NC NC - Madalina Cojocari, 11, reported Missing Dec 2022 three Weeks After Last Seen, Cornelius, *Parents Arrested* #3

I also expected she would have been located by now, because to be honest, her parents don't seem savvy enough to outsmart LE. JMO/IMO.
I agree. I thought we'd know the story by now because both were arrested but they don't seem to be on the same page. I was pretty sure they'd turn on each other and the truth would come out.

It is very depressing that we are still in the dark, one full year later.
 
I agree. I thought we'd know the story by now because both were arrested but they don't seem to be on the same page. I was pretty sure they'd turn on each other and the truth would come out.

It is very depressing that we are still in the dark, one full year later.
I would have thought so too.

Did the mother and stepfather essentially beat the "prisoner's dilemma"? Which is game theory explaining why, even though two arrested suspects would go free if neither talks, one or both will usually talk to cut a deal. I assume that's what investigators were expecting.

Did the prosecutors ruin it by showing their hand, revealing they have more of a case against the mother by seeking a higher bond for the mother? Though that could be explained away by the mother being a higher flight risk from having ties outside the country. That also didn't happen immediately, so both stayed silent for a long time without that factor.

It may be the case that one spouse is truly innocent (prisoner's dilemma only applies if both are guilty).

It may be that the stepfather has good counsel. Without having all the details (and it sounds like the prosecutors don't have all the details either, which is the core problem here), he has a solid defense to the crime he's been charged with because he's not her parent. Much harder case to prove. But that said, that doesn't mean much if the spouse can cut a deal by flipping on him, implicating him in a much more serious crime. So this is only relevant if he's indeed uninvolved in the disappearance.

Maybe as long as "no body, no case" applies, neither is motivated to talk.

It's of course possible neither knows what happened. Probably unlikely, but possible.

It seems most likely then that one spouse was truly not involved. But there are problems with this too. Was their marriage so good that one is really willing to cover for the other? That is, how do you remain completely uninvolved when a young child just disappears? Does anyone remember if both spouses were witnessed setting the furniture on fire?

Maybe the prisoner's dilemma just takes more time to play out. It usually works, you see variations of it all the time. I'm probably oversimplifying this, but a recent illustrative example is the Dan Markel case. Would prosecutors have been able to convict any of them without cooperation from one? They all had a valid 5th Amendment privilege, so the prosecution could not have forced any of them to testify against anyone else. But one flipped for a deal that was something like 12 years for a charge of murder. Everyone else is doing life.

MOO
 
I would have thought so too.

Did the mother and stepfather essentially beat the "prisoner's dilemma"? Which is game theory explaining why, even though two arrested suspects would go free if neither talks, one or both will usually talk to cut a deal. I assume that's what investigators were expecting.

Did the prosecutors ruin it by showing their hand, revealing they have more of a case against the mother by seeking a higher bond for the mother? Though that could be explained away by the mother being a higher flight risk from having ties outside the country. That also didn't happen immediately, so both stayed silent for a long time without that factor.

It may be the case that one spouse is truly innocent (prisoner's dilemma only applies if both are guilty).

It may be that the stepfather has good counsel. Without having all the details (and it sounds like the prosecutors don't have all the details either, which is the core problem here), he has a solid defense to the crime he's been charged with because he's not her parent. Much harder case to prove. But that said, that doesn't mean much if the spouse can cut a deal by flipping on him, implicating him in a much more serious crime. So this is only relevant if he's indeed uninvolved in the disappearance.

Maybe as long as "no body, no case" applies, neither is motivated to talk.

It's of course possible neither knows what happened. Probably unlikely, but possible.

It seems most likely then that one spouse was truly not involved. But there are problems with this too. Was their marriage so good that one is really willing to cover for the other? That is, how do you remain completely uninvolved when a young child just disappears? Does anyone remember if both spouses were witnessed setting the furniture on fire?

Maybe the prisoner's dilemma just takes more time to play out. It usually works, you see variations of it all the time. I'm probably oversimplifying this, but a recent illustrative example is the Dan Markel case. Would prosecutors have been able to convict any of them without cooperation from one? They all had a valid 5th Amendment privilege, so the prosecution could not have forced any of them to testify against anyone else. But one flipped for a deal that was something like 12 years for a charge of murder. Everyone else is doing life.

MOO
Good analysis there. Yeah, I thought for sure they'd have worked the parents against each other, offered one of them a deal, and had this case resolved in no time.
 
Last edited:
Whereas here we are still waiting. Does anyone know how long this situation could continue legally? Will we still be here waiting in a year's time? 5 years? 10? 20? Are there any similar cases historically?
 
Whereas here we are still waiting. Does anyone know how long this situation could continue legally? Will we still be here waiting in a year's time? 5 years? 10? 20? Are there any similar cases historically?
Well, I know there are plenty of unsolved homicides and missing persons. With children in particular, Jonbenet Ramsey (found murdered in her home in 1996) and Madeleine McCann (missing since 2007, body found 2023) come to mind. And of course sometimes LE seriously suspects someone but they don't think they have enough evidence to convince a grand jury. My understanding is they only get one shot there. So if they try too soon, they could ruin the chance of ever holding the guilty party responsible.

All they have on either of Madalina Cojocari's parents now, as far as I know, is failure to report a missing child. If/when the parent/s are found guilty and sentenced for that relatively minor crime and serve their time, if no further evidence is found, they'll have to let them go. :(

I found @BlaiseFinlay 's thought above interesting, that the reason LE hasn't been able turn these amateur likely criminal parents against each other and get them to talk could be because one of them truly doesn't know what happened to Madalina.

