Found Deceased FL - Madeline Soto, 13, Missing Child Alert, 13500 blk Town Loop Blvd, Orlando, 26 Feb 2024 *arrest* #12

[iamshadow21]

I am reminded of the text JS sent SS....something like: I cant afford to have Maddie sleep with me anymore.
What was that about.
And after listening to CS speak with LE he described when JS told him to get SS a lawyer. She was not stressed at all about hearing about SA or that her child was missing.
And when JS was being interviewed by LE or media....it was all about "her" story, no pleas about finding her daughter. Not sure she even brought up Maddie's name when speaking with LE. VERY odd. IMO

"Maddie is no longer sleeping with me, I can't risk it."

Yeah, claimed she didn't remember and couldn't explain the text's meaning.

Uhuh, sure. Pull the other one, JS, it's got bells on.

MOO

 

[Megnut]

FWIW I think her statement about MS not sleeping with her, couldn't risk it was all about JS. Her priority was her mental health and she didn't want anything to interfere with her meds. Not her meds, her routine, her sleep, her new job. Parenting got in the way of that.

jmo

 

[iamshadow21]

FWIW I think her statement about MS not sleeping with her, couldn't risk it was all about JS. Her priority was her mental health and she didn't want anything to interfere with her meds. Not her meds, her routine, her sleep, her new job. Parenting got in the way of that.

jmo

I think what's interesting about that text is I think, 100%, that LE have the text message he sent before she replied to that. So, they have the context, they just wanted to see what she would say when questioned about it.

I think there was nothing innocent about his request (hence her convenient and predictable memory loss), and the pattern of their messages over time combined with the dates of his visits and the date stamps on the CSAM would mean they know exactly what was going on there.

MOO

 

[ShadyLady]

FWIW I think her statement about MS not sleeping with her, couldn't risk it was all about JS. Her priority was her mental health and she didn't want anything to interfere with her meds. Not her meds, her routine, her sleep, her new job. Parenting got in the way of that.

jmo

I cant remember the exact word she used...but "risk" was not about meds, etc. imo. More coverup lies.
Her lack of concern that Maddie was missing convinces me, she knew what happened.

And her regurgitation of the same "story" was rehearsed. imo....as was SS's.

 

[Poedelini]

Im working on a timeline and JS is contradicting herself in the same interview. Tell me im seeing that wrong?
Page 32 in the 896 page PDF file.

 

[iamshadow21]

Im working on a timeline and JS is contradicting herself in the same interview. Tell me im seeing that wrong?
Page 32 in the 896 page PDF file.

Just because you wake up doesn't mean you get up then. I don't think it's a flat out contradiction.

MOO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Im working on a timeline and JS is contradicting herself in the same interview. Tell me im seeing that wrong?
Page 32 in the 896 page PDF file.

I have to agree with what you cite there @Poedelini . Nice catch! It does seems inconsistent, and right in the same statement displayed in that image. Two different times for when she states SS had woken IIUC.

And yet JS IIRC had also woven in something about having heard someone in the kitchen around that time. But she was unsure who it was, or so she said. So the timeline IMO is even more fluid or less specific. (The individual(s) in the kitchen statement is right mid center of that image.) As some might say, pinning that down is like nailing jello to a wall. MOO

 

[cujenn81]

I am reminded of the text JS sent SS....something like: I cant afford to have Maddie sleep with me anymore.
What was that about.
And after listening to CS speak with LE he described when JS told him to get SS a lawyer. She was not stressed at all about hearing about SA or that her child was missing.
And when JS was being interviewed by LE or media....it was all about "her" story, no pleas about finding her daughter. Not sure she even brought up Maddie's name when speaking with LE. VERY odd. IMO

That’s been my problem with JS from the jump. In every single interview, she tells her story from a justification point of view.

Maddie had her party at my mother’s house because I had to work.
I sent Maddie upstairs to sleep with Stephan because I needed a good night of sleep.
Stephan took her to school that morning because I wanted to sleep in.
Maddie is missing because she has ADHD and left her phone at home because she’s forgetful and does that often.
I left the school when I didn’t see her exit because I was holding up the line.

This woman has been in defensive mode from Day 1. Why was it so important to her that she defend herself and explain her reasoning behind every decision she made—without being asked? I’ll tell you why. Because SHE KNEW how her choices would make her look. SHE KNEW they were selfish and wrong. SHE KNEW she shouldn’t have sent her child to bed with a grown *advertiser censored* man. SHE KNEW… and she did it anyway. And then when she was faced with the public learning about it, she tried incredibly hard to justify her actions in an effort to make them seem rational. It didn’t work.

