Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - 5 Major Updates in Maddie Soto Murder Case

Episode Date: February 11, 2025

The murder trial for Stephan Sterns, the man accused of murdering and sexually abusing Maddie Soto, is scheduled to begin in September. Sterns faces the possibility of the death penalty if convicted of Maddie's murder. His attorney's have filed a flurry of motions asking the judge to remove the death penalty as a possible punishment. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy looks at the arguments and other developments in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Remove your personal information from the web at https://joindeleteme.com/crimefix and use code CrimeFix for 20% off!DeleteMe international Plans: https://international.joindeleteme.comHost:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest:Anthony Rickman https://x.com/ARickmanLawCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this law and crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Stephan Stearns, the man accused of murdering Maddie Soto after sexually abusing her for years, asked the judge to remove the death penalty from his case, even bringing Pope Francis into his argument. This as Maddie's former choir teacher, is charged with sex crimes involving young boys. I go over the latest developments in the case. Welcome to Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. It's been a little bit since we've talked about Maddie Soto's case, so I thought we'd bring you up to speed on what's been going on in the courts.

Stephan Stearns' trial for Maddie's murder is scheduled to begin this September. And when it does start, he doesn't want the jury considering the death penalty as a possible punishment. I'm going to go through the reasons why for you. Stearns has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges in the murder and sexual battery case. Also, in a strange development that I'll get to later on, Maddie's choir teacher has been arrested by the feds, accused of enticing minors. He was interviewed by detectives in Maddie's case, and you're going to hear some of that later on. It's been nearly one year since Maddie Soto celebrated her 13th birthday and went to bed and was never heard from again. The search for Maddie lasted several days in Kissimmee, Florida. Her mother's on-again, off-again boyfriend, Stefan Stearns, would be charged with sexually abusing Maddie for years.

The search for Maddie began in the evening of February 25, 2024, when Maddie's mom reported her missing. So, my daughter was dropped off close to school this morning, but never made it. I went to the drop-off school. I'm sorry, one second. Go ahead, sir. Are we looking for another kid or we have a kid? Looking for another one.

I'm trying to reach down. Get it on. All right, so the people are still on. Someone's going to step down to continue the conversation. Any hospital locations? How long? 13.

I'm trying to get that right in the hospital. Okay. How old? 13. I'm trying to get that right now. Absolutely. Okay. All right. So she was supposed to be dropped off at school, didn't make it to school. Didn't make it to school. I went to pick her up from school today. Okay.

And she never came out. They announced it over the speaker. And I'm just like, maybe she walked here because sometimes she'll walk here to this office. I came here, nothing. I went back to the school it was closed i got a notice an email from the school saying she was absent but i also mess okay what's her name madeline m-a-d-e-l-i-n-e m-a-d-e-L-I-N-E. M-A-D-E-L-I-N-E. Last name? Soto. S-O-T-O. S-O-T-O? Deputies searched for Maddie using canines.

Nope. Fair thing. Good boy. Fair thing. Deputies also searched using horses and on foot but from the beginning you could tell that kasimi police detectives felt something wasn't adding up with stephan stern's story three days after maddie was reported missing detectives interviewed stern's one last time going back to school uh how was she like on the car ride there? She's calmed down, sleeping. Sleeping along the way, she does that.

How often have you? How often have you? Not often, honestly. This might have been my third or fourth morning school run. I'm not normally the one to do it. Did you know that your personal data is being harvested and sold online by data brokers? Yes, anyone can buy your personal information. When this happens, you're at risk for a whole host of things like identity theft, becoming a target of phishing scams, potential stalking, and honestly, a lot more. And that's why I wanna tell you about Delete.me. Delete.me keeps your personal information private. I use Delete.me and honestly, it's crazy what I found.

The site uncovered five data brokers with my personal information and removed my data from seven listings. Doing that myself would have taken a full eight-hour workday. The site will keep monitoring the sites for you so your info doesn't find its way back on there after the first removal. So right now, you can get 20% off of Delete Me and protect your personal data when you go to joindeleteme.com slash crimefix and use the promo code crimefix at checkout. That's joindeletMe.com slash CrimeFix, promo code CrimeFix.

