ALFRED (AP) — Two days of closed-door court proceedings failed to produce a jury Wednesday for first trial of a major figure charged in a prostitution scandal centered on a Zumba dance studio in the seaside community of Kennebunk.
The remaining prospective jurors — about 50 to 60 out of an original jury pool numbering more than 140 — were told to return today as the judge attempts to finish the selection process and begin opening statements in the trial.
Mark Strong Sr., 57, of Thomaston, faces 59 misdemeanor counts including conspiring with dance instructor Alexis Wright, who’s accused of using her studio as a front for prostitution.
The married insurance agent has acknowledged having a physical relationship with Wright but said he never paid her for sex. Characterizing himself as a business partner, Strong said he helped Wright launch her studio by co-signing for her lease and loaning her money.
Both Strong and Wright have pleaded not guilty.
On NBC’s “Today,” Strong said Wednesday he’s guilty of cheating on his wife but not of accusations of promoting prostitution or invasion of privacy for allegedly viewing sex videos featuring unsuspecting clients. He said he rejected a plea deal because he’s innocent of the state charges against him.
The jury selection process in York County Superior Court has been cloaked in secrecy, with potential jurors questioned behind closed doors by the judge and lawyers.
Justice Nancy Mills on Wednesday rejected a request by the Portland Press Herald to open the proceedings to the public, and the selection process continued throughout the day even as the newspaper asked the state supreme court to intervene.
Lawyers have been ordered not to talk to reporters.
Wright, who lives in nearby Wells, faces 106 counts including prostitution and invasion of privacy. She will be tried at a later date.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less