PORTLAND, Maine — A Superior Court justice refused to block access to a list of more than 100 potential clients of an alleged prostitution business in Kennebunk on Tuesday, but police and attorneys said those names — some of whom are rumored to be high-profile individuals — will not likely be handed over to the public until later this week.

State prosecutors, who have accused Thomaston businessman Mark Strong and Kennebunk fitness instructor Alexis Wright of running a prostitution operation out of Wright’s zumba studio, filed a motion to keep the list of clients out of the public eye. York County Deputy District Attorney Justina McGettigan told the court that investigators may not be filing charges against everybody on the list, and making those names public before the individuals are formally charged could unnecessarily harm their reputations.

But attorneys representing Strong and Wright during a Tuesday hearing in Cumberland County Superior Court told Justice Nancy Mills that prosecutors did not apply similar discretion in the indictments of Strong and Wright.

Strong was arrested on a single charge of promotion of prostitution in July, and Wright was named in publicly accessible court documents related to that arrest months before both were indicted last week on dozens of additional charges tied to the alleged business.

“They took no concern to protect the privacy of my client or Ms. Wright,” Daniel Lilley, the attorney representing Strong, told Mills on Tuesday. “It seems crazy for the state to say now, ‘We don’t want to hurt anybody.’ Well, we don’t want to hurt anybody either, but my client’s business and reputation have been destroyed, and his children have been humiliated.”

Sarah Churchill, the attorney representing Wright, echoed that sentiment in her comments to Mills.

“I take issue with the [state’s concern over the] privacy of the individuals not yet charged,” she said.

Sigmund Schutz, attorney for the Portland-based firm Preti Flaherty, represented the newspapers The York County Coast Star and Portland Press Herald on Tuesday in court, and also argued against keeping the list confidential. Justice Joyce Wheeler, who was presiding over the case before recusing herself last month, had temporarily ordered the names be blocked from public access until the court could give full consideration to a more permanent protection order.

Mills, taking up the case Tuesday, put an end to Wheeler’s order. She said she didn’t feel prosecutors’ concern about the reputations of the individuals on the list rose to a level that would obligate her to restrict access to it, saying it is important for Maine people to see transparency in the court system.

“I haven’t heard any good cause to impose a confidentiality order at this time,” the judge said.

Still, the names on the list were not immediately available Tuesday. Lilley told reporters after leaving the courthouse he would be using the list to build his defense case, but that he would not be turning it over to the media for scrutiny before it is ultimately entered as evidence in the court case.

Lt. Anthony Bean Burpee of the Kennebunk Police Department told the Bangor Daily News on Tuesday that investigators with his department have begun serving alleged clients of the prostitution business with summonses, but said he remains unsure of how many people on the list will be charged.

Burpee said he plans to release the names of the individuals charged so far on Friday. He said the alleged clients hail from “all over,” and that Kennebunk police may need to travel to deliver summonses or ask for help from other departments to serve paperwork in their jurisdictions.

BDN reporter Stephen Betts contributed to this story.

Seth has nearly a decade of professional journalism experience and writes about the greater Portland region.

Join the Conversation

34 Comments

  1. Doesn’t seem right to release names for a case that hasn’t been decided.  Maybe the “justice” system wants to try the case in the court of public opinion…

    1. Someone who pays for sex to a prostitute is committing a crime., So yes the names should be revealed to the public..

      I understand what you are saying, you don’t think the Elite should  be held to the same standards as everyone else.. I think the prosecution feels the same way you do, in protecting the special people, and letting the others rot

      1. Well, I think the difference is that the people haven’t been charged yet, and some may not. I think they should be released when they are charged.  They really shouldn’t  yet until they figure out who they are charging.  But I would be VERY curious to hear why some people may not be charged (if that is what happens).  They can’t just not charge the “high profile” people and charge all of the average joe’s on the list……  Either way it should be an interesting list…..

      2. Nothing
        has been proven yet comrade easy button. 
        So quick to rush to judgment & such a clean living soul I presume. You have
        no idea how I “feel” & obviously get some vicarious thrill out of
        this which says more about you (yeah, & those who agree w/you) than
        anything else.  Even if it is eventually
        proven a “crime” it is victimless although you & your voyeur think alikes
        will probably be lining up to buy the videos…
        I have zero respect for people who want to pry & interfere in others lives simply because they are so unhappy in their own.