I think one of the most poignant points made on The Behavior Panel video of the March 1 interview was this— in reference to JS saying she rarely sent Maddie to sleep upstairs with SS… she said it only happened a few times. Greg Hartley points out that such statements are common from people who have groomed children.

At 1:05:22 in the video:

 

[iamshadow21]

I think one of the most poignant points made on The Behavior Panel video of the March 1 interview was this— in reference to JS saying she rarely sent Maddie to sleep upstairs with SS… she said it only happened a few times. Greg Hartley points out that such statements are common from people who have groomed children.

At 1:05:22 in the video:

RSBM

Yeah, that combined with the 'sex stuff isn't evil' and 'oral isn't rape' are, combined, a hideous trifecta of child rape apologism and enabling.

I honestly think her being uncharged is a travesty.

MOO

 

[cujenn81]

RSBM

Yeah, that combined with the 'sex stuff isn't evil' and 'oral isn't rape' are, combined, a hideous trifecta of child rape apologism and enabling.

I honestly think her being uncharged is a travesty.

MOO

I wholeheartedly agree!

 

[Gemmie]

Im working on a timeline and JS is contradicting herself in the same interview. Tell me im seeing that wrong?
Page 32 in the 896 page PDF file.

What I'm seeing is that SS "woke her up" around 8am to "put the leash on the dog" (a lie on his part of why he was in her room when she was sleeping). I then read that JS "got out of bed" around 9am. Waking up and getting up aren't the same thing IMO. An example is myself (true story). I "woke up" around 3am this morning, and finally fell back asleep around 5am. I "got out of bed" around 8:30.

So... not the same thing IMO.

 

[Pruddennce]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Keep wondering if SS might eventually or ultimately provide information about any one else’s possible involvement.

IMO it is hard not to think that the parents CS and DS should also be examined. For items such as the apparent missing or unfounded computer hard drive at a minimum.

And as @Pruddennce notes in post # 1008 above, the apparent ‘sorting it out’ in SS room in their house. With SS visits and appearance there IIUC after MS was missing, hard not to see possible tampering with evidence or obstruction of justice? The investigation had only begun and was ongoing!

IMO if other charges can be laid, it might help invigorate or ‘fresh-start’ the investigation and change the dynamic between anyone suspected or involved. MOO

I agree. IMO, his parents gave the impression they were 'cooperating' but IMO it was selective and conflicting as to what they knew firsthand....IMO, there are many dizzying explanations for this or that that doesnt line up.

its also noteworthy that CS did not volunteer information he had a storage unit originally. he relays the story in the parental interview with Det Smallwood when asked about the storage unit keys, etc. CS says that when he was told by "Alex" (Det Alex Richards) wednesday evening that SS was in Northport early wednesday morning, CS relayed he said 'really'...and he said "I couldnt imagine why', then he said he was told by "Alex" that they had information SS possibly went to his storage unit, he then begins the storage unit story access/no access story.

this was interesting to me: CS states he spoke to SS AFTER he arrived in Kissimmee on the 25th. (no time stated) why were they talking on the phone?

then CS said he tried to call him several times in the morning on 2/26, no answer. why was he calling SS in the morning?

then SS calls him back at 15:17 hours, and CS says his voice 'sounded off" and SS tells him about the flat tire on Highway 192 and 'hurting his finger' and specifically how the injury happened. then SS calls CS again at 16:54 and told him there was an 'occurrence', and CS punctuates how he felt that was a 'strange use of words'. and SS tells him all about Madeline missing etc.

CS hightailing it down to Kissimmee to the hotel at that hour, why not just come up first thing in the morning? what did he expect to accomplish with SS and JS and the situation at that time of the morning? wasnt he concerned enough when he got the call on 2/26 Madeline was 'missing' and get there to assist in any way he can?

the next morning CS gets up and goes to his office. he claims he has no idea if JS and SS were in their rooms when he left and only found out that SS wasnt there when JS called and said he wasnt there. CS is so intuitive and he asks if her car keys are there? why would he immediately think SS left in her car?

 

[Poedelini]

Just because you wake up doesn't mean you get up then. I don't think it's a flat out contradiction.

MOO

True!

What I'm seeing is that SS "woke her up" around 8am to "put the leash on the dog" (a lie on his part of why he was in her room when she was sleeping). I then read that JS "got out of bed" around 9am. Waking up and getting up aren't the same thing IMO. An example is myself (true story). I "woke up" around 3am this morning, and finally fell back asleep around 5am. I "got out of bed" around 8:30.

So... not the same thing IMO.

True, thank you for keeping me straight. I guess she fell asleep until 9.

