Found Deceased FL - Madeline Soto, 13, Missing Child Alert, 13500 blk Town Loop Blvd, Orlando, 26 Feb 2024 *arrest* #10

[flowershop]

IF Maddie had been at her grandmother's home for a week and IF Maddie's mother JS had to work on Sunday evening and knew, she would be tired the next morning, then WHY Maddie didn't stay for one single night more at grandmother's home? Grandmother could have taken her to school like she did for one week already - would have been a normal arrangement in a normal family, IMO. I see no reason at all, why Maddie should have left grandmother's home for this one night, only to have a problem with her too tired mother and who would take her to school the next morning. The story seems to be totally incomplete or false. I believe, there are more liars than JS and SS, but for what exactly?

The grandmother was still employed at the insurance office. Maybe she had time off when she was was caring for MS. JMO

 

[Megnut]

The evidence on both counts is overwhelming and really beyond dispute. I assume he has a public defender who has likely explained to SS what his charges mean. If SS insists on a trial, his P.D. can make sure he's getting a fair trial so, unless one side seeks a continuance/waives the speedy trial, there's really nothing to dispute.

JMO

 

[Curious Me]

...The 7/16 jury trail is for the death penalty case, so that has to be Maddie's murder: Case Number:2024 CF 001293

...MOO, it's too soon for either really...​

Whether there's something to dispute or not-- this is a Death Penalty Trial. It's unheard of to have a DP trial within six months, isn't it?

MOO here-- They haven't even had time to gather the evidence all together. It hasn't even been quite six months. Proceeding to a DP trial can't seem like a lynch mob mentality. I would think they have to ensure they go by proper procedures to the fullest extent for a fair trial. I really want to know the thinking here if this is really the murder trial set for next week. WTH?

Defendants that end up on Death Row can pop up years later appealing trying to get the sentence overturned. It can be for something that seemed inconsequential. Look at Scott Peterson.
​

 

[Megnut]

Whether there's something to dispute or not-- this is a Death Penalty Trial. It's unheard of to have a DP trial within six months, isn't it?

MOO here-- They haven't even had time to gather the evidence all together. It hasn't even been quite six months. Proceeding to a DP trial can't seem like a lynch mob mentality. I would think they have to ensure they go by proper procedures to the fullest extent for a fair trial. I really want to know the thinking here if this is really the murder trial set for next week. WTH?

Defendants that end up on Death Row can pop up years later appealing trying to get the sentence overturned. It can be for something that seemed inconsequential. Look at Scott Peterson.
​

I won't be shocked if motions (continuance/waiver) pile in tomorrow.

JMO

 

[Curious Me]

Yes, MOO, I doubt a trial will happen next week. I just don't understand why the defendant or their defense attorneys would want a speedy trial in a DP case. (I certainly am not ready for a trial next week.) Any chance, it being Florida with it's Sunshine Law, that this trial and Voir Dire be televised when it does happen? ​

The Right to a Speedy Trial in a Criminal Law Case

A defendant has a right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, but what this means is often unclear.

www.justia.com

 

[Gemmie]

Whether there's something to dispute or not-- this is a Death Penalty Trial. It's unheard of to have a DP trial within six months, isn't it?

MOO here-- They haven't even had time to gather the evidence all together. It hasn't even been quite six months. Proceeding to a DP trial can't seem like a lynch mob mentality. I would think they have to ensure they go by proper procedures to the fullest extent for a fair trial. I really want to know the thinking here if this is really the murder trial set for next week. WTH?

Defendants that end up on Death Row can pop up years later appealing trying to get the sentence overturned. It can be for something that seemed inconsequential. Look at Scott Peterson.
​

Exactly! Which is why I'm wondering what "Jury Trial" means in the DP case. And so early! There must be different phases of a jury trial or something. I wish it was a link to get more info about what it means. Hopefully we find something out on the 16th.

And I just poked around a little more. Unless the Judge has super powers, he'll be trying 90 cases all at the same time! (9am). No way...

At least we know it's not a "real" Jury Trail as we know them. I didn't think it was possible but had to question what I saw! lol I wonder what in the world this is about that there are 89 others all at the same time, same courtroom and same judge. Things that make you go hmmmmm....

