KENNEBUNK, Maine — With more and more suspected johns in Kennebunk’s high profile prostitution case refusing to speak to police, the sweep of summonses that began nearly two months ago has slowed to a trickle.
Kennebunk police have been releasing the names of men charged as clients in the case on approximately two-week intervals dating back to Oct. 15. In each of the first three installments, police released the names of between 15 and 21 men charged with engaging a prostitute.
On Nov. 26, police released the names of four men, and then on Friday, another two names.
According to Kennebunk Police Lt. Anthony Bean Burpee, that’s because more and more suspected johns are going around the police investigation, and beginning talks directly with prosecutors in the high profile case. That approach can be taken to help dim the spotlights on their alleged crimes by keeping their names out of the regular police blotters.
“Many suspects have retained counsel and have, therefore, canceled previously scheduled interviews with investigators,” Kennebunk Lt. Anthony Bean Burpee told Maine media outlets Friday. “Many attorneys have indicated they plan to speak with York County Deputy District Attorney Justina McGettigan, who is handling the prosecution of these cases, prior to making a final decision on how best to proceed with cases against their clients.
“This may include the process of pleading ‘guilty by information’ directly with DDA McGettigan and handling the matter sooner in court rather than having clients receive a criminal summons with a formal criminal charge and a subsequent later court date,” he continued.
Thus far, 64 men have been charged with engaging a prostitute in the case, with seven having already pleaded guilty or no contest. Two guilty pleas and one no contest plea were entered in person by alleged clients in the case Wednesday in Biddeford District Court.
Four guilty pleas were entered in previous weeks through the “guilty by information” process Lt. Bean Burpee described.
Another 19 men charged as clients in the case have entered not guilty pleas in writing through their attorneys, avoiding in-person court appearances.
The names of the two men released Friday are Jay P. Sanborn, 46, of Springvale and Ricky J. Dewitt, 49, of Lyman.
Investigators allege that 29-year-old Alexis Wright of Wells ran a prostitution business out of her Kennebunk fitness studio alongside businessman Mark Strong, 57, of Thomaston. Police have said Wright kept meticulous records of the operation, including a list of nearly 150 names of clients, which in southern Maine has become popularly referred to as “The List.”
That list has not been made public, but Strong’s attorney, Daniel Lilley, suggested early in the case that it contained the names of several high profile individuals. Alleged johns are only being named publicly as they are officially charged with engaging a prostitute, a rolling process that has taken place over nearly two months thus far and is on pace to continue into early 2013.
Thus far, the list of men previously charged includes former South Portland Mayor James Soule, former Kennebunk High School hockey coach Donald Hill, local lawyer Jens Bergens, former Portland Planning Board Chairman Joe Lewis and former Church of the Nazarene Pastor James Andrew Ferreira.
Hill, Soule and Bergens have entered pleas of not guilty, while Lewis and Ferreira have yet to reach their scheduled arraignment dates.
Kennebunk police Lt. Anthony Bean Burpee has said his detectives are combing through massive amounts of evidence collected in the case, and are charging men as clients of the alleged operation as they gather enough incriminating evidence to do so. The names of those charged over each two-week span are then released to the public through the department’s regular biweekly arrest blotter, which also includes the names of people charged with unrelated crimes over the same period.
Both Wright and Strong have pleaded not guilty to a slate of crimes tied to the case.
Prosecutors from the York County District Attorney’s office are urging Cumberland County Superior Court Justice Nancy Mills to rejoin the cases against Strong and Wright after the judge previously agreed to requests by both suspects to separate the two.
Mills gave prosecutors until midday Thursday to enter evidence supporting their motion to rejoin the cases, saying in her order that the evidence in question would remain under seal — blocked from public view — until further notice. Mills also gave the defense attorneys until 10 a.m. Monday to file any opposition to the state’s evidence or request another conference on the topic.
In the parallel cases against accused johns in the case, another group of at least 15 alleged clients are due for arraignments — at which they will be asked to enter pleas of guilty, not guilty or no contest — on Dec. 19.
Next we’ll be down to one name released from “the list” bi-weekly, then there will be one name released every other month. Just wait and see. My previous predictions have been spot on.
“…that’s because more and more suspected johns are going around the police investigation, and beginning talks directly with prosecutors in the high profile case. That approach can be taken to help dim the spotlights on their alleged crimes by keeping their names out of the regular police blotters.” BDN article
Nice way to spin it so names aren’t released for their crimes. I’m sure if I got a DUI and tried talking directly with prosecutors, my name would be in the papers. I wonder if this might become a legal matter for the prosecutors for not giving “johns” equal treatment. If my name was on “the list” and printed in the news, then I found out other people who did the same crime were given special treatment to keep their names secret, have no doubt, my lawyer would be in touch.
The papers can ask for the names via FOIA request. Already happened in one or two of the cases.
This paper refused to publish the names of the batch that was indicted. One of the posters posted who they were.
They were good calls. It almost has a sniff of sadism: Make ‘m squirm.
Spit it out and give us the numbers all at once, then tell us WHO only after they’re convicted.
Why the different treatment? “That approach can be taken to help dim the spotlights on their alleged crimes by keeping their names out of the regular police blotter.” Alleged? Already convicted in the pubic eye is more like it!
