PORTLAND, Maine — A Superior Court judge ruled Monday afternoon that the names of the people accused of engaging a prostitute in a Kennebunk Zumba dance studio can be made public, but that their addresses should not be made public.

When that release will occur is not clear.

Justice Thomas Warren rejected a request for a temporary restraining order sought by the attorney for two men referred to in court documents by the pseudonyms John Doe No. 1 and John Doe No. 2 to prevent the release of the names of clients issued summons by the Kennebunk Police Department.

“Plaintiffs’ motion for a [temporary restraining order] is granted with respect to the disclosure of the address of any person who has been summonsed and who is also an alleged victim of the invasion of privacy brought against Alexis Wright,” Justice Humphrey ruled.

The order came on a day that saw additional legal maneuvering, much of it outside of public view.

Justice Humphrey made his ruling following a brief telephone conference with the John Does’ attorney, Stephen Schwartz of Portland, and an attorney for the Kennebunk Police Department.

The Kennebunk Department had announced it would begin releasing on Oct. 12 the names of people issued summonses for engaging a prostitute. Schwartz first filed an appeal in Biddeford District Court on Friday and was rejected in an effort to block the release of names. An appeal then was filed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court but on Monday, Schwartz filed a motion to withdraw that appeal because of a the motion filed in Cumberland County Superior Court.

The Superior Court motion filed by Schwartz also sought to permanently prevent the district attorney’s office from prosecuting clients of Wright. He argued that the amount of harm inflicted on the people would outweigh the necessity to prosecute such a low-level offense.

“The state’s interest in prosecuting the low-level offense of engaging a prostitute is not outweighed by the invasion of privacy that will inure to plaintiffs if the prosecution proceeds,” the motion states.

The lawyer claims his clients have a constitutional right against the invasion of privacy by the publication of names.

“By gratuitously publishing a list of those charged with the minor offense of engaging a prostitute, subjecting them and their families to ridicule and public spectacle throughout the country, defendants are actually facilitating the more serious crime of invasion of privacy that the Legislature meant to proscribe and for which defendants have obtained an indictment against Ms. Wright and Mr. Strong,” the motion stated.

Affidavits filed by the John Does provide a little more information on the two alleged clients. John Doe No. 1 states that he is a disabled person who is a productive member of society with children.

“The nature of the charges against me is so notorious that any indication of involvement with such activities will cause severe and irreparable harm to my reputation as a private citizen, my familial relationships, and my professional reputation and relationships,” stated John Doe No. 1 in his affidavit filed in Cumberland County.

John Doe No. 2 states he has a family including a child and owns a business. He repeated the claim from John Doe No. 1 that the release of his name would cause irreparable harm.

A Superior Court ruling can be appealed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.

Charged thus far have been Mark W. Strong Sr., 57, of Thomaston, who has been indicted for 59 counts that include promotion of prostitution, invasion of privacy, and conspiracy; and Alexis Wright, 29, of Wells who was also was indicted earlier this month on 106 counts, including charges of engaging in prostitution, violation of privacy and failure to pay taxes.

Strong’s attorney Daniel Lilley said Monday that the names should be released.

“Let the chips fall where they may,” Lilley said.

“They’ve crucified Mark Strong. They’ve tried him in the media. We should have a fair playing field,” Lilley said.

Lilley said if Strong’s case goes to trial, he certainly will call the alleged clients of Alexis Wright to testify.

Wright ran a Zumba dance studio in Kennebunk where police and prosecutors say she operated a prostitution business and videotaped clients having sex with her without their knowledge.

A telephone call and email messages were sent late Monday afternoon to Kennebunk police about if and when they would release names of people charged.

Join the Conversation

44 Comments

  1. They just better not release the names of people not charged, then yes it would be a great invasion of privacy. 

    1. When this goes to trial  Strong can call everyone of the Johns as a witness. I know I would…  I also woud petetition the court to charge all the clients. , You seem a little nervous mero818, someone had to rat the operation out, one of the johns I presume 

      1. Funny how you’re one of the people constantly screeching about big government, but you here you want government to explode and have these guys prosecuted without the necessary evidence. You accuse others without any evidence at all. How disgusting is that? That has never been part of our justice system.

        1. The poor, middle income and the rich should all be treated the same, thats all. I don’t want them hiding people because they clam to be pillars in their community.. equal justice. thats all

  2. If they are going to release the names ; First, Middle, Last and age should be included. At the very  least protect those with the same name who have nothing to do with this. 

    1.  In Aroostook County they used to have to do this and include addresses, due to so many French Catholics with saint’s names as first names. I used to know 5 people with the same name back in those days!

