Town

of Kennebunk Press Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 17, 2012

The Town of Kennebunk has again been drawn into the media headlines regarding criminal activity at the Zumba dance studio, this time by the issuance of an inaccurate press release by Mark Strong, one of the principal defendants charged with the promotion of prostitution at that facility. While it would be inappropriate for the Town to try the case in the media, and it will not do so, Mr. Strongs press release is inaccurate in many instances that portray both the Department and several of its sworn officers in a false light and that must be corrected. First, the department has never harassed either Ms. Wright or Mr. Strong. Both have been investigated because of the existence of probable cause that one or more crimes may have been committed at the dance studio. All subsequent searches of Ms. Wrights properties in Kennebunk and Mr. Strongs properties in Thomaston were pursuant to valid search warrants approved in advance by the District Attorneys office and authorized by a State court judge. The Departments efforts here were all the result of professional police investigation, based on probable cause, and pursued with the approval of the District Attorneys office. Second, Mr. Strongs suggestion that his investigative efforts disclosed misconduct by Department personnel and that he was then targeted for retaliation is completely false. The fatal shooting he references was fully reported in the press at the time, and a subsequent in-depth investigation by the Maine Attorney Generals office-- as is customary under Maine law--exonerated the police officer completely. For Mr. Strong now to say that he discovered this incident is not only false, but an inappropriate exploitation of an incident that remains tragic for all involved. It has absolutely nothing to do with the dance studio investigation and illegal activities there. Third, Officer Presby was selected to investigate the dance studio incidents, in part, because the Department felt it appropriate to have one of its three female officers on the investigation team (along with two male State Police Officers) and, in part, because at the time the dance studio investigation began in earnest she was working days on a patrol shift and the Chief felt that her shift position could be covered more easily than other shift positions. Three years ago, unrelated to the dance studio investigation, she was given a written reprimand for having a romantic relationship with another officer in the Department; pursuant to State law, the reprimand was a public record. She was never suspended. The other officer elected to resign from the Department; he was not fired. The two are now engaged to be married. This incident

did not then, nor now, have anything to do with the dance studio investigation. And finally, the Department has returned to Mr. Strong those computers seized from him that were determined not to have any information on them relevant to the dance studio investigations. Others determined to have information on them relevant to the criminal investigations, have not been returned for obvious reasons after consultation with the District Attorneys office.