Found Deceased FL - Madeline Soto, 13, Missing Child Alert, 13500 blk Town Loop Blvd, Orlando, 26 Feb 2024 *arrest* #11

[FromGermany1]

...JS was OK KNOWING he gave Madeline an 'extra dose' that nite?! OMG

Allegedly Maddie returned so very happy from her birthday party and happily showed her gifts and then went to bed. The next day would have been a schoolday in addition. For what did M need an "extra dose", if she was happy (certainly it also means: relaxed) and if she had to wake up in time the next morning?
It looks, as if JS and SS ran a private laboratory and conducted experiments with poor Maddie, all to their own satisfaction. MOO and thoughts.

 

[Poedelini]

Allegedly Maddie returned so very happy from her birthday party and happily showed her gifts and then went to bed. The next day would have been a schoolday in addition. For what did M need an "extra dose", if she was happy (certainly it also means: relaxed) and if she had to wake up in time the next morning?
It looks, as if JS and SS ran a private laboratory and conducted experiments with poor Maddie, all to their own satisfaction. MOO and thoughts.

Why if they gave Maddie a extra dose, JS needed to sleep alone to have a good nights of rest? Maddie was drugged anyway so she couldn't be that much of a burden. JS is acting like she had a new born baby.
This case does not make ANY sense in so many ways.
Jmo

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Why if they gave Maddie a extra dose, JS needed to sleep alone to have a good nights of rest? Maddie was drugged anyway so she couldn't be that much of a burden. JS is acting like she had a new born baby.
This case does not make ANY sense in so many ways.
Jmo

I agree, the way JS is presenting things does not make sense. I think there is another narrative that makes much more sense, but unfortunately, the police have not yet found sufficient evidence to bring charges against her.

MOO

 

[tlcya]

Yeah, there's a definite fetish for it, there's no doubt. Hence his searches for anaesthetic.

It's a fetish, IMO, not a kink. There is a difference.

The fact that he couldn't sustain an erection without it says it's a fetish. A requirement, not a preference.

Like the killer of Lucie Blackman, it was only a matter of time before he killed someone to make it real.

MOO

Good point fetish is more accurate. and if true it makes the searches for anesthesia make a lot of sense.

 

[Pruddennce]

so.......ChrisSterns is an ex-cop?

 

[tlcya]

is he?? I hadn't read that. I thought CS was a real estate agent or some such.

[removed quoted post]

 

[Pruddennce]

is he?? I hadn't read that \

its in this CSterns interview. at the beginning he talks about an event that happened when he was a cop and then the detective asks him since was a cop, did he notice anything when they would visit (JS, Madeline, SS)... 28:19

ETA: says they 'secluded' themselves in Stephan's room....thats normal for a christmas or thanksgiving visit? guess he thought so.

 

[Seattle1]

I think the most critical phrase here is "seem to".

While folks on the outside looking in, seem to be completely convinced JS is guilty of criminal conduct, the folks on the INSIDE with all access to all evidence & interviews that are not available to the public, have now stated there is no evidence of criminal conduct on JS part.

While I do think she's guilty of unknowingly making a terrible choice in bringing SS into her & MS's life, I'll accept the word of LE that she is not guilty of any criminal conduct as it pertains to the abuse or the death of her child.

Respectfully, I believe this is a situation of the DA not prosecuting the mother of a murdered victim because they don't believe they would prevail at trial, and NOT that she's not responsible for criminal conduct.

More recently, from the mouth of JS and the those OP references as being 'on the inside, knowing all of the details,' today we know that not only did JS try to protect SS over her child-- even on the date MS she was found deceased, she told detectives she didn't believe SA involving MS was "evil." To that I say, evil is as evil does.

I'm also reminded how very early in the investigation when JS was first shown photos of SS's penis while with her child, JS insisted she couldn't see a penis in the photo!

Madeline Soto’s mother suggested sexual abuse involving daughter was 'not evil,' new docs show

During one interview, she said she didn’t notice anything unusual going on between Madeline and Sterns.

www.wesh.com

OSCEOLA COUNTY, Fla. —
Investigators say Madeline Soto’s mother suggested the sexual abuse involving her daughter was “not evil,” according to documents released by prosecutors this week.

[..]

“During the interview, Jennifer Soto continuously protected Stephan Sterns, was questioned about why she prioritizes Stephan Sterns over (Madeline), and even at one point referred to the ‘sex stuff as not evil but the murder of (Madeline) as ‘evil,” the report says.

“Jennifer Soto did not show the same level of emotion or care in regards to (Madeline’s) on going victimization by Stephan Sterns than she did her disappearance. It appeared to me that she has already accepted that the victimization was happening and her emotion appeared fictitious,” the report also noted.