 

[PayrollNerd]

These 2 cases have so much evidence, I wonder if they really need a lot of time to prep.

https://courts.osceolaclerk.com/BenchmarkWeb/CourtCase.aspx/Details/3373972?digest=sFl01KjD7OrMBaaEyet2FA

His pretrial cases are both on 7/10/24, Wednesday: Murder at 10am & CSA/M AT 1:30pm.

2024 CF 001293
FIRST DEGREE MURDER (CAPITAL) (782.04 1a1)	Death Penalty
Wednesday, July 10, 2024	10:00 AM	PRETRIAL
2024 CF 000632
CSA/M	Speedy Trial
Wednesday, July 10, 2024	1:30 PM	PRETRIAL
2024 CF 001293
FIRST DEGREE MURDER (CAPITAL) (782.04 1a1)	Death Penalty
Tuesday, July 16, 2024	9:00 AM	JURY TRIAL
2024 CF 000632
CSA/M	Speedy Trial
Monday, August 19, 2024	9:00 AM	JURY TRIAL

 

[girlhasnoname]

These 2 cases have so much evidence, I wonder if they really need a lot of time to prep.

https://courts.osceolaclerk.com/BenchmarkWeb/CourtCase.aspx/Details/3373972?digest=sFl01KjD7OrMBaaEyet2FA

His pretrial cases are both on 7/10/24, Wednesday: Murder at 10am & CSA/M AT 1:30pm.

2024 CF 001293
FIRST DEGREE MURDER (CAPITAL) (782.04 1a1)	Death Penalty
Wednesday, July 10, 2024	10:00 AM	PRETRIAL
2024 CF 000632
CSA/M	Speedy Trial
Wednesday, July 10, 2024	1:30 PM	PRETRIAL
2024 CF 001293
FIRST DEGREE MURDER (CAPITAL) (782.04 1a1)	Death Penalty
Tuesday, July 16, 2024	9:00 AM	JURY TRIAL
2024 CF 000632
CSA/M	Speedy Trial
Monday, August 19, 2024	9:00 AM	JURY TRIAL

Looks like SS's Defense filed a Motion for Speedy Trial, in most cases I think that's 70 days for the State.

It really doesn't matter in this case, the State has so much hard evidence against SS. I wonder if he will take a plea deal in order to get the DP off the table?

jmo

 

[ttjo]

I have a different take on interpreting how and what she said about Madeline: re: seeing her at 8am. IMO, just from that first statement about the morning, which turned out to be a lie, for me it infers covering for him AND herself in the event LE suspects something happened to Madeline while in the home with her right there.

she attempted to redirect the focus off of both of them right out of the starting gate by saying she saw her alive in the morning .....which fits with her story 'someone took her after she was dropped off' which she peddled to the media/public......and she tried to recover from that lie in another LE interview by then saying LE 'she didnt hear Madeline definitively because of other roommates in the home'. inferring among the morning sounds, could be Madeline.

...then, along with the her supposed last conversation with Madeline before she went to bed. again, no substance, barely a conversation to relay because IMO, it never happened as a 'happy girl' conversation. IMO, something explosive could have occurred between them OR Madeline was drugged out in bed and she never saw her when she came home. and now known she DID NOT see her that morning.

they both echoed the same story, so rehearsed, hence the 'we'....with SS leading the duo, interjecting, punctuating with additional 'info'...but we see JS changing his clothing description, but even then she prefaces that with 'she thinks' she was wearing black shorts. at this point, it is now known she never saw her that morning.

also, the LE narrative indicates that Madeline did not tell JS about a crush, which JS stated to the media as 'she told "US" when she had a crush. the LE narrative indicates JS said that SS TOLD HER about Madeline having a crush on a boy and his name is then redacted.

her LE interview narrative, she said he was going to be there a week 'but he was trying to move back'. so yes, there's that conflict of what she knew or didnt know...on one hand it sounds like it was planned, but then a conflicting statement, doesnt know what day he arrived. and he danced around that question as well, but he settled on sunday evening after her bd party.

