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

[Red Pill]

Why does it need to be taken literally?

The document she signed is a Sworn Statement, the officer witnessing it signed as well. Not sure how that plays out in a court of law or if you are allowed to ammend it.

(Thanks for all the documents, btw. Very helpful!)

Page 4
https://www.scribd.com/document/764...nge-County-Sheriff-s-Office-records-115-pages

ETA: Corrected page #

 

[Knox]

In an emergency people are not always thinking straight and/or able to articulate perfectly.

I know we nit pick apart everything in cases sitting here on the outside but sometimes it seems excessive. Just too much, especially when we have not been in that exact situation ourselves, we cannot possibly know what we would or would not do/say etc moo

That's so true. In an "emergency situation" your adrenaline is flowing and your thoughts are racing. If your child is missing your sense of urgency doesn't allow you sit still. You may even think not enough is being done to find them, you need to go look for them yourself. You're running their last words, actions, what may be missing from thier room. Thinking of what you can tell those searching and LE which might help to find them.

Words don't have to be perfect and people react differently, but I think those of us not in that situation - have an innate sense of what that person is experiencing. If it's not genuine, if there is avoidance or a sense the truth isn't being told. The public is going to recognize that. Jen did not come across well in her interviews, then she dropped off the end of the earth. I'm still asking myself why that is? I don't feel bad for questioning her behavior, JMO.

 

[Seattle1]

View attachment 528450View attachment 528451
Are we able to compare and see, whether MS or JS wrote the notes about trauma?
The 2. pic is JS' handwriting.

I didn't know there was any doubt. They are clearly both written by JS. The vowels are by the same author. JMO

 

[Seattle1]

I know this goes against popular opinion, but I honestly don’t think she was “lying” or being intentionally untruthful. That initial report says she “saw” MS, but every subsequent report where she is asked about it, she says she heard her or she thinks she heard her. She never gave specifics on seeing her (did JS get out of bed? Where was Maddie?) but she does get specific about hearing her (heard movement in the kitchen, assumed it was Maddie). I don’t see anything that would make her want to back away from that lie, if it was a lie. I chalk a lot of it up to all the anxiety and stress that would be building up in the hours of waiting for police and then the hours of working with them after they arrived. I wouldn’t expect any report to be 100% accurate at that point, or any point really.

The same goes for saying “we” dropped her off. I think she might even say “I” in one instance. Despite saying “we,” she also repeatedly talked about Stephan taking MS to school or how JS slept in. She keeps saying “we” even after it’s established that she didn’t take MS to school. It seems like it’s just how she talks.

Also as a caveat: I don’t quite mean that she wasn’t lying or couldn’t be lying, and more mean that the in the set of circumstances, I don’t think her language means she was definitely lying.

Yes, I agree. JS was medicated and her alarm set for her to awake about 2 hours later. I think JS barely remembers SS taking the dog out, and doubt JS ever got out of bed before MS was loaded into SS vehicle, and headed to the dumpster. Leaving home early for the school run was not the norm here. JMO

 

[CuriousCricket]

In an emergency people are not always thinking straight and/or able to articulate perfectly.

I know we nit pick apart everything in cases sitting here on the outside but sometimes it seems excessive. Just too much, especially when we have not been in that exact situation ourselves, we cannot possibly know what we would or would not do/say etc moo

People have varying levels of verbal ability. There is even a disability (I don't know the name) that a smart person simply can't express themselves. One of my favorite aunts had it and a younger sister helped her through school. My sister taught for many years and worked with gifted. She told me what the disability is called, but I don't recall. I just know that some people are gifted with words. Some are not. When you add mental fog from drugs . . . well, if you get anything that makes sense, that's a good day.

 

[Mack the Knife]

Because words need to be exact in an emergency.
Seen. Heard. Two completely different senses.
Otherwise it is assuming.

That’s a reason why it is important for witnesses (which JS was in this circumstance) to be exact and literal and precise, but that doesn’t mean that JS or any other witness will be exact and literal and precise when we would want them to. Witnesses are incorrect all the time without lying. Sometimes they mean something other than how it is interpreted, sometimes they are outright wrong.

A witness said they saw SS changing his tire with the help of a red headed man at a time we know he was not changing that tire (17). Is that witness lying? Presumably no. He most likely misremembered the time or saw someone else.

I believe that law enforcement expects and anticipates these kinds of discrepancies and errors. I argue that witness statements should not be taken literally, they should be considered open to interpretation and further interrogation to confirm that LE’s understanding is the same as the witness’s meaning.

 

[Seattle1]

wondering the same thing, he had the honda civic. why did he take the Lincoln owned by CS? good question...what vehicle did CS drive up in? wasnt there a second lincoln? its confusing in the attached. because it says in the Honda narrative SS has access and known to drive Lincoln MKZ "which is registered to him. BUT: the plate number is the Honda's... must be an error?

page 8 - https://www.scribd.com/document/764...nge-County-Sheriff-s-Office-records-115-pages

I believe naming SS as the registered owner of any vehicle other than the Honda Civic would be in error.

