.
Feedback

Rt. 32 Massage Business Owner Has Prostitution Conviction in New York

Showgun Spa operator opened business two years after losing her NY license.

The 65-year-old woman who owns and operates Showgun Spa in Uncasville was convicted in New York of promoting prostitution, a felony, and had her massage therapy license pulled in that state as a result, a Montville Patch investigation revealed.

Nan Suk S. Clark, of Queens, NY, is the license holder and corporation agent for the Gristmill Plaza massage parlor, according to state records.

Clark was convicted in 2006 for promoting and profiting from prostitution services in two Westchester County massage parlors, according to prosecution documents. 

Identified with the alias "Candy" by New York prosecutors, Clark, 65, was found guilty of advancing and profiting from “prostitution activity conducted by three female employees who the defendant supervised,” according to a press release issued in 2007 by Assistant District Attorney Steven Vandervelden, Chief of the Organized Crime and Criminal Enterprise Bureau in Westchester.

According to the documents obtained by Patch, Westchester investigators and the New York City Police Department raided two massage parlors after a two-month investigation where four women performed massages — without licenses — “and engaged or offered to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.” Clark was not one of the four women; she was their “supervisor.”

Following the conviction, Clark was forced to surrender her license to practice massage in New York.

Move to Connecticut

The loss of her New York license did not stop her from practicing in Connecticut; well before the Westchester case, Clark had already applied for and received a Connecticut license in 2001 (DOPH Lic. # 2517). That license expires in 2013. According to state records, she is facing no disciplinary actions.

Two years after the New York conviction, Clark opened up shop in Montville. According to the Secretary of the State, she registered her Route 32 massage parlor as a limited liability corporation in 2009.

When a person applies for a license to practice massage therapy in Connecticut, the license is awarded by the state Department of Public Health. A number of requirements must be met before the license is granted including verification of course of study and board certification, a $375 application fee and verification from other states where one is or was licensed.

That form, to be completed by the state where the applicant has (or had) another license, incudes a section on any disciplinary action. It is unclear what, if any, information Clark provided about her conviction. Numerous calls to DOPH — from licensing to the legal department  — went unreturned.

A Visit to the Spa

With a camera in hand, a reporter attempted to get inside the location twice but was stopped first by a locked door and then Clark, who said, among other things, that entry was permissible but without the camera, and then changed her mind and denied access.

But before closing the door the second time Montville Patch showed up, Clark denied the prostitution conviction. When pressed to answer whether or not she was running an illegal massage parlor here, similar to the one she was convicted of running in New York, she said flatly: “No, not doing that.”

Online Reviews

Patch will not be providing links to the reviews of the alleged services available at Showgun Spa; the majority are contained on 'adult' sites. But it was not difficult to locate them via a basic Internet search. 

A cursory online search revealed numerous "reviews" and referrals about the type of services one can allegedly receive at the Montville location, including what’s described as a ‘happy ending’ with graphic details of sex services, including a table shower.  A number of client reviews include graphic descriptions of services beyond the so-called "happy ending."

On one site, a "sex guide," a number of reviewers share their alleged experiences at Showgun. One, posted by OffTheRail, said "I've never left unhappy," and another, B2000, describes in lurid detail the services he received by Coco. Several reviewers describe at least two young Asian women working there.

Local Awareness

Montville Patch began its investigation of the spa after residents shared their outrage that the business was featured in Patch’s business-listing directory.

Mayor Ronald McDaniel, who is also Chief of Police, said he was unaware of any illegal activity at business.

The newly installed Resident State Trooper at the Montville Police Department, Sgt. Martin "Marty" Martinez, has been on the job for five weeks and said he'd never even heard of the business. 

