KENNEBUNK — Twenty-one men have been charged with engaging in prostitution in connection with an alleged prostitution operation in Kennebunk. The men’s names were released late Monday after a judge denied a new motion to keep them private.
Justice Thomas Warren denied the motion Monday from attorney Stephen Schwartz that sought to prevent release of the names of two of the alleged clients of Alexis Wright, who is facing 106 charges related to operation of an alleged prostitution business out of her Zumba studio.
Schwartz, Monday, removed his appeal to the state Supreme Judicial Court to have his clients’ names prevented from being released, and instead moved the appeal to Cumberland County Superior Court.
He filed the motion on Monday amidst controversy over when, and if, the names of the alleged clients would be released in a list of summons regularly provided by the Kennebunk Police Department.
Kennebunk Police released a summons list last Friday, but with a note specifying that the names of those summonsed in connection with the alleged prostitution business would be withheld, at least temporarily.
The summonses were released by the department at 5:45 p.m. Monday after the ruling on the appeal. The names of those summonsed are listed on the Kennebunk Police Department’s website.
Only first and last names were released, leaving some of the men’s identities unclear. The men’s addresses are being withheld by court order because some of them may be victims of criminal invasion of privacy because they were allegedly filmed without their knowledge while engaging in sexual acts, according to the court documents. Ages were also withheld by the police department.
Those charged are due to appear in Biddeford District Court on Dec. 5 at 1 p.m., according to a statement from the Kennebunk Police Department. The affidavit filed in relation to the investigation of her business states that Wright videotaped clients of the alleged prostitution business without their knowledge or consent.
Wright, 29, of Wells, the owner of the Pura Vida Zumba fitness studio in Kennebunk, which is alleged to have been the site of a prostitution business, was arraigned at Cumberland County Superior Court in Portland last week and pleaded not guilty to all 106 counts against her, including multiple counts of violation of privacy, engaging in prostitution, evasion of income tax and a count of theft by deception.
Mark Strong Sr., 57, of Thomaston, who was arrested in June in connection with the investigation into the studio by the Kennebunk Police Department and Maine State Police Major Crimes Unit, was arraigned simultaneously and pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of promotion of prostitution, a count of conspiracy to promote prostitution, and multiple counts of violation of privacy.
Schwartz, representing alleged clients known only as “John Doe 1” and “John Doe 2,” was attempting to permanently block the release of his clients’ names, saying in his motion, “Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury if denied a preliminary injunction, because the nature of the charges are such that any appearance or indication of involvement on the part of plaintiffs would cause severe and completely irreparable harm to their personal reputations as private citizens, their familial relationships, their professional reputations, and their professional relationships.”
In the motion, Schwartz cites several state statutes, including the Invasion of Privacy Statute and the Maine Victims’ Rights Statute as well as the constitutional right to privacy.
“The right to privacy is secured in Maine and it is one of the penumbral, fundamental rights enjoyed by citizens of this country under the Constitution of the United States,” wrote Schwartz in his motion.
The motion went on to claim that the Maine Criminal History Records Act permits but doesn’t require police departments to disclose criminal history record information contained in police arrest logs.
Enclosed in the documents filed by Schwartz on Monday are affidavits from each John Doe, which reflect the alleged clients’ concerns over the spectacle that would be created over the release of their identities.
“I am a disabled person,” wrote John Doe 1 in his affidavit. “I am a productive member of society, I have children, and my family and reputation will be irreparably harmed if my name is revealed pursuant to the so-called ”˜list.’”
John Doe 2, in his affidavit, wrote that he owns a business, and is concerned that release of his identity will prejudice potential jurors.
It was unclear at press time which of the men who are charged were represented by Schwartz.
York County District Attorney Kathryn Slattery, Col. Robert Williams of the Maine State Police, Maine Attorney General William Schneider, and Kennebunk Police Chief Robert Mackenzie were listed as defendants in Schwartz’s motions.
Neither Mackenzie nor Kennebunk Police Lt. Anthony Bean Burpee were at the Kennebunk Police Department Monday afternoon or available for comment, but the Journal Tribune filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the department on Monday afternoon, seeking release of the names, ages and addresses of those charged. This was prior to the evening release of the names after the court ruling.
Law clerks at the York County Superior Court in Alfred said early Monday that they had been instructed not to provide information to the media, with the exception of an online link to documents that have been filed in connection with the case.
Attorney Sigmund Schutz of Preti Flaherty, who represents the Maine Press Association, said early Monday, before the ruling, that the men’s identities should already have been made public.
“The police have every right to release the information now,” he said. “At some point, there is no further excuse.”
Last week, Schwartz filed an injunction in Biddeford District Court, seeking to keep his clients’ names private. Judge Andre Janelle denied the motion for a temporary restraining order against police and prosecutors, saying the names are “public information,” and also denied Schwartz’s appeal.
“I don’t think they have good cause to decline to release the records given at this point there is not only no court order preventing their release, but a judge has said the opposite,” said Schutz. “There is no valid legal basis to refuse to release the records.”
The police department was presumably concerned about liability and potential lawsuits should they release the names prior to the law court’s ruling, said Schutz. The obligation is to disclose, however, unless there is a court order directing them to do otherwise, he said.
“Adults charged with crimes is public record in Maine, as it should be and always has been,” he said.
Schutz said if the court had decided to keep the names of those charged private, the decision would set a precedent: Anytime someone does not want their name released in relation to a potentially embarrassing criminal charge, the release of that public record could be held up until litigation is complete.
Schwartz, in his motion to Cumberland County Superior Court on Monday, echoed a sentiment made in his original injunction to Biddeford District Court last week that releasing the names would not be in the public interest.
“The public interest is not adversely affected by this motion,” wrote Schwartz, “because the public interest at stake is merely that justice be done.”
— Staff Writer Jeff Lagasse can be contacted at 282-1535, Ext. 319 or jlagasse@journaltribune.com. Kristen Schulze Muszynski can be contacted at 282-1535, Ext. 322 or kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