I have to agree with what you cite there @Poedelini . Nice catch! It does seems inconsistent, and right in the same statement displayed in that image. Two different times for when she states SS had woken IIUC.

And yet JS IIRC had also woven in something about having heard someone in the kitchen around that time. But she was unsure who it was, or so she said. So the timeline IMO is even more fluid or less specific. (The individual(s) in the kitchen statement is right mid center of that image.) As some might say, pinning that down is like nailing jello to a wall. MOO

Yeah she heard people in that time so did she fall asleep as she said?
And could there be someone in the kitchen at that time?

 

[Gemmie]

True, thank you for keeping me straight. I guess she fell asleep until 9.

Yeah she heard people in that time so did she fall asleep as she said?
And could there be someone in the kitchen at that time?

Personally I don't think she fell back asleep between 8-9. That's not a whole lot of time IMO. Sure, she could have, but if she does then she falls asleep a lot easier and quicker than I do! (literally hours)

She said SS "work her up" around 8am, and she "got up" around 9am", which begs the question... while she laid there hoping for a few more minutes of snoozing I'm going to guess that she likely heard things going on in the kitchen. But what sorts of things is what I want to know. If it's true about the time SS woke her, and when she actually got out of bed, that's an hour of prime time when SS was doing "stuff".

Pg 32 of 896 pager: I asked if she had heard her (Maddie) and she stated she heard people in the kitchen but was not sure if it was her specifically.

The roommate was already gone by this time (7:45am), and likely her son as he'd need to get to school, but maybe someone picks him up later than when his mom left, or he walks? I don't think he went to the same school but that's just a guess on my part. That leaves 1-2 people (SS and possibly the son), when it would normally be 2-3 people (SS, Maddie, and potentially the son). So my question for JS would be... did you hear anything that was out of the norm for a school day at that hour? It was DEFINITELY not like a regular school day in that house with Maddie dead. Things had to sound different IMO.

Pg 875: (roommate) she always leaves by 0745 hours.

And back to my quote above about JS not being sure it was Maddie "specifically". You would think she'd know what her daughter sounds like. The kitchen is in the next room. Her laugh? The normal things she does (breakfast?), etc. I just find it hard to believe she wasn't sure if she heard Maddie "specifically".

 

[ShadyLady]

Personally I don't think she fell back asleep between 8-9. That's not a whole lot of time IMO. Sure, she could have, but if she does then she falls asleep a lot easier and quicker than I do! (literally hours)

She said SS "work her up" around 8am, and she "got up" around 9am", which begs the question... while she laid there hoping for a few more minutes of snoozing I'm going to guess that she likely heard things going on in the kitchen. But what sorts of things is what I want to know. If it's true about the time SS woke her, and when she actually got out of bed, that's an hour of prime time when SS was doing "stuff".

Pg 32 of 896 pager: I asked if she had heard her (Maddie) and she stated she heard people in the kitchen but was not sure if it was her specifically.

The roommate was already gone by this time (7:45am), and likely her son as he'd need to get to school, but maybe someone picks him up later than when his mom left, or he walks? I don't think he went to the same school but that's just a guess on my part. That leaves 1-2 people (SS and possibly the son), when it would normally be 2-3 people (SS, Maddie, and potentially the son). So my question for JS would be... did you hear anything that was out of the norm for a school day at that hour? It was DEFINITELY not like a regular school day in that house with Maddie dead. Things had to sound different IMO.

Pg 875: (roommate) she always leaves by 0745 hours.

And back to my quote above about JS not being sure it was Maddie "specifically". You would think she'd know what her daughter sounds like. The kitchen is in the next room. Her laugh? The normal things she does (breakfast?), etc. I just find it hard to believe she wasn't sure if she heard Maddie "specifically".

For all we know, she was up half the night trying to get her story straight. I just dont believe what she says. All to cover up/justify her actions. imo

 

[Pruddennce]

Just because you wake up doesn't mean you get up then. I don't think it's a flat out contradiction.

MOO

however, her Feb 29 audio interview she does say: 'I got up off the bed AT THAT MOMENT", technically, she got up but she claims she wasnt out of bed for the day until she says 9am. IMO she certainly wasnt back in la la sleep land, IMO if she thought she heard somebody in the kitchen, heard sounds etc.