 

[Seattle1]

Jenn is saying she had no idea about the SA and in the reports she said " Stephen would never hurt Maddi"
yet there were so many red flags, her being double dosed with meds. her roommate even discussed the sleeping arrangements with JS" At first I thought the sleeping with mom was due to anxiety, but it was probably because it was more dangerous to be alone in the L/R. so while Jenn wasnt seeing the red flags, others were, and even brought it to her attention. isnt that willful blindness? Do you have to be aware of the SA, what about just ignoring the clues?
At the very least, if she needed help, like she said before Stephan came to Kissimmee " I need to be medicated and I need sleep" yet she chose a person who was known to mis-medicate, just so she could see her more often, than she would if maddi stayed at her moms. Jenn worried about her own needs being met, before anyone else's, she put maddi at risk in fact, to meet her own needs. because she " believed" in her judgement nothing was going on despite the clues. even the fact that Maddi didnt seem too bothered when Stephan had to move out? Like wake up!!!!!.
Maybe she didnt know about the SA, maybe maddi never said anything b/c she was basically anesthetized and had no memory, IDK, but come on, even when there is a tiny bit of smoke, you should look to see where its coming from.

A child sleeping with a parent and/or adult seemed to be something CS/JS shared in common. SS's father told police that following a child age accident (SS was run over in a parking lot), he had separation anxiety and took to sleeping with his parents in their bed until his father caused him to return to his own bed. IMO, each used MS's anxiety to excuse their behaviors.

 

[photographer4]

Respectfully, I believe this is a situation of the DA not prosecuting the mother of a murdered victim because they don't believe they would prevail at trial, and NOT that she's not responsible for criminal conduct.

More recently, from the mouth of JS and the those OP references as being 'on the inside, knowing all of the details,' today we know that not only did JS try to protect SS over her child-- even on the date MS she was found deceased, she told detectives she didn't believe SA involving MS was "evil." To that I say, evil is as evil does.

I'm also reminded how very early in the investigation when JS was first shown photos of SS's penis while with her child, JS insisted she couldn't see a penis in the photo!

Madeline Soto’s mother suggested sexual abuse involving daughter was 'not evil,' new docs show

During one interview, she said she didn’t notice anything unusual going on between Madeline and Sterns.

www.wesh.com

OSCEOLA COUNTY, Fla. —
Investigators say Madeline Soto’s mother suggested the sexual abuse involving her daughter was “not evil,” according to documents released by prosecutors this week.

[..]

“During the interview, Jennifer Soto continuously protected Stephan Sterns, was questioned about why she prioritizes Stephan Sterns over (Madeline), and even at one point referred to the ‘sex stuff as not evil but the murder of (Madeline) as ‘evil,” the report says.

“Jennifer Soto did not show the same level of emotion or care in regards to (Madeline’s) on going victimization by Stephan Sterns than she did her disappearance. It appeared to me that she has already accepted that the victimization was happening and her emotion appeared fictitious,” the report also noted.

You said it far more politely than I would!! There is no scenario in which I would consider JS to have been manipulated or gas lit by SS here. She sent her child to sleep with him.

 

[Seattle1]

so.......ChrisSterns is an ex-cop?

is he?? I hadn't read that. I thought CS was a real estate agent or some such.

[removed quoted post]

CS alleged he served in LE for about two years, decades before he began a lengthy corporate career, followed by his current real estate investor/developer activity.

 

[Mack the Knife]

I'm going back through these Kissimmee PD docs now...

In a press conference, OC Sheriff had said that they informed JS "last night" that they believed MS was dead, and she reacted the way any parent would. (3/1/2024 press conference (3:04))

I actually think she might not have found out until an hour before that press conference. Detective Morris's incident report (58) says he spoke to JS at 11:57 on 3/1:

I advised Jennifer that I would be taking over the investigation and there would be a press conference this day to announce it. Jennifer asked when I said we, did we mean homicide. I told Jennifer I meant we as the Kissimmee Police Department, but yes, we will be working it as a homicide because we had a strong belief that Madeline was deceased. Jennifer became silent for a few moments and started to cry.

Det. Morris had also spoken to JS the night before, and makes no mention in his report of telling JS they believed MS was dead, so I think this was it. If that's the case, I wonder if they'd planned on specifically telling her they believed MS was dead, or if it was only because JS narrowed in on the homicide detectives taking over. From my understanding it's not always the case that just because a specific unit takes over that that means the suspected crime matches the name of the unit (in this case that would mean the homicide squad might investigate more than certain homicides).

 

[floridafreshsqueez]

This case infuriates me as a mother. Either there isn’t enough they’ve uncovered (yet) to seal the deal on charges, or the state attorneys office is biding their time.

In a country where you can have your life ruined by a possession charge for marijuana, someone like JS should not get off Scot free JMO.

I am not a lawyer but I’m having trouble grasping why JS isnt charged with child negligence, obstruction of justice, child endangerment, etc.