'he drove away': I didnt view that comment as being 'can you believe it!' I viewed it as 'thats it' because she finished telling the 'car embarrassment story, wanting to walk', so there was nothing more for her to say about the dropoff...he continues to fill in the narrative and notably the last time she was seen was "at 8:30-8:40 when WE dropped her off'. JS does not correct him. in fact, she is intently listening to SS's story about Madeline walking, the headphone backpack story that she loses her train of thought and asked LE to repeat a question...

thanks for your opinion as to how her words/behaviour appeared to you. It would be helpful to listen to her LE interviews instead of reading an abbreviated LE narrative.

That's right, she did say he was trying to move back. If that's the case, either im wrong about the family, or she was going to have a heck of a time explaining him moving back.

I have changed my mind on this so many times, but the things that dont make sense to me, I dont just accept the most obvious answer. instead I ask in what instance would that make sense.
was she covering for him? why would she cover for him? aside from the obvious ( involved) what else would explain it?
Why did she say she saw her in the morning? why say " we" drove her when she did not. for what purpose? ( aside from the obvious again)
why correct the clothing?
why the tone about not being at the birthday?

She has no reason to cover for him anymore, ( unless she is involved somehow)
But if they had anything on her why hasn't she been named a POI.

Do they need her as a witness? sounds like the evidence they have is overwhelming, How much better can direct evidence get? They have 1700 videos for the SA charges. For the murder, the same thing, he may as well have had a videographer in his back seat.

My interpretation of her is just a hunch I could be way off, So I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
Im not 100% sold on anything yet. My opinion is simply a possibility. Just as her being guilty is a possibility. How can anyone be sure, when there is so much we still dont know?
I agree it would be helpful to hear, and/or read, anything from L/e or anything from her (even her family members). but we get nothing, not even crumbs.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Looks like SS's Defense filed a Motion for Speedy Trial, in most cases I think that's 70 days for the State.

It really doesn't matter in this case, the State has so much hard evidence against SS. I wonder if he will take a plea deal in order to get the DP off the table?

jmo

Doesn't a plea usually include some benefit to the state? Such as, offering a defendant a deal in exchange for names, dates, info on other suspects, ratting out the bigger fish, etc.? I can't see what SS has to offer to even enter any kind of a deal. He's a child rapist and a killer and it's justice for him to pay for what he did, with his life. Period.

jmo

 

[girlhasnoname]

Doesn't a plea usually include some benefit to the state? Such as, offering a defendant a deal in exchange for names, dates, info on other suspects, ratting out the bigger fish, etc.? I can't see what SS has to offer to even enter any kind of a deal. He's a child rapist and a killer and it's justice for him to pay for what he did, with his life. Period.

jmo

$$$$$ I agree with you that SS is the poster child for the DP. The State does seem to have all the evidence they need to convict, I just wondered if they wouldn't take the DP off the table if SS plead out in order to avoid a DP case and $$$.

JMO

 

[FromGermany1]

She has no reason to cover for him anymore, ( unless she is involved somehow)
But if they had anything on her why hasn't she been named a POI.

Has SS something on her and she knows very well? Has she to support him because of that?

 

[Bahshudc]

Probably not super relevant, but I watched “Tell me Who I am” on Netflix recently and it really opened my eyes to how sexual abuse in families really CAN operate in silence, with many people being aware of what’s happening. I’ve always thought there was a high chance JS knew about the abuse but simply couldn’t face the exposure and criticism she would get for telling somebody. Once you condone it the first time, it gets harder and harder to tell somebody because you have objectively made a horrible choice.

There also seemed to be a theme (in the Netflix show) of the mother often meeting “friends” and sexual partners by advertising her attraction for children. All moo, worth a watch.

 

[photoprose1122]

$$$$$ I agree with you that SS is the poster child for the DP. The State does seem to have all the evidence they need to convict, I just wondered if they wouldn't take the DP off the table if SS plead out in order to avoid a DP case and $$$.

JMO

If they had sufficient evidence and decided to pursue DP I doubt they’d take it off the table just to avoid a DP case. I don’t think SS has any leverage here.