Also, I presumed the "pet/poodle ambulance" was the Lincoln parked in the driveway along with the Honda (Mrs Sterns) but maybe it was the 2010 Lincoln SS borrowed to drive from his parents to Orange County.

Also, I think there are a total of 3 Lincolns: 2010 MKZ borrowed by SS, Mrs. Sterns Lincoln, and a Lincoln that was being driven by Mr. Sterns (CS).

I recall JS Nissan and the MKZ Lincoln were taken to OCPD stalls to be searched at the same time. MOO

 

[wcsleuth]

Possibly some attempt to confuse, does anyone remember any explanation on why SS took the Lincoln on that trip that was going to last a week? I can't recall.

Apparently, SS' father insisted SS take the Lincoln on his trips to Kissimmee because SS' vehicle was in "dire need of servicing" - brakes, AC, etc. - and last thing CS wanted to deal with was a stranded car 2 hours away. CS estimates the car needed $2-3k in repairs. He says he had SS tow the car back to North Port rather than drive it when SS moved out of Jen's condo.
Scroll to 1:30 mark for CS' explanation.

SS' car was the 2012 Honda civic.

wondering the same thing, he had the honda civic. why did he take the Lincoln owned by CS? good question...what vehicle did CS drive up in? wasnt there a second lincoln? its confusing in the attached. because it says in the Honda narrative SS has access and known to drive Lincoln MKZ "which is registered to him. BUT: the plate number is the Honda's... must be an error?

page 8 - https://www.scribd.com/document/764...nge-County-Sheriff-s-Office-records-115-pages

Yes, I think this is a mistake. There are other mistakes too in some of the documents that give the year as 2023 even though they meant 2024.

Given this information, it's entirely possible MS was rightly embarrassed/disgusted by any vehicle SS dropped her off in. The Honda sounds like a ticking time bomb and I can only imagine how messy it was on the inside. The Lincoln was, well, "a poodle ambulance" and everything that that entails.

 

[Seattle1]

The hard drive found in the storage unit might be the one removed from the computer tower that CS handed over, but it wasn’t put there after MS’s death. Investigators initially thought SS had been to the storage unit, which was how they got the search warrant, but later determined there was a misinterpretation of the data or something, and the storage unit hadn’t actually been accessed.

In this attacked link, page 73/80, CS contacts LE to advise he believes SS must have gained access to CS's storage located on Executive Ave on 2/28 (i.e., after death), and that he just found a hard drive normally housed in a desktop --inside a storage bin where he also found SS's watch. SS previously told CS from jail that the watch was inside his bedroom. Also, CS confirms SS had no access to the parents home after leaving Kissimmee on 2/25.

Pg 80/80 -- in a call from SS to CS/DS on speakerphone, CS asks him about the events of 2/28 -- why he drove to Northport, and gets a typical SS words salad response, but he never denies murdering MS.

IMO, It doesn't follow that CS located SS's property (hard drive & watch) inside his storage unless SS placed it there. Not exactly property that comes in multiples. CS didn't put it there! Just sayin..

https://www.scribd.com/document/761306492/24001896-Stephen-Sterns-Documents-released-by-Kissimmee-PD-regarding-the-investigation-into-Madeline-Sotos-murder

 

[Seattle1]

Apparently, SS' father insisted SS take the Lincoln on his trips to Kissimmee because SS' vehicle was in "dire need of servicing" - brakes, AC, etc. - and last thing CS wanted to deal with was a stranded car 2 hours away. CS estimates the car needed $2-3k in repairs. He says he had SS tow the car back to North Port rather than drive it when SS moved out of Jen's condo.
Scroll to 1:30 mark for CS' explanation.

^^rsbm

For clarification, the YT video marker about why SS did not drive his own vehicle (Honda Civic) to Orange County and was driving his dad's Lincoln is 1:30:00 -- an hour and a half into the recording.

 

[Mack the Knife]

In this attacked link, page 73/80, CS contacts LE to advise he believes SS must have gained access to CS's storage located on Executive Ave on 2/28 (i.e., after death), and that he just found a hard drive normally housed in a desktop --inside a storage bin where he also found SS's watch. SS previously told CS from jail that the watch was inside his bedroom. Also, CS confirms SS had no access to the parents home after leaving Kissimmee on 2/25.

Pg 80/80 -- in a call from SS to CS/DS on speakerphone, CS asks him about the events of 2/28 -- why he drove to Northport, and gets a typical SS words salad response, but he never denies murdering MS.