  3. This is rich. The “Captain Obvious” list is about to be published. Names but not addresses. How are the lynch mobs going to hang the horrible, dastardly johns without addresses? Gotta love politics! 

    1. If it’s only “seconds” in your world you should know that there is medical help for this condition.

  4. “By gratuitously publishing a list of those charged with the minor
    offense of engaging a prostitute, subjecting them and their families to
    ridicule and public spectacle throughout the country, defendants are
    actually facilitating the more serious crime of invasion of privacy…”

    I guess it’s not so minor an offense then. Newsflash, councilor…People who commit crimes shouldn’t have reasonable expectations of privacy.

    1. If these people wanted “Privacy” they probably shouldn’t be exposing their private parts to prostitutes under the cover of receiving Zumba training.  Now it’s time to face the music, wives and the general public. 

      1. The true victims in this case are the “John’s” families that will be forever connected to this incident because the names are released. Should they have to suffer?

  5. Release the Johns! Oh, that’s what the ruling has stated…..looks like White Pages and MyLife will be busy for a few days chasing down addresses……you Johns better come clean with the little lady while there is still time……

  6. The names should be released immediately.  There’s absolutely no reason for the PD to be holding onto that information now that the court has authorized it.  People get their names put in the paper for minor marijuana possession and even jay-walking.  They should also be there for hiring a hooker.  Sorry that it will be embarrassing to some, but we don’t need to be part of keeping their wives in the dark any longer.

  7. I don’t disagree that their names should be released, but looking at these comments, I see a lot of hypocrisy. Many do bad things themselves, and it’s usually the ones who have done the worst that are the first to point their fingers elsewhere. 

    What is it going to do to have their names release? What does it matter? So some crimes get scapegoated and then others are just ignored? The guys who hired cheap Zumba prostitutes get their lives ruined, but then the ones that hired more expensive and discreet ones go unnoticed? 

    This is gross to me. I hate how inconsistent it is. 

    1. whats wrong with you. do you judge the drug dealer? the abuser? prior to a court conviction.. Hipocrisy would be allowing these people off the hook for a crime they commited..

      1. What’s wrong with you? Are you capable of reading a comment before commenting?

        These guys will have their day in court, they’re not going unpunished if there is real evidence. Since when did public brandishing and hearsay become part of the justice system? My problem is exactly what I stated and exactly what you ignored — that this is inconsistent. I don’t care if you publicize their names, the issue is when you make it a priority to publicize some and not the others. That’s inconsistent and that’s hypocrisy.

  8. Too bad John Doe 1 and 2.   Come clean with your family and you may have a better outcome.  You could bring it up as a dinner “peace”pun intended. If that doesn’t go well, there is always the campaign to discuss:) 

    1. One said he was disabled? What the heck does that got to do with the case?
      My wife doen’t know. LOL!! who would have thought.. Don’t all johns talk to their wives about their sex lives?

  9. Great bust KPD.. Thanks for caring enough about your town to stop this type of crime and bring order to your wonderful town… The criminal element of the sex trade needs to know it won’t be allowed in Maine.. Shame on the customers who incourage girls to sell there bodies, without them there would be no prostitutes.. These girl coud be your kids. shame on you.

    1. Give the sanctimonious angle a rest, will ya granny?  Been reading your neurotic drivel for days now.  Here’s the names, call each of them personally and have a ball.  Shame on you for being so holier-than-thou and such a prude, okay?  LOL

      1. Bill I am not holier than thou. I don’t like coverups for the elite. I myself am a humble servant trying to balance justice. Heck Bill I’ve  seen it all hanging in PQ, we used to have plenty of fun up there that would have got you jail time here in the States.

        1. Parti Québécois, eh? Pardon me for that, too much coffee, I guess. =) I just got really burnt on the old-lady type of sentiment I seemed to see behind your posts — and I may be entirely wrong. Seemed I was reading comment after comment where the main idea was shouldn’t do this and shouldn’t do that and the and sky is falling, oh me oh my. LOL On a personal note, never have liked old school-marm types trying to shove their sheltered little versions of reality on others — a left-over from other times, I guess. Peace on, Buttons.

  10. HERE THEY ARE….I BEAT BDN AND MORNING SENTINEL

    …removed…BDN’s reasoning was a good decision

  11. At this point, the addresses are just an afterthought.  Heard there’s a whole gang of divorce attorneys booking hotel rooms.  Grab a chair and watch this freak show, folks!  LOL

  12. if you are a conservative republican,just switch to  liberal democrat.It will be a resume’ enhancement.

Leave a comment

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