SS claims he was in and out of JS's room several times giving her updates. I know, he is a liar, but what about her?? (IMO)

she is then confronted on Feb 29 about her written statement about seeing Madeline in the morning, her words:
"I MIS-REMEMBERED, I didnt see her....I wanted to believe I saw her......but I didnt"

Feb 29: but she is then asked about what she said on the police bodycam reporting her missing, that she knew what she was wearing? she claims Madeline picked it out the nite before. no other info. until:

subpoena interview:

JS: This evening we had, um, I had already discussed prior to Stephan coming to visit that he was going to help me take Maddie to school that day. Um, so because I knew that that was what was going to happen, that night, I had asked Maddie to pick out your clothes, have everything ready, have your backpack ready, your water bottle, everything you need ready, so that way you could just grab your stuff and head out. It won’t be too much--too much of a hassle in the morning. Um, and so she did. She picked out her clothing. I asked her what she was wearing, and she told me what she had picked out. I said, “Okay, fine.”

Madeline TOLD HER what she picked out to wear (convenient, no one can confirm that). what she goes on to say is she never saw the clothes she picked out or where they were, whether in Madeline's space on her bed in the living room or upstairs. "I hadnt see them".

in fact, there is no corroboration or witness as to what Madeline said or did upon arrival home when she shut the front door. JS was not there for 2 hours. SS was.

IMO, I cannot rely on JS's generic account of her interaction with Madeline for 30 minutes upon her arrival home and about her 'bedtime routine".

Subpoena interview:

WJ: Okay. Now during this 30 minutes that the three of you are in your bedroom, is Madeline engaging in any of her kind of nighttime routine or getting ready for bed? What else is going on, if anything? (remember the movie statement, it is omitted in this interview)

JS: Ummmm... We spent a long time talking about gifts and having her show me, and then we counted out her money. Um... (long pause) I can't remember if she had finished with all of her bedtime routine.

WJ: Okay. Does she brush her teeth at night?

JS: Uh, in the shower.

WJ: In the shower, okay, and that occurred before you got home?

JS: Yes.

my question: if she was changed, showered, teeth brushed, and 'she believes she instructed Madeline to take her meds herself when she got home'.....and clothes picked out....30 minutes with JS, food talk, money counting, a few trinkets, she was so happy, and then she is heading upstairs with SS....what was left for Madeline to do, that she doesnt know if she is 'finished'?????

'

 

[Curious Me]

I am reminded of the text JS sent SS....something like: I cant afford to have Maddie sleep with me anymore.
What was that about....

It was that Maddie was no long sleeping with JS, and she can't risk it. Big difference. It means all that claiming that Maddie didn't like to sleep alone could be proven untrue by that statement.
​

"Maddie is no longer sleeping with me, I can't risk it." Yeah, claimed she didn't remember and couldn't explain the text's meaning....​

That's it! And what couldn't she risk? It's such a strange statement, and I expected LE to dig deeper into why she'd say that, but no they let her fall back on she couldn't remember. Why she'd say such a very strange thing. MOO, it points to something... something that JS seemed to link herself to being held responsible if revealed. If Maddie wasn't sleeping with JS, then where was she sleeping?

MOO​

 

[Megnut]

It was that Maddie was no long sleeping with JS, and she can't risk it. Big difference. It means all that claiming that Maddie didn't like to sleep alone could be proven untrue by that statement.



That's it! And what couldn't she risk? It's such a strange statement, and I expected LE to dig deeper into why she'd say that, but no they let her fall back on she couldn't remember. Why she'd say such a very strange thing. MOO, it points to something... something that JS seemed to link herself to being held responsible if revealed. If Maddie wasn't sleeping with JS, then where was she sleeping?

MOO​

Stealing from an OP upthread, LE knew what they wanted to ask her... they likely have the context for that statement because they have access to preceding and trailing texts ... I'm guessing they were giving her an opportunity to be truthful, explain herself. If she stopped short of an answer, that would be a strong indication for them. Pursuing it in that interview while she's got immunity gains LE nothing and could muddy independent investigation.

In other words, not answering the question (didn't remember it) answered the question for LE.

Actual lack of recall
Risk of implicating herself
Protecting SS

IMO LE got what they needed from her. In the form of what she didn't say.

JMO

 

[PawneeDew]

It was that Maddie was no long sleeping with JS, and she can't risk it. Big difference. It means all that claiming that Maddie didn't like to sleep alone could be proven untrue by that statement.



That's it! And what couldn't she risk? It's such a strange statement, and I expected LE to dig deeper into why she'd say that, but no they let her fall back on she couldn't remember. Why she'd say such a very strange thing. MOO, it points to something... something that JS seemed to link herself to being held responsible if revealed. If Maddie wasn't sleeping with JS, then where was she sleeping?

MOO​

Because she allowed it, I think. (She didn't want anyone to know) Also SS insisted, that's probably how he got started with Maddie. All my own opinion..