IMO, It doesn't follow that CS located SS's property (hard drive & watch) inside his storage unless SS placed it there. Not exactly property that comes in multiples. CS didn't put it there! Just sayin..

https://www.scribd.com/document/761306492/24001896-Stephen-Sterns-Documents-released-by-Kissimmee-PD-regarding-the-investigation-into-Madeline-Sotos-murder

I can't say if SS accessed CS's storage unit (neither can CS), but the reason it was originally believed that SS had accessed his storage unit and the information that law enforcement based their eventual search warrant for said storage unit on was that information from the storage unit company indicated that the unit had been accessed, and CS said it wasn't him. This turned out to be untrue.

That is, records of access to CS's storage unit do not show anyone accessing that unit after MS's death/disappearance. I'm not exactly sure what they misinterpreted, but it was a misinterpretation, and there is no evidence to suggest that SS accessed the storage unit the night he went to North Port, beyond the fact that he was in North Port.

Law enforcement got the correct information directly from the assistant manager of Life Storage, and CS says the same at about the 53 minute mark in this interview.

 

[Seattle1]

In the YT joint interview with CS/DS, I did not hear anything we've not already discussed except for DS citing her opinion that JS and SS seemed to have a "joint defense" about MS missing including the "we dropped MS off" statements to media and that DS thinks the party allegedly seen on surveillance video in the church parking lot could have been MS. DS believes they share clothes and are similar in physical stature.

And more important -- CS reveals towards the end of the interview that JS contacted CS and informed him that he needed to get an attorney for SS because LE found SA against her child on his electronics, and that it had been going on for 2 years. At this time, JS also confided in CS that SS/JS were no longer intimate because her Rx affected her sex drive. CS and JS spent several hours together following this convo including CS driving her to/from the PD. CS tells LE that he's been extremely perplexed by CS reaction (i.e., no reaction) to her daughter being SA abused by SS.

IMO, it's just one more event that causes concern as to why JS has not been separately indicted for child endangerment, at a minimum. MOO

In this attached link, page 78 73/80, CS contacts LE to advise he believes SS must have gained access to CS's storage located on Executive Ave on 2/28 (i.e., after death), and that he just found a hard drive normally housed in a desktop --inside a storage bin where he also found SS's watch. SS previously told CS from jail that the watch was inside his bedroom. Also, CS confirms SS had no access to the parents home after leaving Kissimmee on 2/25.

^^ this call by CS to LE referenced above took place on May 14, 2024 at 1403 hours.

I can't determine the date of the interview linked above with CS/DS and LE but suspect it predates the 5/15/24 call by CS to LE when he found the hard drive and watch. The later by CS alleging SS must have gotten into his unit on 2/28 conflicts the audio linked above.

But CS/DS confirm again in the audio that SS does not have access code or a key to the unit unless he stole it. In other words, any access to the unit by CS is/was not with the owner's permission.

MOO

 

[Seattle1]

In this attacked link, page 78 73/80, CS contacts LE to advise he believes SS must have gained access to CS's storage located on Executive Ave on 2/28 (i.e., after death), and that he just found a hard drive normally housed in a desktop --inside a storage bin where he also found SS's watch. SS previously told CS from jail that the watch was inside his bedroom. Also, CS confirms SS had no access to the parents home after leaving Kissimmee on 2/25.

Pg 80/80 -- in a call from SS to CS/DS on speakerphone, CS asks him about the events of 2/28 -- why he drove to Northport, and gets a typical SS words salad response, but he never denies murdering MS.

IMO, It doesn't follow that CS located SS's property (hard drive & watch) inside his storage unless SS placed it there. Not exactly property that comes in multiples. CS didn't put it there! Just sayin..

https://www.scribd.com/document/761306492/24001896-Stephen-Sterns-Documents-released-by-Kissimmee-PD-regarding-the-investigation-into-Madeline-Sotos-murder

^^edit by me -- should be page 78/80, and not 73.

 

[Pruddennce]

That’s a reason why it is important for witnesses (which JS was in this circumstance) to be exact and literal and precise, but that doesn’t mean that JS or any other witness will be exact and literal and precise when we would want them to. Witnesses are incorrect all the time without lying. Sometimes they mean something other than how it is interpreted, sometimes they are outright wrong.

A witness said they saw SS changing his tire with the help of a red headed man at a time we know he was not changing that tire (17). Is that witness lying? Presumably no. He most likely misremembered the time or saw someone else.

I believe that law enforcement expects and anticipates these kinds of discrepancies and errors. I argue that witness statements should not be taken literally, they should be considered open to interpretation and further interrogation to confirm that LE’s understanding is the same as the witness’s meaning.

