Found Deceased FL - Madeline Soto, 13, Missing Child Alert, 13500 blk Town Loop Blvd, Orlando, 26 Feb 2024 *arrest* #7

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
mickey2942 said:
JS should also be charged. She had one job as a parent, to keep her daughter safe. Instead, she invites a predator like SS to come live with them. It is like bedding down the fox in the hen house!
Click to expand...
I understand , most people feel that way, but to say she invited a predator, you gotta prove that whoever brought the fox knew what the fox was going to do. ( in court anyway)
 
ttjo said:
I understand , most people feel that way, but to say she invited a predator, you gotta prove that whoever brought the fox knew what the fox was going to do. ( in court anyway)
Click to expand...

We do know that her daughter is missing, presumed dead. And that there is evidence of significant child sexual abuse, involving Madeline and SS. For JS not to know...is a very high bar of denial.

<modsnip - speculation outside the bounds of the known facts of the case>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If it is true, as the friends of SS said in the Grey Hughes interviews that JS and SS again, had a "kinky sex life" and "JS did things no one else would do", then this REALLY makes you question WHY JS would think it was "normal" for SS to go "snuggle" MS to sleep, alone in another bedroom?

I mean, inappropriate enough to send your daughter to sleep alone with your boyfriend, but knowing he is into who knows what? And it has to be fairly extreme, I think? This goes so far beyond JS being "naive" or "manipulated" IMO.

JS knew and was involved.

Nothing else has ever made any sense to me, and the more we learn, the less hope I have of JS not being aware/involved.
 
Beekarina said:
If it is true, as the friends of SS said in the Grey Hughes interviews that JS and SS again, had a "kinky sex life" and "JS did things no one else would do", then this REALLY makes you question WHY JS would think it was "normal" for SS to go "snuggle" MS to sleep, alone in another bedroom?

I mean, inappropriate enough to send your daughter to sleep alone with your boyfriend, but knowing he is into who knows what? And it has to be fairly extreme, I think? This goes so far beyond JS being "naive" or "manipulated" IMO.

JS knew and was involved.

Nothing else has ever made any sense to me, and the more we learn, the less hope I have of JS not being aware/involved.
Click to expand...
could be? there are red flags for sure, Im just saying if this went to court there isnt enough thats been released to the public to get her on anything other than lying, and neglect. Thats the difference, what did she know and how you prove it ? whats measurable?
 
photographer4 said:
If there is evidence of him moving the body before dumping it, could it mean the body switched cars? The LE had trackers on three cars. I still don’t get why or how these would be at all helpful post mortem for MS or locating her body?
Click to expand...
A question on the trackers and vehicles came up yesterday IIRC. If I understand correctly, an NBC WFLA article indicated the trackers were not placed in the initial part of the investigation. It seems they were not placed until later and perhaps with a warrant. I don’t have all dates for this case; here is a May 15, 2024 article by Rachel Tucker entitled ‘Madeline Soto case: Potential evidence revealed in Florida teen’s death investigation’:

www.wfla.com

Madeline Soto case: Potential evidence revealed in Florida teen’s death investigation

Attorneys for Stephan Sterns, the man accused of murdering 13-year-old Madeline Soto in February, requested state prosecutors turn over evidence collected by law enforcement as part of the Florida …
www.wfla.com www.wfla.com

Whether those requests, devices, or possible GPS would allow one to also search for some vehicle prior movement and history I do not known and IANAL. I would hope that it would. MOO
 
2024 CF 000632
STERNS, STEPHAN MICHAEL
CSAM

No changes, just refreshing with the same info.

1716342861196.png

1716342899812.png

Charges
CountDescriptionLevelDegree
1SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
2SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
3SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
4SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
5SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
6SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
7SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
8SEXUAL BATTERY ON CHILD UNDER 12 (794.011 2)FC
9SEXUAL BATTERY WITH A CHILD 12-18 (FAMILIAL/CUSTODIAL AUTHORITY) (794.011 8b)FF
10SEXUAL BATTERY WITH A CHILD 12-18 (FAMILIAL/CUSTODIAL AUTHORITY) (794.011 8b)FF
11SEXUAL BATTERY WITH A CHILD 12-18 (FAMILIAL/CUSTODIAL AUTHORITY) (794.011 8b)FF
12SEXUAL BATTERY WITH A CHILD 12-18 (FAMILIAL/CUSTODIAL AUTHORITY) (794.011 8b)FF
13SEXUAL BATTERY WITH A CHILD 12-18 (FAMILIAL/CUSTODIAL AUTHORITY) (794.011 8b)FF
14LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
15LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
16LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
17LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
18LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
19LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
20LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION (800.04 5b)FL
21UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5)FT
22UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
23UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
24UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
25UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
26UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
27UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
28UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
29UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
30UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
31UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
32UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
33UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
34UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
35UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
36UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
37UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
38UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
39UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
40UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
41UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
42UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
43UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
44UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
45UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
46UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
47UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
48UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
49UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
50UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
51UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
52UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
53UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
54UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
55UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
56UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
57UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
58UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
59UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS
60UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF MATERIALS DEPICTING SEXUAL PERFORMANCE BY A CHILD TEN OR MORE IMAGES (827.071 5 )FS

 
LetsSolvIt said:
Autopsyresults not being made public. If two is true, I think they can always add the charge. Moo.
Click to expand...
Actually now that you say that it is possible they wouldn’t add the second charge to protect Maddie’s privacy. If he’s already going down for first degree premeditated why announce to the public that she was also pregnant. The amount of vulgar information available to the public about what that poor girl suffered is already too much.
 
mickey2942 said:
Has SS been charged with murder? On Courttv today, it was all sex crimes.
Click to expand...
There was a recent doc dump of Supplemental case reports by Investigators detailing more about the sex crimes.

However, as linked here by @PayrollNerd--Florida court case links, SS was arrested and charged with 60 count CSA/M around 3/1/24, and indicted for first degree murder of MS on 4/24/24.
 
photoprose1122 said:
Actually now that you say that it is possible they wouldn’t add the second charge to protect Maddie’s privacy. If he’s already going down for first degree premeditated why announce to the public that she was also pregnant. The amount of vulgar information available to the public about what that poor girl suffered is already too much.
Click to expand...
Understand your sentiment-- privacy for victims, etc.

It's like a double edged sword..... all atrocious illegal activities of perpetrators being publicly released removes the ability for these monsters to keep the worst parts of themselves & their actions hidden and not have to face the humiliation of public scrutiny for what they did.
The flipside is that it exposes private matters that their victims *may* have preferred not be publicly known.
 
Ontario Mom said:
If LE have the evidence she knowingly did this, then yes, she 100% should be charged.

jmo
Click to expand...
I think she should be charged either way. The law in Florida doesn’t require knowing for child neglect. It’s failing to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse.

Florida Statute 827.03(1)(e)(2) defines “Neglect of a child” as “[a] caregiver’s failure to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse, neglect, or exploitation by another person.”*

There is a law enforcement summary report discussed here that says “Jenn Soto, Madeline's mother, told detectives” it was “not unusual” for him “to sleep in the same bed as Madeline while Jenn slept somewhere else or was not home, according to the documents.”

Knowingly allowing your boyfriend to sleep with your child unattended is not exercising reasonable effort to prevent abuse or exploitation.

*Edited to add: The statute even continues to make clear that this can be based even on a single event: “Except as otherwise provided in this section, neglect of a child may be based on repeated conduct or on a single incident or omission that results in, or could reasonably be expected to result in, serious physical or mental injury, or a substantial risk of death, to a child.”
 
Last edited:
BeeGirl said:
I think she should be charged either way. The law in Florida doesn’t require knowing for child neglect. It’s failing to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse.

Florida Statute 827.03(1)(e)(2) defines “Neglect of a child” as “[a] caregiver’s failure to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse, neglect, or exploitation by another person.”*

There is a law enforcement summary report discussed here that says “Jenn Soto, Madeline's mother, told detectives” it was “not unusual” for him “to sleep in the same bed as Madeline while Jenn slept somewhere else or was not home, according to the documents.”

Knowingly allowing your boyfriend to sleep with your child unattended is not exercising reasonable effort to prevent abuse or exploitation.

*Edited to add: The statute even continues to make clear that this can be based even on a single event: “Except as otherwise provided in this section, neglect of a child may be based on repeated conduct or on a single incident or omission that results in, or could reasonably be expected to result in, serious physical or mental injury, or a substantial risk of death, to a child.”
Click to expand...

I agree completely. She allowed--even encouraged--SS to sleep with Madeline. Whether she knew what he was doing to her is immaterial. She put her child in a potentially harmful situation and she should be held accountable for that.
 
Last edited:
BeeGirl said:
I think she should be charged either way. The law in Florida doesn’t require knowing for child neglect. It’s failing to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse.

Florida Statute 827.03(1)(e)(2) defines “Neglect of a child” as “[a] caregiver’s failure to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse, neglect, or exploitation by another person.”*

There is a law enforcement summary report discussed here that says “Jenn Soto, Madeline's mother, told detectives” it was “not unusual” for him “to sleep in the same bed as Madeline while Jenn slept somewhere else or was not home, according to the documents.”

Knowingly allowing your boyfriend to sleep with your child unattended is not exercising reasonable effort to prevent abuse or exploitation.

*Edited to add: The statute even continues to make clear that this can be based even on a single event: “Except as otherwise provided in this section, neglect of a child may be based on repeated conduct or on a single incident or omission that results in, or could reasonably be expected to result in, serious physical or mental injury, or a substantial risk of death, to a child.”
Click to expand...
I wonder if it’s time to update the child protection laws in Florida? In Ontario, Canada, children need only face a risk of harm for child protection services to intervene. Risk. Not even substantial or reasonable risk. Just the risk is enough. For those interested: Law Document English View
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 214 more.
Total: 3,054 (members: 215, guests: 2,839)

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
2,839
Total visitors
3,054
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
595,369
Messages
18,023,407
Members
229,633
Latest member
Withergaming101
Back
Top