        1. Yes I am enjoying this, I want all to be charged especially the elite. I don’t care if it causes hardships for them and their families.. I want it brought out in public in every paper there is in New England.. I am sure these are the same people who would spit on people who steal for food. I want them shamed fined and jailed if need be.
          RJ .  I have made mistakes in my life and no one tried to protect me. Yet we have the DA’s office trying to protect the special elite people.. That is bull crap. Never would they do this if it were regular Joes visting this place..

  2. Hope I’m not on it…hehe…no really,what is the difference in paying for it and knowing what your going to get or doing the wining and dining and not ever sure if your going to get anything at all?  just asking

    1. Should it be legal is another question. Since pay for it is a crime and they broke the law then their names should be released

    2. Well at least if you wine and dine them you are likely going to get a good meal.  The other scenario only leads to getting a nasty disease or at the very least sick to your stomach..LOL

  3. The people have a right to know. The question is whether the people want to know. Personally, speaking only for myself, I would rather not know.

    1. Oh, contrare, i Definately want to know what high-profile holier than thou people are doing shady things behind their wives, and our backs.  Bring on the criminals and lets fry them in the court of public opinion….Might just see a few of those richy riches get flambayed on here and elsewhere.

  4.  some of whom are rumored to be high-profile individuals — will not likely be handed over to the public until later this week.

    Translation, those TRULY high-profile individuals will be somehow majically erased from the list for the good of the public..LOL….

  5. There are a couple of things to be pondered in this situation.
    1- They had best insure that the names on the list are attached to proof that the people actually did buy sex or offer to buy it.
    2- The family members of the supposed clients should be informed, especially spouses or other sexual partners, in order for them to see their doctors to be checked for STDs.

  6. Maybe we get lucky and “Swallow the pill” Dill, “Bummer” Summers, and Ding-A-Ling” King will be on the list, and we can then get some good, honest candidates for Senate.

  7. 1 skowheganresident
    2________
    3________
    4________
    5________
    6________
    7________
    8________
    9________
    10_______
    11_______
    12_______
    13_______
    14_______

  8. “They took no concern to protect the privacy of my client or Ms. Wright,” Daniel Lilley, the attorney representing Strong, told Mills on Tuesday. “It seems crazy for the state to say now, ‘We don’t want to hurt anybody.’ Well, we don’t want to hurt anybody either, but my client’s business and reputation have been destroyed, and his children have been humiliated.” – BDN
    Maybe he should have given his children a thought when they started this prostitution ring in the beginning! They lost their rights when they were busted – I do not feel any compassion for either one of these people – I do feel for their families.

    1. Didn’t they release the client names in the Heidi Fleiss (I think that is how it’s spelled) prostitution case? Maybe they were released after the verdict…

    2. so you already know that they are guilty as charged ms eaton? please tell me where your crystal ball is, as i would like to take a look. people in this country are presumed innocent and the actions of the prosecution are making me lean more and more towards that presumption.

      1. Usually I am the one who thinks that someone is innocent until proven guilty, but not this time. I just feel that they are guilty of this crime. I apologize if I offended you with my cynicism.

    3. Maybe he (sStrong) should of thought about his reputation before he started pimping and whatever other grifting he got into. 

  9. Typical case of “It’s who you are”.  They should turn loose the names when and if they are charged. Merely being a “Suspect” can damage your reputation for no reason.

  10. ” my client’s business and reputation have been destroyed, and his children have been humiliated.”   Hmmmmm-whose fault would that be?   

  11. Ha,ha.  I bet that if the DA’s Office knew who was involved  before they charged this man, they would never have opened this can of worms… Now the DA’s office are trying to protect the criminals who are Elite.
    This is what wrong with the world right here in plain sight for everyone to see. The DA’s office want’s to protect the names of the well to do or friends whichever it is.

    1. Over the years I have clearly seen there are two sets of laws. One set is for the common man. The other is for the elite in society. The elite get caught and get away with more than we hear about. I see it often.

      One elitist family had their convenience store  broken into a couple of weeks ago, but not one word in the news. Supposedly there was also illegal drug activities going on and one man was caught. But yet again, not one word in the news. Police were there but no story and no charges in any news article that I have read. Employees started talking about what happened and for some reason stopped talking about it the very next day.  Hmmm…. makes me wonder what is up with that??? But, like I said, this is a rich family and the rules most of the rest of us must follow did not pertain to them. The story completely managed to get covered up. 

  12. The whole thing is ridiculous.  If it were filmed between consenting adults who got paid, it’s pornography and that’s legal. Why the double standard with prostitution?

  13. eliot spitzer  didn’t seem to get hurt by being client number 9, it probably served as a resume’ enhancement,i hear him on liberal radio almost every week-end. 

Leave a comment

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