Makes me sick.
Well, it’s nice to know that these ‘gentlemen’ can refuse something. The longer this prostitutes list of ‘clients’ grows, the grosser and more desperate these ‘Johns’ look.
Slimy deal this is. The D.A choosing this tact makes me wonder what we don’t know. They hinted at possible extortion plans, then immediately do exactly what the extortionist would have threatened. Odd case all around.
Does anyone know who the “High Profile” people are? Or are they slick enough to keep it all hidden?
Why do you care?
just wondering if its you……
Nope, it’s not me. Have no need for a prostitute. I like to read the self righteous comments that people make – especially when money is involved. If the same two people “did it” for FREE, it wouldn’t be in the news – period.
That’s because the same two people “doing it” for free is not breaking the law. That’s a “no brainah”.
The problem with prostitution laws – i pay a woman to have sex with me and i’m breaking the law. I pay a woman to have sex with me in front of a camera after signing a waiver and i’m creating art. If Lexie had verification that here customers knew she was recording them then her actions would have been legal.
It’s the same old story,it’s not what you know but who you know.
Plenty of money will get ya a good lawyer….
Actually in a case like this lawyers are BEGGING for clients. Unlike the “John’s” they love publicity.
charge them with obstruction
obstruction? Have you never heard of the 5th Amendment?
They’re simply a bunch of nosy wags with nothing better to fill their dirty little minds.
So true, jealous people that live boring lives.
Funny that some men on “The List” have their employment divulged, and some do not. I guess “John Doe, 36 Westbrook paper mill employee” isn’t titillating enough.
Its none of anyones business, no names should be released… Only ones who want to see the names are people with out a life..
I agree. don’t get hot, it’s a joke.
I dont get hot, unless there is a hooker involved…LOL
I would not either if I were in their shoes.
I thought the police had names, payment records, lists of individual likes and dislikes, videos, etc… So why the need to “interview” prior to issuing summonses?
Just because she wrote stuff down, doesn’t mean its true. Its called ‘investigating’.
People have been summonsed on far less. Charge them or save the tax payers a boat load of money and end the investigation.
By the way there is no requirement to speak with the police or the zdA. To blame the “John’s” for the slow moving investigation is very sad.
I agree JD it is your right not to speak with police . I think that ia like the 5th amendment of the constitution.
I still say the whole thing is a complete waste of tax-payer money. So an adult woman wants money for sex and an adult male is willing to pay for it. This simply should not be a crime.
You are right. Prostitution should be legal. Sex can be sold as a commodity, there is a market, and there are customers. Tax it, and leave it alone. Nuff said.
…and it isn’t unless CASH is exchanged. I can take a girl to the movies, buy her dinner, a condo and a Cadillac and have regular sex with her without violating the law.
You are getting off cheap. If I looked at it as just a sexual relationship, which I don’t, but just for discussion, I bought her a large house and 2 cars and vacations and all her clothes and shopping.. Hmmmm.
Maybe prostitution is illegal because if it wasn’t many men would figure out it was cheaper to just pay a Zumba instructor. It IS cheaper to just pay a Zumba instructor and there would be so much more variety because you could hire lots of different Zumba instructors that were regulated and kept safe and tested and well paid.
We could all be like the Kennedy’s!
You are absolutely correct. Two consenting adults. BOTH men and WOMEN should be able to purchase sex.
That would be called gash for cash and no taxes would be paid, ever.
Does showing a church in the photo constitute ‘slanted’ or ‘biased’ reporting?
Didn’t Paulytics LiePage say Maine was “open” for business…lol.
$=lawyers and protection for now. I AM still waiting for this investigation to arrive in augusta.
I’ll bet the first batch of guys wish they had the lawyers the rest of the guys came up with! This is exactly what the first guys hired their lawyer to do, and he not only failed terribly but he caused even more media attention to the case!
Good, none of anyones business….
I still say when you take someone out on a date, buy them dinner and drinks, and then have sex you just PAID for sex. There should only be charges for Alexis for not claiming so much income AND obtaining State Aid fraudulently, and perhaps Mark for being the money guy. TRUST ME, these men are in enough hot water with their spouses, sig others and family, and probably employer. Why does the State waste so much energy and money on such ridiculous crap. Legalize it and TAX THE HELL out of it.
Sure, blame the “John’s” for slowing down the investigation when in fact, if the police and DA hadn’t wanted to make such an issue about this just to try and make themselves look good, they (police & DA) had investigated and when they had “ALL” information then issued “ALL” summons at the same time and then released “ALL” the names at once, they probably could have wrapped this up before the end of the year.
Like I said the other day ……….. I wonder where they will be able to find an impartial jury that doesn’t know anything about the case.
Hmmmm… They had no problem asking for “Zumba” lessons… The “cat” (or other word) must have their tongues…
As Leonard Cohen’s song, “The Future”…
Give me back my broken night
my mirrored room, my secret life
it’s lonely here,
there’s no one left to torture
Give me absolute control
over every living soul
And lie beside me, baby,
that’s an order! ……When they said REPENT REPENT
I wonder what they meant
Lame enough to get caught consorting with prostitutes, yet smart enough to exercise their right to remain silent under the fifth amendment? Interesting.