Also, I'd be interested to know if they did a voice stress test, or whatever it's called. It's where they hook a suspect up and note changes in their voice when they tell the truth vs. when they lie. I don't know how accurate those are and I doubt they can be used in court but imo it's fascinating what all they can do now. After years of watching the true crime shows detective work, I'm surprised anyone gets away with anything these days tbh. All MOO
 
Last edited:
Good analysis there. Yeah, I thought for sure they'd have worked the parents against each other, offered one of them a deal, and had this case resolved in no time.
It seems they thought so too. I think that's why they initially arrested the stepfather, not the mother. They probably thought a likely situation was that she was under his control (especially with it appearing to be a green card marriage), and that she would talk if he was locked up.

That didn't work, so they then arrested her, assuming they would turn on each other.

LE was probably as perplexed as we are when that didn't work either lol. Hopefully they have more insight now, but any outcome is likely to be very sad.
 
Whereas here we are still waiting. Does anyone know how long this situation could continue legally? Will we still be here waiting in a year's time? 5 years? 10? 20? Are there any similar cases historically?
With the caveat that I haven't researched the crime they're charged with (which, as I understand, is relatively new), I think constitutional law or court procedure will apply to force this situation to a head. Both have a right to a speedy trial. They also have the right to waive that right. Has anyone been following the court filings in their respective cases as to hearing and trial dates?

They're also in two different situations. Until the stepfather was released on bond, he might have had incentive to push for a trial (though lawyers in general like to take their time and you don't want to rush your lawyers). He was sitting locked up in jail and has a valid defense. Might have been worth distracting the prosecutors from their investigation into the disappearance by making them try the case and risk losing, in turn losing their leverage over him. I'd recommend he consider waiving jury and going to trial before a judge, because under the law as I read it, it's legally a tough case to prove. But I would not want to be in the position of arguing to a jury that they should let the stepfather who didn't report the disappearance (and may have also caused or covered up the disappearance) go free. So you argue that to a judge instead.

But with him free on bail, the analysis changes somewhat. Delay is often strategic in criminal law, and most importantly, he is currently a free man. No matter how strong his case, you can never be confident in the outcome of a trial. So pushing for a speedy trial might just accelerate his incarceration. At his age, seems like his time today is more valuable than time someday in the future, so he might as well maximize it if he can live with the stress of the case hanging over his head.

For the mother, it seems like an open and shut case on the charges filed against her. So then you're generally just going to want to delay, unless some strategic reason not to presents itself. I don't know the sentencing range for the crime she's charged with.

This strikes me as too risky a strategy for an attorney to recommend, but just thinking as I type, there could be incentive for her to serve her sentence (if expected to be relatively short) and then leave the country back to her family. That would depend on her current immigration status (whether a conviction would allow them to revoke her immigration status and then just hold her on that after she serves her time), and whether the prosecution thinks they have enough for probable cause on another charge. If they do, they'll just arrest her as soon as she tries to leave. That'll depend on what they've seen in discovery, but it would be difficult (likely impossible) to confidently advise that the government doesn't have enough for probable cause (especially since they'll continue to investigate while she serves her sentence, so you have no idea what evidence the government will have at the time you have to advise your client on whether to enforce her right to a speedy trial...so I really don't see this happening). It would ultimately be the client's decision, though. I could certainly see being emotionally compelled to try and get back to your family asap after losing your daughter, at whatever cost. But even still, the longer it goes with the investigators not making progress, the more likely the government might be willing to plead her out on more favorable terms, so yeah, pretty much any way I look at this, she'll probably want to delay.

And the government in the meantime is trying to solve the real case, so they want more time too.

So given all that, it seems all lawyers involved will probably want to delay trial. Then it's just a matter of how long the court will allow that, but court dockets are often backed up. It's not uncommon for criminal cases to take a few years to go to trial, so it wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't much movement for another couple years (unless of course they get more evidence that allows them to move on more serious charges, or if they determine one to be uninvolved, they might plead them out).
 
Last edited:
Maybe it's because no one believes her story?
Isn't the amount substantial? Am I remembering $250k right? So a $25k bond? Moldova isn't a wealthy country and I'm not sure what that amount would translate to for them. Her family may not have the means.

I wondered why her husband didn't bail her out, but then I remembered his lawyer would shut that idea down fast if he was inclined to. His best defense is to blame her.

Do they live in a community property state such that she might have any right to equity in the house she could use if there was a forced sale? Would she be likely to get any money from a divorce settlement? Wonder if it would be strategic to pursue divorce. Given her best defense is to blame him, that might not be a bad strategy regardless of whether it would be beneficial financially. Not sure how divorce plays out in a situation like this.
 
I found @BlaiseFinlay 's thought above interesting, that the reason LE hasn't been able turn these amateur likely criminal parents against each other and get them to talk could be because one of them truly doesn't know what happened to Madalina.
I had similar thoughts at the beginning, Original thread comment #500, Repeating myself in 2nd thread #591
There is likely more, but the theory still stands, and no one has proved it wrong; there is a good chance that neither will say anything because MC's well-being or life is at stake if they do, or Mum sends her back to Moldova, for one of many reasons, or they both had a part in disappearing MC. I feel if the latter were the case, their relationship would be unlikely to be as solid or controlling as we have been privy to.
This has never added up, and I will say once again, a year later, that in my own opinion, there is much more to this case than meets the eye.
 
The story from the grandmother has some far fetched elements in my opinion. I wish for Madalina to be found.
While I agree with the far-fetched elements, I think it is more a case of loss in translation. Either the grandmother has misunderstood a question being asked and/or her reply was mistranslated.
And possibly the context has been skewed
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
3,158
Total visitors
3,257

Forum statistics

Threads
592,968
Messages
17,978,746
Members
228,965
Latest member
Tici
Back
Top