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Waterford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Richard Waselik May 19, 2013 at 05:57 am
There is no "suckles away". The money is deposited by those that use it. The rest isRead More relentless retoric...
Daniella Ruiz May 19, 2013 at 05:44 am
another 'not for profit' that suckles away at the very core of peoples generosity?? better toRead More 'retire' the banking/WS thieves that casually gore the system with relentless greed, schemes and secrecy.
Ivy's Simply Homemade
nascarblue May 17, 2013 at 08:05 am
happy happy anniversary, i love your food, you can tell when a business takes pride in what they do.Read More wishing you many many more years, i will definatly be back, along with my friends, we love your food.
Kate May 19, 2013 at 02:05 pm
Oh, and please spread the word, and bring a friend to the meeting! :)
Kate May 19, 2013 at 02:03 pm
Hi Naty! That would be so great! The next RTM meeting in Waterford is on June 3rd, at 7:00 p.m.Read More The more people who show up and tell the town we want Cohanzie School to be repurposed, the better! This is politics, after all, and it is the residents showing up and telling the town this is a building we care about, this is a property we want access too. Imagine at least the 1923 section being repurposed into some department that would benefit the town. The town will demolish Cohanzie, sell the land and the bricks, and turn around in a year or two and say "We need more space! Let's build a new building!". Why should we do that when Cohanzie School is there, it can be repurposed, and it is so important for our town's history and the Cohanzie community? What if there was a park area where the basketball courts are, a path to walk around the building and down a part of the hill. Sledding could still happen, ball playing or other activities on the lower level. This retains the historic building, the architecture, the Cohanzie name, the community "presence", the hill, the ball field. It can be a place to go and relax. Even a dog park can be built on part of it! There is nothing like that in that section of town. Leary Field is remote and isolated. It is a ball field. With Cohanzie Firehouse and Lisa Dedrick Field right there, you feel the presence of community, without being isolated or unable to grab a quiet moment or more. Come on Waterford. This building and grounds belongs to us. Let's reclaim it before it is demolished and the bricks sold. Don't believe it cannot be repurposed. Asbestos, oil tanks, and other environmental factors are ALWAYS present in old schools, so the experts have told me. Old schools are repurposed all the time. It is a matter of convincing the town officials that this is what we WANT. Please speak up! Please SHOW UP, at the RTM meeting on June 3rd, at the Town Hall at 7:00 p.m. They are waiting to see what kind of turnout we get. Ignoring one resident or twenty is easy. Ignoring 100 or 500 is hard. We can do this, if you HELP.
Naty Bush May 18, 2013 at 11:44 am
Where will the meeting take place? I might be able to go to say why it shouldn't be demolished.
Liz May 12, 2013 at 09:06 pm
Mr. Steiner wants to build 72 three story homes on 32 acres in addition to the 60 condos in the twoRead More large buildings. That is more than two individual units per acre or if you include the 60 condos - that is MORE than 4 units per acre! The area around the property for new building is zoned 3 acres per unit. The average of currently built housing abutting the property is about one acre per unit. That is not in keeping with the neighborhood character.
Daniella Ruiz May 12, 2013 at 05:36 pm
Mr Steiner may be the last hope for this decrepit place. The neighbors need to move along, or buyRead More the place themselves. Change might help the stonewalling attitude that has become evident in nearly the entire town, revolving around exclusive entitled old farts with nothing better to do than remember their glory days of Seaside. Its gone, & it's not going to revert back to a pasture either. (too many complaints about that cow smell and so forth). My advice is to listen carefully and try to work something out, get over your own selfish grandious dreams of Pelham Manor style estates and do SOMETHING before it simply falls apart like Norwich Hospital, the countless thread/manufacturing mills, and every other historic building that has been left to rot.
Daniella Ruiz May 14, 2013 at 08:53 am
mary m>> common sense? heee hee. in this day and age? lawyers have made every attempt toRead More eradicate that concept from our every life activity. write it into some law, that can be thence used as future gurantee of use of, by and for their own existence? it's like job security for that entire group, keep the general public at a disadvantage, unable to apply common sense (whats left of it they havent entombed in laws) and uneasy about acting on their own. John Y has the right attitude, heave the cra.pp on the peoples lawn, and hope it doesn't lay there for days as well!
John Yannacci, Sr. May 13, 2013 at 10:09 am
Mary May, I don't know the legality of posting signs on telephone poles. But, take a ride aroundRead More Waterford on Saturday mornings and you'll see signs on anything that is verticle. Take a ride around the same neighborhoods on Wednesday and half the signs will still be there. I wonder if the folks who have had the same yard sale sign at the corner of Great Neck and Rope Ferry Rds. for two and a half weeks wonder why cars are still stopping at their house every Saturday morning.
Mary May May 13, 2013 at 09:53 am
Um I believe it is ILLEGAl to post ANY sign on a telephone pole ANYWAY but free standing signsRead More should be removed after sale is over ! Really a state law just COMMON SENSE we have lost along the way !