 

[ttjo]

$$$$$ I agree with you that SS is the poster child for the DP. The State does seem to have all the evidence they need to convict, I just wondered if they wouldn't take the DP off the table if SS plead out in order to avoid a DP case and $$$.

JMO

If they had sufficient evidence and decided to pursue DP I doubt they’d take it off the table just to avoid a DP case. I don’t think SS has any leverage here.

I was just going to ask, what would be his bargaining chip? and you answered.

 

[Megnut]

If they had sufficient evidence and decided to pursue DP I doubt they’d take it off the table just to avoid a DP case. I don’t think SS has any leverage here.

He should do humanity a favor and plead guilty. Bypass trials, accept his sentence. Good riddance.

Lock him up and throw away the prison.

JMO

 

[threesevenninefour]

Doesn't a plea usually include some benefit to the state? Such as, offering a defendant a deal in exchange for names, dates, info on other suspects, ratting out the bigger fish, etc.? I can't see what SS has to offer to even enter any kind of a deal. He's a child rapist and a killer and it's justice for him to pay for what he did, with his life. Period.

jmo

Not necessarily…sometimes it’s also done in especially heinous cases to protect the families/victims from having to go to court and relive/recount the trauma that they experienced. Obviously, the DA’s office will often consult the family first before they make these decisions. However, the minor victim here won’t be testifying, so I doubt that they will offer any type of plea. Also, as others have stated, SS is the poster boy for the DP and this is Florida so they are definitely willing to take it to trial to see it through.

Also, in states that are more anti-DP than Florida, DA offices will often arrange pleas so that the defendant is sentenced to LWOP and avoids the DP. Again, not likely to happen in this case for multiple reasons, IMO.

MOO.

 

[ttjo]

Not necessarily…sometimes it’s also done in especially heinous cases to protect the families/victims from having to go to court and relive/recount the trauma that they experienced. Obviously, the DA’s office will often consult the family first before they make these decisions. However, the minor victim here won’t be testifying, so I doubt that they will offer any type of plea. Also, as others have stated, SS is the poster boy for the DP and this is Florida so they are definitely willing to take it to trial to see it through.

Also, in states that are more anti-DP than Florida, DA offices will often arrange pleas so that the defendant is sentenced to LWOP and avoids the DP. Again, not likely to happen in this case for multiple reasons, IMO.

MOO.

What could be worse than what they already know, They have 1700 photos and a play-by-play on CCTV.
I know there is likely no plea deal, but asking for info only.
In the US would a family need to agree to a plea deal or can the state make that offer on their own? Probably depends on what the state hopes to gain from the plea deal. ( getting bigger fish)
Probably too many variables to answer this question in a short answer.

 

[Wallendo]

The only incentive I can see for the state of Florida to offer a LWOP plea deal would be so that the many graphic sexual abuse images would not be admitted into evidence.

 

[Mack the Knife]

What could be worse than what they already know, They have 1700 photos and a play-by-play on CCTV.
I know there is likely no plea deal, but asking for info only.
In the US would a family need to agree to a plea deal or can the state make that offer on their own? Probably depends on what the state hopes to gain from the plea deal. ( getting bigger fish)
Probably too many variables to answer this question in a short answer.

[bolded by me]

I've heard of, occasionally, policies or local laws requiring victim involvement for criminal case decisions--these are typically for cases involving domestic/intimate partner violence (eg. the state cannot prosecute an abuser without participation from a complaining witness/victim). But by and large, it is just a courtesy for the state to get victim/family approval for any actions.

In the US, it is basically (generalizing here) like this: In a criminal case, the defendant is accused of breaking a law, and the state is the "injured" party for that violation of law, which is why the cases are named something like The People of West Virginia vs. the Defendant. It's a courtesy to have a participating and satisfied victim, and it makes things easier for the prosecution, but it is not a requirement. A civil case is where the victim can directly seek restitution as the injured party.

In practice, I think the prosecution always wants the victim/family to be happy with their actions, but I can think of two factors here that might affect that. First, this case has become very public, and so there will be political, etc. repercussions for whatever the outcome is. Second, there is a possibly complicated family situation to try and consider, since the victim's parents may not be on the same page and the custodial parent (JS) is suspected by some to have been involved in the crime.