During this interview with Stearns, it's important to recognize that detectives already know the answers to most of the questions that they're asking. Did you take any trash out from the apartment? Was it night before I think I did? I'm not sure. I took the trash out at some point, but I don't remember. I don't know if it was the night before or it was the morning of. Yeah, sometimes we get trash bags piling up by the door. I don't know if you see them.

Is there, like, a common trash place? Or, like, is there a trash tomb? Yeah. Okay. Is that where you took the trash out? Yeah. Okay. When you had her backpack, presumably her school computer was in her backpack, and you described her wearing green jackets, some kind of dark colored shorts, and white crops.

Okay. Well, I can confidently tell you she did not go to school with her backpack. How's that? Because we found it in the trash. So, Stefan, here's what I'm asking you and pleading with you is to dig down and do some soul searching. Okay? Do you understand? Families pleading with you. I'm pleading with you.

Because this is the people that we need to find. And as more time goes around, goes by, it's tough. I have kids. He's got kids. And there's little girls out there somewhere that we need to know where. And I really, really, really think you can help us. How do you feel? I mean, you want to get something off your chest. I don't know what it is, but

I'm pleading with you. I don't know. I don't know. I don't. What happened? I dropped her off. Where? I dropped her off on the road to school. That was the last I saw her.

Now, you heard the detective tell Stearns that they found Maddie's backpack in the trash. That backpack was covered in paint, and one of Maddie's white Crocs was also found in the trash. That backpack was covered in paint and one of Maddie's white Crocs was also found in the trash. The Orange County Sheriff would say that night that they had video of Stearns putting the items in the dumpster. Here's where I'm going to be brutally honest with you. There's a phone. And I'm pretty sure you know what some of those pictures are about. You're a very intelligent person. And I don't want you to discredit yourself by saying you don't know about all the pictures that are on your phone. You understand what I'm saying? So do you want to add to the list of pictures?

I don't know. Should I be talking with a lawyer right now? I can't answer that question. My sole purpose right now is to see if I can find and I'm really hoping you can help me. Okay. I'd like to try to help, but I feel like I should probably have a lawyer present at this point. So you want an attorney? Yeah, I think so.

Okay. Stearns was initially charged with more than 60 counts of sexual battery after detectives said they found more than 1,700 images of Stearns sexually abusing Maddie on his Google Drive. The next day, a man called in a tip remembering that he saw someone matching Stearns' description changing a tire on a silver car near a farm that Monday. Deputies found Maddie's body at the farm in between two bamboo trees. It took a little time, but at the end of April, Stearns was charged with murdering Maddie. The state attorney later announced that prosecutors would seek the death penalty. They believe Stearns should face the death penalty because of Maddie's age and the felony sex crimes he's accused of committing against her.

But Stearns' lawyers want the judge to strike the death penalty, meaning they want it removed as a possible penalty for the jury to consider. It's not an uncommon request in death penalty cases, and the first motion is simply a motion to prohibit the death penalty as a possible punishment. It states, the defendant through counsel moves this court to enter an order excluding death as a possible penalty because selecting a jury based upon their opinions about the death penalty, death qualifying, will violate Stephan Stearns' right to a jury and due process of law. It is widely recognized that the process of selecting a jury in a case where the state is seeking the death penalty has an impact on diversity of the jury and jurors' attitudes. Jurors are excused either by cause challenge or peremptory challenge because of their opinions about the death penalty. Stearns' lawyers also

claim that the death penalty impacts the age and gender of the jurors selected. They write, men of all ages, with the exception of the youngest men, those approximately 20 to 30 years old, were more likely to choose the death penalty than were women. Young women in the age range of early 20s to late 30s were more likely to sentence the defendants to death than were older women. Stearns' lawyers believe the reasons why the state is pursuing the death penalty against their client are unconstitutional. They write, the only possible motive for pursuing the death penalty in this case can be to skew the composition of the jury or coerce a plea. Both would be constitutionally