I agree with you about witnesses and times, however, one would expect the mother, who is living with their child to be fairly accurate accounting for their own timeframe. and in this instance, she barely had a timeframe of movements that day, meaning leaving the house. we have no idea what happened that nite with JS, SS and Madeline, nor the morning. but she could recite SS's movements that morning (we we we) and HIS subsequent activities almost verbatim... its what she was told to her about his travels with her daughter on the way to school, and the rest of his 'errands'. which of course was BS.....she chose to recite HIS STORY.

in her first interview, she couldnt even say with certainty when SS arrived that weekend. *she doesnt remember* if it was saturday or sunday was her first response. SS was also hedging on the arrival day and time. when asked what day, he pretends he has to think about it and then says sunday. why were they both non-committal as to when he arrived? then, listen to her in the car on the way to the presser: at this point, the detective brilliantly has her at ease and she is asked if Stephan was at the party.....now she is definitive:

"he was on his way here from Northport during the party'. detective says 'so he would have got here sunday nite'?....she says yeah, and says Madeline got home at 8:30pm,(her sister would have told her,) but says 'then Stephan walked into the house about 10 minutes later to make sure Madeline took her meds, get in the shower and get ready for bed'. then the 'we watched Sister Act movie' shows up in the 30 minute timeline of JS supposedly with her daughter. 30 minutes of happy happy madeline, showing her presents, talking about her amazing birthday party, now she has Madeline singing for SS and JS, then hey, lets watch Sister Act! then JS says, 'but we didnt finish the whole thing'.

stark contrast to her initial interview with LE AND the media. ADHD, anxious Madeline (no mention of asthma and inhaler), happy happy Madeline, showing of presents, amazing party, no cell or computer use, we said goodnite and 'yeah, that was it'.

how is it JS can give a step by step account of Stephan's movements that morning without skipping a beat? but cant answer right away as to when she got home from her blood appt. when asked: longesttttttttttt pause.....she had to CHECK what time her appt was, (checks, its 10:15) and then says 11:15-11:30....that was a tough one for her. next Q: was Stephan there when you got back: answer: pause, "I want to say yes, but I cant remember'. now factor in claiming she was accidentally awakened at 8am, (dog story) goes back to bed until 9, leaves at 9:30, comes home at 11:15-30, roughly 2.5 hours awake and she cant remember....WTF?

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I am pretty confused by my fellow WSleuthers who seem to think it's no big deal that JS said in her sworn affidavit to LE that she SAW Maddie getting ready for school that morning.

It's ridiculous IMO. I don't confuse what I saw with what I heard. I would never say I saw something I didn't actually see.

And the kicker is, JS couldn't have seen or heard whatever she claims to, because poor Maddie was already dead and was never getting ready for school that day for JS to either see her or hear her.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I agree with you about witnesses and times, however, one would expect the mother, who is living with their child to be fairly accurate accounting for their own timeframe.

Respectfully snipped for focus

Yeah, everything you said.

 

[wtiger]

she said "i saw her getting ready".......the truth is actually "i didn't see her getting ready" - where is the doubt here???

 

[Forest_Wood]

sure....its several of them (with commentary)
you can click on watch on utube.

Thank you @Pruddennce.

Right around the 38:00 mark, the cop asks her what the rest of her day looked like after her "blood appointment" from which she arrived home at 11:15 or 11:30. She answers, "I just waited. I waited for the rest of the day until 2:30 to leave for the car line".

It seems that JS spent most of the day "just waiting". I wish the cop had asked her specifically what she did all day from 11:30-2:30 when she left to go to Madeline's school. Is this how she spent every day, "just waiting"? I doubt it! What was different about this day where she spent it "just waiting". Oh, right, her daughter "never made it" to school, "never made it" to her mother's work, "never made it" home as they "just waited" while everyone else searched.

She couldn't remember if she heard Maddie in the morning or if it was the roommates. She couldn't remember if she told Maddie she was picking her up that day. But she could remember every little detail of what SS told her about dropping Madeline off, that she didn't want to go to McDonalds after all, what MS was wearing, what time SS got home that morning, that he went to the vape store twice, and so on.

I find it hard to believe this woman has not been charged. I don't believe her.

MOO.

 

[Forest_Wood]

In an emergency people are not always thinking straight and/or able to articulate perfectly.

I know we nit pick apart everything in cases sitting here on the outside but sometimes it seems excessive. Just too much, especially when we have not been in that exact situation ourselves, we cannot possibly know what we would or would not do/say etc moo

Well, respectfully, everybody knows that seen and heard are two entirely different words that do not mean the same thing. They are not synonymous. So it's not nit picking or excessive IMO. If you put yourself in the exact situation and your daughter was missing, I would imagine getting the facts right would be essential to most anyone. She didn't see her daughter that morning. It was a lie, not a mix up of words. She didn't see anybody that morning in fact. She even says she saw SS when he came into the bedroom. But how could he have come in the bedroom at 08:00 when his car was captured out driving around? So many discrepancies. Such a calm mother giving her stories.
MOO.