Does anyone know the standards for those charges? Like if someone at CPS were looking at the details we’ve now learned through the interview, even if MS never disclosed to anyone…would there have been enough to warrant visits or removal from the home?

 

[ttjo]

This case infuriates me as a mother. Either there isn’t enough they’ve uncovered (yet) to seal the deal on charges, or the state attorneys office is biding their time.

In a country where you can have your life ruined by a possession charge for marijuana, someone like JS should not get off Scot free JMO.

I am not a lawyer but I’m having trouble grasping why JS isnt charged with child negligence, obstruction of justice, child endangerment, etc.

Does anyone know the standards for those charges? Like if someone at CPS were looking at the details we’ve now learned through the interview, even if MS never disclosed to anyone…would there have been enough to warrant visits or removal from the home?

I looked at this, Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine
It gives a pretty good breakdown . when you read it you will see that alot seems to revolve around being aware of the risk. IE if you take your kid to a babysitter and their house was on fire, they have to prove you saw the smoke in order to say it was negligent, to leave her there. It's a simple example but kind of makes the point. even negligence ( in florida) is more about failing to provide the necessities of life (physical and mental health, including, but not limited to, food, nutrition, clothing, shelter, supervision, medicine, and medical services that a prudent person would consider essential for the well-being of the child; so. being aware of the risk and willfully endangering them.
not my opinion just what I understand for Florida.

 

[ttjo]

This case infuriates me as a mother. Either there isn’t enough they’ve uncovered (yet) to seal the deal on charges, or the state attorneys office is biding their time.

In a country where you can have your life ruined by a possession charge for marijuana, someone like JS should not get off Scot free JMO.

non kidding right? or if you fail to take your kid to a dr b/c of your religious beliefs they can become involved for sure.

Does anyone know the standards for those charges? Like if someone at CPS were looking at the details we’ve now learned through the interview, even if MS never disclosed to anyone…would there have been enough to warrant visits or removal from the home?

I can only speak for what it would be like in Canada.
a parent with custody of their own kid the sleeping arrangements in this case might make them pay you a visit, they'd interview you and the kid, ( we have a special unit that does that, no-one else can, they are specialists) and whatever comes of that, would determine the outcome.
Sadly with so many custody issues, it's one of the weapons people have used (make allegations) ( many are false) and so the interviewers are often looking for solid proof. if they are not able to prove it, file usually gets closed.
Rarely is there a follow up etc, or monitoring, but money is a factor too, too many cases out there vs # of SW's , and its not cheap to apprehend a kid, not to mention they become the responsibility of the govt, there are liability issues. etc etc, and bottom line theyre not out to take your kids away unless its warranted (high risk) . cant afford to do all the work that is needed, so their standard for what would justify removing a child is pretty high

 

[Seattle1]

non kidding right? or if you fail to take your kid to a dr b/c of your religious beliefs they can become involved for sure.

I can only speak for what it would be like in Canada.
a parent with custody of their own kid the sleeping arrangements in this case might make them pay you a visit, they'd interview you and the kid, ( we have a special unit that does that, no-one else can, they are specialists) and whatever comes of that, would determine the outcome.
Sadly with so many custody issues, it's one of the weapons people have used (make allegations) ( many are false) and so the interviewers are often looking for solid proof. if they are not able to prove it, file usually gets closed.
Rarely is there a follow up etc, or monitoring, but money is a factor too, too many cases out there vs # of SW's , and its not cheap to apprehend a kid, not to mention they become the responsibility of the govt, there are liability issues. etc etc, and bottom line theyre not out to take your kids away unless its warranted (high risk) . cant afford to do all the work that is needed, so their standard for what would justify removing a child is pretty high

Unfortunately, I think in the U.S., there's also the issue with federal law suits by parents against child protection agencies citing violations of their civil rights. For example, there are cultures that embrace a "family bed," and most recently, we learned that SS slept in the bed of his parents as a child -- making MS's need to sleep with the couple what was normal to them -- and extending this to include sending MS off to sleep alone with SS behind a chain lock-- for the convenience of JS, and her desire for a good sleep (i.e., plausible deniability..).

Really, what parent enjoys a "good sleep" at the expense of their minor children? Evil comes to mind. JMO

 

[ttjo]

Unfortunately, I think in the U.S., there's also the issue with federal law suits by parents against child protection agencies citing violations of their civil rights. For example, there are cultures that embrace a "family bed," and most recently, we learned that SS slept in the bed of his parents as a child -- making MS's need to sleep with the couple what was normal to them -- and extending this to include sending MS off to sleep alone with SS behind a chain lock-- for the convenience of JS, and her desire for a good sleep (i.e., plausible deniability..).

Really, what parent enjoys a "good sleep" at the expense of their minor children? Evil comes to mind. JMO

Thats the thing, and we have a large indigenous population here, who are smart and have a voice now, and social services is much more careful.