impermissible. Stearns also argues that seating a death qualified jury keeps the jury from representing a cross-section of the community and makes it less racially diverse. Research has established that a juror selected because he or she does not oppose the death penalty is more likely to be white. It quotes a paper as saying, African-Americans as a class may be disproportionately excluded from jury service by virtue of the group's disproportionate view of the inappropriateness of capital punishment. Moreover, researchers categorize jurors in capital cases as demographically unique and that they tend to be both white and male. This disproportionate

exclusion of Blacks appears to have a significant impact on the outcome of capital cases. Now, this isn't the only reason Stephan Stearns wants the judge to strike the death penalty. He also makes a number of those arguments, but let's say he doesn't win any of them. Well, he's asking for separate juries for the first part of the trial where the jury determines whether he's guilty or not guilty, and a second jury if he's convicted to determine whether he gets the death penalty or life in prison. But back to Stearns' arguments against the jury considering the death penalty at all. He actually makes a religious argument and even brings in the Pope. Stearns argues the death penalty would violate his fundamental right to life.

His attorneys write that the death penalty should not be considered because of the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment and the fundamental right to life. They continue, the Catholic Church and many evangelical Christians have voiced opposition to the death penalty. Specifically, Pope Francis announced that the death penalty is inadmissible because human life is always sacred in the eyes of the creator. In addition, Pope Francis has clarified that the Catholic Church opposes the death penalty. Another request Stearns' lawyers are making, they want the remaining pretrial hearings closed.

They believe the coverage in the news and on social media has been prejudicial and unprecedented. I wanna bring in Anthony Rickman. He is a criminal defense attorney in the Tampa area. I wanna talk to you first off, Anthony, about this request by the defense to close the remaining pretrial hearings. I just can't see that happening in the state of Florida, especially in any case,

but let alone a case like this one. Thanks for having me back. I mean, yeah, Florida has one of the most open rules for court. I mean, we have an open court hearings where we have TVs in the courtroom. We have cameras in the courtroom all the time. I do not see any circumstance where the judge bars cameras from the courtroom or where the judge bars open proceedings where people can't come into court to see what happens in a case, especially in a case like this in which the public has an interest because of what we saw in this case. We saw how it was publicized from the beginning, where there was a national search for this child, where there was a national manhunt for the potential person who killed her, where there was a lot of publicity leading up to it. I see no circumstance where this court is going to bar any sort of pretrial publicity, do any sort of gag order in a case like this. I want to move on now to the death penalty motions because that's really the bulk of the motions right now. I don't think I've ever

seen a death penalty case where, you know, the defense attorney didn't try to get the judge to strike the death penalty. Usually you hear these arguments and you hear it in this case that it's cruel and unusual punishment. It violates the constitutional rights of the defendant for a number of reasons. We're hearing that here, but then they take it a step further. They start talking about the Pope, which I think is very interesting, and talking about how even the Pope, Pope Francis has said, you know, the death penalty is not something that should be imposed. They're bringing up religious reasons why the death penalty is not something that should be imposed. They're bringing up religious reasons why the death penalty should not be a punishment. What were your thoughts on that? Because I don't know if I've ever seen that argument made before. It's very odd. I mean, it's more of like a

kitchen sink argument. Like they're throwing everything they possibly can at this case. And look, we hear it in the court all the time. If it's not raised, it's waived. So this defense team is raising every single argument they can raise. And if you look at the other motions, there is some religious overtones in the other motions they filed, particularly in some of the juror motions where they want to get into the religious background of some of the jurors. So you wonder if there's going to be some sort of religious overtone in their defense. But it's very odd to see them bringing sort of this fundamental rights approach of their motions and regarding the death penalty. Because at the end of the day, these issues have been litigated. We know that there's a difference between a religious right,

