in Kennebunk.

The state has claimed that Strong, owner of the Strong Insurance Agency in Thomaston, had a significant business and personal connection to the dance studio in Kennebunk where police allege that prostitution was being promoted for more than a year.

The BDN is not naming the woman who operated the dance studio since she has not been charged.

“There is a so-called ‘client list’ with names and contact and other personal information regarding individuals on the list. The state will likely charge many of these persons with prostitution-related offenses, but some of these persons may not be charged,” stated the motion dated Sept. 20 and signed by Assistant Attorney General Gregg D. Bernstein.

The Attorney General’s Office has taken the position that the list should be part of the evidence covered by a protective order, which would restrict its release to only the defense and prosecution.

“The state seeks to be respectful of the constitutional rights of persons before they are charged, as well as those who will not be charged,” Bernstein states in his motion.

Bernstein adds that he expects the defense will object to that restriction and that court direction will be needed.

Lilley was not available for comment Friday, but someone in his office said the defense’s objection to that motion was mailed to the court on Friday.

Lilley has said earlier that he had heard, prior to the evidence being turned over to him, that there were up to 200 names on the client list which included prominent people in the community. Police records state that the dance studio owner videotaped many of the clients without their knowledge and maintained a very specific list of services rendered to clients.

Lilley has argued that Strong merely invested money in the woman’s business. He also has stated that Strong had been hired by the dance studio owner to investigate harassment by the Kennebunk Police Department. Strong also has a private detective’s license from the state.

Kennebunk police have denied the allegation.

The case became public in July when Strong was arrested but police say the investigation had been ongoing since the previous fall.

Justice Joyce Wheeler, who normally works out of Cumberland County, was initially assigned to the high-profile case because judges in York County might know some of the witnesses. But then she recused herself for unspecified reasons.

Justice Nancy Mills is now overseeing the case.

Join the Conversation

28 Comments

  1. now if the police would spend some time sloving murders and rapes and drug store robberies instead of spending our tax dollars going after adults who have  consensual sex we would be a safer place to live.

  2. Hint here fellows, choose a wife and be true to her. Putting morals and public health concerns aside for a moment lets talk about having just a bit of good business sense. In the long run wives are a lot more cost effective and make much better “business” partners. What would is cost you to hire someone to service your desires, help manage and maintain your home AND raise your children? When you’re not willing to respect contracts with one business partner you deserve to get badly burned. I hope all the names of those found guilty eventually get published. The public and a few wives need to know who they should or should not be doing business with in the future.
    On a side note. It may be wishful thinking, but I’m left wondering if any men entering this business ever received a legitimate service. As long as a video doesn’t prove otherwise, I’m sure more than a few will claim they did. Perhaps we should test their Zumba skills?

    1. Doing the math cost per intimate time.  Pay as you go is much more cost effective . You also have to figure in the equations to attractiveness is directly proportional to the amount you spend. IE plane Jane cost  $100s a month to marry and keep. When 2 mins of hot babes time is about the same.  Much cheaper just to pay them and not play the game.

  3. A few won’t be charged…my quess is the more ” prominent people ” are the one’s not gettin charged…guess the old sayin”It isn’t who know,but who you Bl#w” works pretty good in this case,either way

  4. This would never happen in Norway as the ecstasy of living there is so much greater than sexual gratification.  Did you know that according to a Forbes article, Norwegians are the happiest people in the galaxy?  Unlike the US, with 45,000 dead people in the streets  suffering from health care, the Nordic countries are social utopias. 

    1.  Oddly enough, prostitution isn’t illegal in Norway, although paying for sex is. But it’s the johns who get in trouble, not the prostitutes or their employers.

  5. I always thought that it was in The Constitution that only the woman can be charged in prostitution cases.   What’s up with charging the poor male victims of this Jezebel??   Dang liberal DA bending the laws and proud traditions.

  6. They wanna take people down for hiring a prostitute, that is fine, it is against the law even if many of us believe that is a law that long ago should have been changed or done away with.  But if you are gonna take down the factor worker, construction worker or Cable guy, then you darn well better be taking down the many politicians that frequent these types of places as well.

    1. “…………………………..then you darn well better be taking down the many politicians that frequent these types of places as well.”

      Problem with that is, there wouldn’t be hardly any Politicians left …………………………… hey, that might not be so bad for the AMERICAN Public…………………….

    1. Better yet, forget the the whole thing. Otherwise, voters should remember this and make sure all departments involved get a budget cut, since they obviously have way too much time on their hands. 

  7. Before you decide to hire a women to have sex with, who has had sex with hundreds or maybe thousands of men, try masturbation or the local bar at happy hour.

  8. It has always amazed me that drug dealers and prostitutes keep better records than many legitimate businesses- maybe they view them more as insurance policies than business record. We shall see if the names get released won’t we?

  9. Why does anyone care if adults are paying for sex?  Most don’t, but the IRS is scared they might lose a dime, so we make it illegal like drugs.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *