FL MADELINE SOTO: Missing from Orlando, FL - 26 Feb 2024 - Age 13 *Found Deceased*

1709179759561.png1709179780519.png

Madeline Soto missing: Florida mom begs for daughter's safe return home​

A mother in Orange County is begging for help locating her missing daughter.

Madeline ‘Maddie’ Soto was last seen on Monday, one day after she and her family celebrated her 13th birthday. Maddie’s mother, Jenn Soto, said surveillance video shows Maddie hanging out in a church parking lot on February 26 after being dropped off for school, but she never made it inside.

"I’m trying to hope for the best, but I’m scared for her," said Jenn Soto. "I want her to be okay; I want her to be safe… I don’t want her to come back harmed. I just want her back – whatever that means, I just want her back."

Jenn Soto said sheriff’s deputies are using K9s and a piece of Maddie’s clothing to try to track her scent near Town Loop Boulevard.

According to Jenn Soto, Maddie had never run away before. She said the teen had forgotten her cell phone at home that morning, but that was normal.

As of Wednesday morning, a variety of search teams are out searching for Maddie.


MEDIA - MADELINE SOTO: Missing from Orlando, FL - 26 Feb 2024 - Age 13
 
Last edited:
Okay, on April 18th Jenn was subpoenaed by the State Attorney's office and showed up with "her" attorney so I guess there is an attorney at least by that point...

She did not know what either Stephan nor Maddie was wearing that night when she got home from work. That's kind of interesting since she offered up her last clothing worn, etc. in earlier interviews... But would not know in April...

This woman was professing all sorts of things to LE that were not fact. Like that Stephan had only been gone 25 minutes when in fact he was probably gone most of the night and overnight when they were at the hotel... How she claimed and even interjected black shorts in an early interview but Maddie was then found in blue jeans...

Do NOT LIE. Just tell the truth that you know...

I mean c''mon there is plenty of reason people have trouble with her and distrust her. She provided a ton of it and was at minimum blind for years on end and self absorbed I guess...
 
ASked if she was wearing a green sweatshirt. Jenn said no. In April. But couldn't recall what either were wearing. She then says in this April video that she knew no green sweatshirt because she would have been wearing whatever she was going to bed in. (I assume because showered, bedtime routine taken care of per Stephan, etc.).

HOWEVER there is a much earlier video of her offering LE the last clothes she was wearing!! This is what I mean, noting adds up with her.

Now it is POSSIBLE she meant the birthday party clothes but like I said what about pajamas??? And that's what she says here, would have been wearing what she went to bed in. WOULD THOSE not be the last clothing worn??

It's just frustrating and irritating. These sorts of things are EVERYWHERE, the inconsistencies. So MANY of them.

Some people are making a big deal of her referring to Sunday as they last day they "had her". I don't necessarily think that's that huge but again, it's just another odd thing... Was she not alive Monday, did he not take her to school, was she not in your house alive.... One or two are one thing but these kinds of things are throughout and everywhere.

I tell ya sometimes I think she's covering the fact she never came home at all. I don't really believe that but I mean something is being covered up here...

I still have not seen grandma's interview but Jenn was asked why Stephan was not invited to the party and her response was her mom and Stephan did not get along. Now per Regina, her interview was mostly just he was a deadbeat, didn't work, etc. right? Is that all it was?

Because that wouldn't be enough imo for most parents not to be polite and invite even if they didn't approve of the fact daughter chose to be with him and he wasn't earning his keep. It would seem it would be more than that.... Just my guess... I got the distinct impression grandma was not a big fan of daughter Jenn either... And Jenn's ex said made sense to him Jenn didn't go to biday party because she had a new job and would have to deal with family...

I find that relationship a bit odd honestly... That's one not touched on here yet. His name is Steven too (NOT Maddie's bio dad, another ex, this one and ex-husband) and reading that part was confusing with two Stephans/Stevens. They were only married like a year but Jenn describes her daughter and his as raised together and he says he cared about Maddie after Jenn and him divorced and his daughter rand her kept in touch once a month on games and he would play just to talk to Maddie.... UNLESS they were together for years before marrying, this makes no sense...

His daughter has a new therapist...

He apparently tried to befriend Stephan too in interest of Maddie. I'm not sure why he is even around, that's pretty odd to me, I'm sorry... Again unless they were together for YEARS before marrying, the remarks don't make sense...

Again this is not bio dad but another male...

It's hard to sort it all out. This has been quite the dump and not even close to done and more coming. Some of these things may occur to a point in any case and be totally explainable, different perspectives, etc., hearsay rather than directly there and more. BUT there's a LOT ODD, despite trying to excuse a lot for that kind of reason...

The only heartbroken person I've heard to date is her grandpa. He held it together but he cracked and one could tell it was real. Stephan is nothing but Florida crocodile tears and as fake as they come that's why master manipulator and liar I have to laugh at. Not to anyone who maybe did not care about him as family or was taken in by him. I've never seen anything so obvious in my life. Actually, I have, in a couple of cases... The West boys would be one... More than a couple.

My days off are ending as always much too soon, the couple and then back to an all over with shifts grind. For once though this was a nice balance and it never is. Never. I got a lot done, had nothing going on with the home sale, did this, did that, ingested a ton on this case, took a break when needed, laundry done, cats taken care of, made a pot of chili (so rarely I cook these days, it bites), dishes cleared. Some bacon cooked for the fresh tomatoes my daughter brought me and BLTs. Had a major clogged drain and took care of that. Paid bills. More. Just a nice variety and got a lot done but not anywhere near what I need to catch up with from all the months of never being able to but anyhow...

So in having the crucial things done and a break, I went back to some of this...

I dont know what to think of this mother... Seriously. He is EASY. No problem there. I cannot just excuse her nor give her the benefit of the doubt after everything and all these months. She is NOT unintelligent and SO her contradictory statements and there are TONS and her we, I took her and you name it even AFTER are inexcusable. A person or two talked of how tight maybe a mom and daughter are when just the two of them... I instantly thought of Gypsy Rose so don't give me that. Plus it was never just the two of them, this house is full of a shared kitchen, rented out bedrooms and more.

Even when she talked of hiking and what they USED to do but been some years ago... She fell down at some point big time if she ever WAS a good mom.

I know I am going on but I am trying to sort and clear my head. BOTH are extremely selfish, self indulgent people at the very least. HE is a monster. How ANYONE could fall for his fakeness and b.s. I have no idea but again, I guess maybe when you are the parents or you are in something with him affecting you and your daughter every day, you get blinded and just try to deal with life...

This is going to sound odd, and maybe not hit right, but if I were Jennifer Soto, I wouldn't be trying to save myself, I would be thinking I need to do some penance for how I failed my daughter. I think anyhow...

She could go a long way by saying she is on board to see he gets justice and that she missed all the signs. And standing up for her daughter.

But that, I guarantee, is not going to happen...

Just been a lot. Now taking a break again and going to shower. Going to be ahead of the game tomorrow. I don't work 'til early afternoon but going to have a lot out of the way. Still many a thing not done but that's how it always is. Need a vacuum, a mop, etc... Not going to happen. Well who knows. I may get to such yet. Been pretty productive.

Doing such was a good balance in watching a lot on this in between... Is why I bring it up. It again was quite the dump and not sure I will ever see it all...
 
This is distrubing too. There are typos imo in these transcripts as to names sometimes. But both what I know so far to be the last interviews of Jenn and Stephan (not saying there aren't more) are very notable. Jenn was subpoenaed and in his the female officer really went hard hitting on him, not exactly being mean, but interrupting, impatient,, doubting, intentionally imo and calling him out on some things...

In hers she shows up with an attorney like I previously said. Again may not be the last interviews but last I've heard of so far....

A red flag to me unless I am getting so much info confused, didn't Stephan say early on he told Jenn he was there, Maddie had showered, taken her meds, did her bedtime routine and as she was supposed to??

In this one, Jenn had her take her meds after she got home. Then she went on to say Maddie would be sluggish in the mornings if she took her meds too late the night before. HUH?? So what you gave them to her late instead of sTephan saying he had earlier done it for you so she would be sluggish for him that next morning... I mean MY GOD.

it makes no sense except bad sense.

Then here is where I think they mix people up again perhaps. Jenn texted Maddie's father it says about her not wanting her to be flimed under bathroom doors. I am thinking they mean Stephan (who is not her father but Jenn ridiculously referred to him as a stepfather--see that in many cases these days even by media and it is just so wrong and normalizing things and always in cases)... . Well sh*T we know he was doing that to a roommate's gf in prior times AND it came out in this case a photo on is phone or video was of a current roommate of Jenn's!! She makes the excuse she just saw something about someone filming such things and that's why she said that. BULLSH*T. WE KNEW he had done such and we did not NOW LE knew he had done such in Jenn's home as well of a roommate there but we didn't know that until now. NO such thing as this kind of coincidence. She did not hear or see sh*t on some TV show or whatever. My GOD the lies here.

Imo they were closing in at this time and she lawyered up. She is not done for as in innocent, I'd bet money on it if I had any lol.

I don't want my daughter filmed she tells him under bathroom doors. Well okay hon, is that all you ask... Are you fine with everything else though? Sure. Just don't film her in the bathroom...

I mean I am not making this stuff up. No one is. Imo they subpoenaed her as she quit cooperating and her inconsistencies were catching up with her and she lawyered up.

I'd really like to believe otherwise and have moments I still can believe less than the worst with her but there is just so much for at least some pretty serious charges of neglect, and more. Even contributing to what was being done to this child...

I really prefer to keep blinders on here but they keep getting ripped off and unless one is trying to make her innocent and believe that, well I don't know how the tons of things can be ignored otherwise...
 
Sigh.

Asked why if Maddie embarrassed by his car she didn't let Stephan use hers to take her to school... She said he was not on her insurance and did not want the risk. Oh give me a break.

And yet the night of her death, the night at the hotel when her home was taken over, etc. and every time ever after he took her car NO PROBLEM. Again come ON. No one is this DUMB unless they want to be. No one is this zoned or clueless.

If anyone is going to tell me well her meds knocked her out and he took her keys and car well guess what so could he have the morning he took Maddie to school because that was the whole point so she could sleep so why not then....

I guess they are getting at (by now it is known he did not take her to school) why she'd not let him take her car if Maddie was embarrassed by his) but I think that's not the point they are making here, it is her senseless explanations...!
 
I know when a break is needed before I go too far. And I see the signs. I am not even halfway through this AND unfortunately what I am watching is not doing the entire transcript in order, I guess they did some a previous day in parts and so even when I finish, I won't have seen all.

The name of her lawyer she showed up with is in it too but out of niceness I did not put his name here. Never heard of him so no opinion there but just didn't see any reason to name him.

I am going to break from it, find some cooking or some such but will end with, there is just TOO MUCH TO IGNORE and it just keeps coming.

I am not going so far as to say she was involved with murder or disposal but I CANNOT EXCLUDE such either at all. But all things lesser are hard to ignore from helping cover up to them all present to more that's even far more debatable. She is definitely guilty of neglect and failure to protect and I'm sorry looks like a lot more than that to me.

This is a report but I guarantee it is recorded as well. When subpoenaed they actually moved locations because things were not working to ensure they had working services. I think this has been ensured with all of these in this case.
 
yes, now I read your third sentence. His dad did ask the detective if she had a lawyer and he said no. She would not unless ever charged be provided a free one so the likelihood of her having one even now is slim. They are expensive as we know. Unless family is helping or knows someone that is a lawyer that can at least advise her it is doubtful she has one imo.
My line of thinking on that was how Jenn showed consciousness of innocence and I think that's just one such instance.
 
Last edited:
My line of thinking on that was how Jenn showed consciousness of innocense and I think that's just one such instance.
We lol without doubt read into things very differently. 90 percent of the world out there following this I'd hazard a guess feel absolutely the opposite as you do about her. I'll even go so far as to say I'm not sold yet but I definitely have moved off the entirely innocent starting place. At minimum she lied for him many times. And something that LE and attorneys say is she had a duty to protect her daughter. She had a duty to be vigilant and not baked for how many years sleeping her life away and sending her daughter to her boyfriend's room alone or putting her in bed with the two of them while she conked out on drugs. At the very LEAST she was negligent, not vigilant, enabling him and more.

She should feel no consciousness of innocence, a normal mother would feel guilty as HE77 finding out, IF she did not know, what she now knows. I'd be guilty myself all over the place for the rest of my entire life.

Yes, a bit of vehemence. He, as I've said, is a no brainer. No one is defending him. Almost no one is defending her either. But this case bothers me to no end and it bothers most people out there to no end. So does she.

I'm not a sheep either. I stayed at a starting place for some time of not having an opinion on her but that has changed. And it changed on what I've seen myself. I can still believe POSSIBLY she didn't know but I'm not sold on it whatsoever AND I see that she was a neglectful, selfish, drugged up, very dangerous mother in her decisions. And that's not okay.

And plenty of people get no attorney and are the perps even and end up charged.

Not getting an attorney is consciousness of nothing. Imo.

If you read further you will see SHE did show up with an attorney. Consciousness of guilt I guess then right?

LOL. Well, I will say this isn't like an agreeable dull conversation...

Forgive me but I also think any mother would feel guilty in these circumstances and any mother would not be okay with her and that easy about it.

She failed her duty whether intentionally or not. She again at least is entirely selfish and made terrible decisions.

I don't see her sending her child to his bedroom much different than the parents buying a gun for their son in the Crumbley case.
 
I do caps, you do exclamation marks with vehemence LOL.
But I think I only used one...Lol!
Seriously, it wasn't that I felt strongly that Jenn didn't lie- I do, but that isn't the reason I !, it's that you think there're so many and I don't know of a single one.
She did not know what either Stephan nor Maddie was wearing that night when she got home from work. That's kind of interesting since she offered up her last clothing worn, etc. in earlier interviews... But would not know in April...
From Jenn's perspective, Madeline's last-worn clothing was what ever she'd worn to school.
And Jenn has always said that she didn't see Madeline that morn and so what ever she offered up, it wasn't direct knowledge.
ASked if she was wearing a green sweatshirt. Jenn said no. In April. But couldn't recall what either were wearing. She then says in this April video that she knew no green sweatshirt because she would have been wearing whatever she was going to bed in.
I haven't yet seen the April video but I'm not aware of Jenn ever having been asked about what Sterns or Madeline were wearing when she got home from work or what they wore to bed.
I still have not seen grandma's interview but Jenn was asked why Stephan was not invited to the party and her response was her mom and Stephan did not get along. Now per Regina, her interview was mostly just he was a deadbeat, didn't work, etc. right? Is that all it was?
Right, I mean, it's all of what I got from her interview but I think it could have been that he didn't want to go rather than they didn't want him to be there.
(I know he wasn't there in time for the party but he could have left earlier.)
 
Last edited:
This is distrubing too. There are typos imo in these transcripts as to names sometimes. But both what I know so far to be the last interviews of Jenn and Stephan (not saying there aren't more) are very notable.
Please share the link to the transcripts.
 
But I think I only used one...Lol!
Seriously, it wasn't that I felt strongly that Jenn didn't lie- I do, but that isn't the reason I !, it's that you think there're so many and I don't know of a single one.

From Jenn's perspective, Madeline's last-worn clothing was what ever she'd worn to school.
And Jenn has always said that she didn't see Madeline that morn and so what ever she offered up, it wasn't direct knowledge.

I haven't yet seen the April video but I'm not aware of Jenn ever having been asked about what Sterns or Madeline were wearing when she got home from work or what they wore to bed.

Right, I mean, it's all of what I got from her interview but I think it could have been that he didn't want to go rather than they didn't want him to be there.
(I know he wasn't there in time for the party but he could have left earlier.)
Most people imo would never lie to cops, I'd feel it so serious, I'd be tumbling out more truth than they wanted. Not wise maybe but I would and why would I worry if innocent....

No, Maddie's last known clothing were not what she'd worn to school. She was offering them the last known worn clothing from the house for the dogs. How could that be what she wore to school if she never came home?? There are at least THREE different interviews and occasions clothing comes up and maybe more but at least three, and they don't seem to match up.

First it was clothing still on the bathroom floor. Then it was the last known she was wearing which when they asked further she said was in a laundry basket and they asked if contaminated etc., and she said well it was in with both dirty and clean clothes in the basket. Not clear if this would be the birthday party attire or pajamas, imo last worn would be what she wore to bed. THEN in another one I saw yesterday she was asked (WHEN she was with a LAWYER) what Maddie and Stephan were wearing when she got home. She could not recall. She did say she would have been in whatever she was wearing to bed. I guess she bases that of Stephan telling her she'd had her shower, taken her meds, etc. Was THAT NOT SAID? I am sure it was, earlier on. Now she said SHE gave her her meds. Yet in other things he supposedly gave her too much. So WHO the HE77 gave her her meds?? Inconsistencies are EVERYWHERE.

And then let's add her certainty and interjection that she was wearing black shorts to school that day. Explain that one? He said black pants. She was found in blue jeans. But how would Jenn know at all anyhow? She said in these other interviews she did not know what she wore to bed, she referred to the last thing she was wearing as she could provide, etc., etc., etc.

These are just SOME examples where you claim you don't know of a single inconsistency or lie.

Granted this was quite a dump and it's hard to listen to all and then so much to try to compare to what you heard them say in another one and maybe you skipped some like you did of the classmate or quit listening, etc. And I kind of doubt either of us have seen all YET an I've listened to and now read a ton of the transcripts too but it is quite the overload.

I am just saying she is not matching up in her own statements and even though hard to keep track some of it is very notable and glaringly obvious.

To your third paragraph, YES, she was asked in the April interview, the one in which she had to be subpoenaed and showed up with a LAWYER. If none means consciousness of innocence then I guess having one means the opposite right... Lol, just saying.

The case GETS to me, obviously, and I've taken a lot in in the last two days, probably more than I could during the work week when it all came out. And it is just a lot. It gives me total outrage. This child had absolutely no protection. Maddie was failed right in her own home for years on end.

Yeah, I have yet to encounter her grandma's interview. So I can't give a take on that. As for him invited or not to the party, it is mostly said he was not, even his folks seemed to only find that out after. Jenn said in the April interview he was not invited because her mom and him did not get along so I'd take that as likely fact, not his not wanting to go, although doubtful I guess that he would have wanted to in that case.

The thing missing in here is why and who really wanted him to come to Orlando... Maddie was having a meltdown that Saturday and the logical conclusion is she had not had to deal with him and found out she was coming. His mother claimed the child invited him but that very well could be false or she could have been made to by Jenn. Or was that a lie and he finagled and played them all to go, get gas from dad, etc. and played the birthday... It was not even her birthday and he never went to the party and never even showed up other than to help with the school thing the next day. I'm sorry but that's not about a birthday or spending fun time with her, that's about Jenn getting help with getting her to bed, so she could sleep, etc., etc., etc...

The other part missing is he was high anxiety that Saturday as well. Something happened imo between he and Maddie whether by text or phone.... Pregnant, a threat to tell? And imo his going to Orlando from at least Saturday on, he knew he was going to have to kill her...

That's where I lean anyhow at this time.

It is difficult to discern everything when outer people are what they see or think, like his parents versus what they actually witnessed and so on or heard say on speaker phone. However, I try to remove a lot of that chaff and just in comparing what Jenn has said in her own interviews and the inconsistencies, now that matters... Some things one has to consider in the outer interviews. I mean I take his panicked day to be truth. Both parents were asked if they had any kind of medication for anxiety, etc. by him. Both piped up about that. It just seems fact because of several things and first it is not flattering to him and actually would indicate guilt or his worry about what he was about to do... And he was there, they were there, so this isn't like something they heard from someone. And it just fits. And Maddie had one that day too and texted her friend such, a total meltdown...

You know, I like that Florida gives almost all to FOIA requests. I am a true believer in transparency that way. But boy when such comes it is one HUGE dump. Daybell was similar. It was months of looking through all, no lie. Months. And then before most done, here came more.

I'd suggest two interviews. If you haven't seen. The what I know so far to be his last one where the female officer gets pretty short with him and she is controlling the interview and keeps interrupting.... She knows exactly what she is doing. The male pipes in once or twice, a total way of working this kind of thing they know how to do imo....

And the one with Jenn in April with her lawyer.

Does that mean she is still lawyered up? No idea. Maybe just had one to help for that subpoena and that day. But I think it would be a fair guess that she is. I wonder who is paying for that? I'd guess dad before mom but who knows...

I don't know if these were the last interviews but they are the last ones I have seen thus far...
 
Had to start slowly at least getting ready here and there but one last thought I think should be shared.

They said through that local news right before all this sh*t hit the fan they had no reason or something like that to charge her, well actually "sources" said that so I don't give that much weight but even so, we know how LE does this if the source was even LE.

The fact that the last interview I saw in April she had to be subpoenaed for says a lot. That is no longer cooperating in the murder of your daughter. You can interview with your attorney without having to be subpoanaed. My guess would be she was subpoanaed because she quit cooperating and had to be, and THEN she went and got an attorney.

Nothing wrong with getting an attorney. But they had to serve a subpoena or further guess is they would not have abided or come in.

It all says to me she is not free and clear and from all we have seen (and they no more) she shoudln't be.

Can anyone name the last case a parent had to be served a subpoena... Do they have to interview or comply, no, probably not. But subpoenas have to be complied with. I have probably spelled versions of this word wrong countless times but I know the true spelling as the one in it. Lol.

Alll is not hunky dory as to mom's innocence in my opinion anyhow...
 
They have gotten through more of it and am now hearing six known interviews of Jenn, she reveals more each time. And then body cam footage on top of it. It does sound like the April one I saw was the last known one at this point in what has been released...
 
OMG more than 300 videos still on the way representing more than 105 hours of bodycam videos, etc. Tons of pictures and more. :thud:
 
Plunder also helps pay for all with The Docket.

896 page document.

Explaining how they don't know what they are paying for and can be duplicate, they just provide, can't pick and choose, close to 1,000 photos, 911 calls, more . And of course costly because just have to take all pretty much.

I've said before she is not my fave but she does pay and get the stuff as well.
 
I really have a to get moving but there is now the poem out, with no one sure at this point who wrote it. Always.

Plunder bothers me mostly at times because she really pushes the edge and envelope with speculation and sensationalism I feel to a point.

BUT man she gets the info and has some great parts too. All of these first people (others then take from them) do a ton of work. I know how hard it has been to sift through all this and match up information or statements that don't match indicating lies and so on but they have already went through them all, editing out names if missed and more before sharing. They pay for them. They sift, they put out, they come back now comparing like all of his or all of hers and put things together.

A TON of work.

I'ts been a ton for all of us just to watch and keep straight.

So while she is not my fave because she does push a bit the envelope, the facts and work are all there as well and it is not all that way.

She was one of the first out with it. Grizzly most love and I used to but she just bothered me in the Delphi case and a few sensational headlines on cases as well. None thoughg are the irresponsible entirely types I have seen come and go in the past. They know the lines and they walk them sometimes right tot the edge.

So just saying, we wouldn't have this info without them and overall they beat news. I can't believe MSM or news even exists any more in its worthless form. Jmo.

And I've gotta get a move on. Hope everyone has a wonderful day and holiday weekend. I keep forgetting it is one as it's just another weekend of work to me...
 
No, Maddie's last known clothing were not what she'd worn to school. She was offering them the last known worn clothing from the house for the dogs. How could that be what she wore to school if she never came home?? There are at least THREE different interviews and occasions clothing comes up and maybe more but at least three, and they don't seem to match up.

First it was clothing still on the bathroom floor. Then it was the last known she was wearing which when they asked further she said was in a laundry basket and they asked if contaminated etc., and she said well it was in with both dirty and clean clothes in the basket. Not clear if this would be the birthday party attire or pajamas, imo last worn would be what she wore to bed. THEN in another one I saw yesterday she was asked (WHEN she was with a LAWYER) what Maddie and Stephan were wearing when she got home. She could not recall. She did say she would have been in whatever she was wearing to bed.
When the officer asked for clothing for the dogs, he asked for dirty clothes and Jennifer told him that there was such clothing on her bathroom floor.
I can't comment as to clothing in a laundry basket because I haven't come across the report or audio- which ever- of the interview.
Not getting an attorney is consciousness of nothing. Imo
It's her thinking that only Sterns needed one (to me ) shows that she had nothing to with what was on his phone.
And then let's add her certainty and interjection that she was wearing black shorts to school that day. Explain that one? He said black pants. She was found in blue jeans. But how would Jenn know at all anyhow? She said in these other interviews she did not know what she wore to bed, she referred to the last thing she was wearing as she could provide, etc., etc., etc.
It's funny you say "her certainty" because in one of the Kissimmi investigative reports I'm currently reading (80 pages), it's stated that Sterns appeared "confident" as to what Madeline was wearing and Jennifer didn't.
Yeah, the officer was questioning and gathering info from Jennifer and when it came to what Madeline was wearing, Jennifer hesitated and it was Sterns who offered that info.
Now when Jennifer corrected him that it was black shorts, I think that info was from the church video, since black shorts is what that person showed to be wearing.
What's interesting to me is that it wasn't Sterns who corrected Jennifer. To the contrary, he immediately went along with the church video and the notion that it was black shorts.
 
When the officer asked for clothing for the dogs, he asked for dirty clothes and Jennifer told him that there was such clothing on her bathroom floor.
I can't comment as to clothing in a laundry basket because I haven't come across the report or audio- which ever- of the interview.

It's her thinking that only Sterns needed one (to me ) shows that she had nothing to with what was on his phone.

It's funny you say "her certainty" because in one of the Kissimmi investigative reports I'm currently reading (80 pages), it's stated that Sterns appeared "confident" as to what Madeline was wearing and Jennifer didn't.
Yeah, the officer was questioning and gathering info from Jennifer and when it came to what Madeline was wearing, Jennifer hesitated and it was Sterns who offered that info.
Now when Jennifer corrected him that it was black shorts, I think that info was from the church video, since black shorts is what that person showed to be wearing.
What's interesting to me is that it wasn't Sterns who corrected Jennifer. To the contrary, he immediately went along with the church video and the notion that it was black shorts.
Well there is a video of clothing in a laundry basket in with clean and dirty clothes, and she offers such on that rare occasion when she does such like how she pushed the vape shop name and video to try to push his narrative or proof of such. Imo.

Now before that yes she talked of clothing on the bathroom floor as the last worn, not clothing in the laundry basket as last worn.

She also said they walked around it and hadn't touched it, meaning she knew they might need it so they left it alone.

Well if her not needing a lawyer went to heck when she had to be supoenaed and showed up with one.

If you have the narrative that is its own link, I'd appreciate it and think it would be good to be part of the thread here.

I just relistened to Jenn's interviews and bodycams this morning, most of them and her thing about the grainy video from the church and I would say push towards it. She only really could tell a green shirt, there is no way imo she saw black shorts in it versus black pants or anything else. Some are starting to take and compare all the videos of both, changing times, and changing facts and pulling such together.

She is the one who went along with the church video, perhaps he did too, and it was HER sister who informed her of it.

Regardless 90 percent of what she says is not direct knowledge because she did not see Maddie right? And the we, I, he took her to school, picked her up and more, what parent does that when their child is missing and facts matter. They both do it and they continue doing it. She continues parroting and helping him with his story forever, days, and she if not present had no way of knowing any such thing and I don't know WHAT the "I took her to school was". Rather than we.

Then when asked about if her phone was with her all day, etc. and so on she said yes after long hesitation. And the female sex crimes detective said what time did the other detective take it or didn't he take it and she oh yeah, just kidding, just kidding. That is the oddest remark I've ever heard in any case of the thousands I've followed. KIDDING?

As far as the investigative report you are reading, you now tout what LE says? Because prior you think they have everything or a lot wrong.

Lol clearly we don't agree on all. Nothing new there. I think it's also fair to say there are videos and bodycam I've seen that you have not. And you are reading a report that I have not read directly but I did watch something that I think had the same one and had much of it on the screen. Unfortunately they had covered parts of it in another show I had not seen (new to me the channel) s she was skipping through parts they had covered to focus on the ones they had not yet, so I have not been able to read it all in order or see it all yet. And I'm back to the work week.

So if you do have a link, it would be appreciated, to the full direct report.

It is said info may well keep coming all through the month of September as not all FOIA requests and paid for items have been provided yet.

Anyhow, lately I've been watching where they are starting to pull together all the interviews from both, and comparing the statements from each both separately and together and changing stories. I quit the continuing what I was watching knowing I've seen most interviews but still have not seen her mothers/the grandma.

I know you said recently to me "what inconsistencies" but they abound and that's what many are starting to do. I know I noticed plenty and now they are finding them all.

On a totally different note, I found myself wondering last night how they found the Holiday Inn stop by Stearns. Where he went into the indoor parking structure and moved her body to the trunk... I mean I guess it's possible they saw his car on some license plate reader and then a cop went to every single business on this road and checked hours upon hours upon hours of cameras.... That would seem unlikely but I guess possible... I also still wonder how he got in. In my experience hotels in cities like that would have no one coming in who was not a guest without proof of a room or at least a stop as to why there, how long, payment, etc. especially to an indoor parking structure? What is his connection to the place and how did he get in and what if anything did he have to pass through?

The man is so stupid, caught on camera doing that too.

Anyhow it was just something out of the blue I've wondered about before as to his going there but now I found myself wondering how LE was able to zero in on it... Any ideas?
 
To your third paragraph, YES, she was asked in the April interview, the one in which she had to be subpoenaed and showed up with a LAWYER.
Well it sounds like she was called as a witness in a hearing for Sterns, right?
By subpoena might be just the way they call such a witness but I really don't know.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,005
Messages
240,370
Members
963
Latest member
sweetpeasmith
Back
Top Bottom