a fundamental right, and cruel and unusual punishment that the courts have dealt with throughout jurisprudence from the inception of our country. And at the end of the day, these issues have been litigated. And in the state of Florida, we have a death penalty. We have one of the most harshest death penalties in this country. In the state of Florida, we are the most death friendly state in this country unlike other states you don't need a unanimous jury to condemn someone and sentence someone to death unlike other states in the state of florida you can be put to death for child molestation so in the state of florida we are very death friendly and i understand what the defense is doing here they are doing

everything they can to save their client from being executed. And they have to do it. That is their job. That is their role. And what you see here is them doing everything that they feel they can do above and beyond what we normally see in most cases to prevent their client from seeking the death penalty. And here you have, when you look at the evidence, it's a tough case. I mean, there are a lot of bad facts, as defense attorneys would say, for Stephan Stearns.

I mean, we have video evidence. We have photographic evidence in the form of the sexual abuse photos, which that's a separate case, the I can't imagine that the prosecutors are not going to present that as evidence in the murder case because that, I would assume, is going to play into why this happened in their view. You know, another one of the arguments that the defense is making, and they are being really, really aggressive in their arguments. I mean, it's very interesting to me. They're saying, basically, if you seat a death penalty juror, a so-called death qualified jury, that basically you're excluding a cross-section of the population, that there are certain people or certain members of the population, certain demographics, African-Americans and some other demographics that are less apt to impose the death penalty.

So they're saying basically, if you if you want a death qualified jury, you're resentencing case of where there was a pretty demographically, you know, the mixed demographics were mixed and they still imposed the death penalty. But they're saying basically you're going to be excluding all of these jurors and you're just going to have a bunch of white guys on the jury if you see to death qualified jury. What are your thoughts on their argument? Yeah, I think that's a false premise. I mean, they're basing that whole premise on their implicit bias themselves.

I mean, look, they're basically saying that the only jurors that are going to be people who are going to be open to not see death are going to be those individuals are going to be excluded automatically. I think that's just a false premise, because like you said, we've seen jurors who have decided the opposite way that have been white. We've seen jurors, look at that Nicholas Cruz jury that decided, when you talk about that case, I mean, if anyone should have been qualified for the death penalty, it's somebody who walked into a school and executed students. And that jury panel was made up of a lot of white individuals and they spared him his life. So when you look at the cross section and the demographics, I mean, to say that you can't get a fair and impartial jury just based on the fact of the color of their skin, I think they're operating on a false premise to start with.

I mean, you have to be able to walk into that courtroom and be able to put aside those biases. And just because you have a demographic that in and of itself may not be African-American, may not be the race that they want them to be, you could still sit there and be fair and impartial. So walking in with that premise, I just think the defense is wrong with that premise. They're basically saying also if they don't win any of these and they've got to be thinking they I think the defense knows this is an uphill battle. They're fighting, trying to get the death penalty stricken from this case. They're saying, OK, if you don't grant any of these motions to strike the death penalty, we want two separate juries, one to consider his guilt or innocence, and then the other for the punishment phase or the penalty phase. Have you ever seen that happen? That seems like that might be unlikely too. Am I wrong about

that? It just doesn't work that way. I mean, the same jury that determines guilt or innocence then moves on to the sentencing phase. And then that same jury hears the mitigating and aggravating circumstances. And then that jury makes the determination if they're going to recommend want that same jury who looked at that autopsy photo, that same jury who saw this victim's body found in the way she was found, who heard the evidence of how she was strangled, who heard the evidence of saw the witnesses testify. They don't want that same jury who heard those horrible facts now deciding this defendant's fate because those jurors are going to be more likely to say that they want that individual executed. They would much rather, as a defense attorney, I would much rather have a jury sitting there with a clean slate just hearing aggravating and mitigating factors without hearing the facts of the case. But for the defense, unfortunately, it's not going to work that way. That same jury who's going to be impaneled at the beginning of that case, who heard those facts, who decided guilt, is going to be the same jury who's going to make the determination of if this defendant lizard eyes. And finally,

Anthony, they're asking that the judge bar victim impact statements in this case. So people who loved Maddie Soto, her father, her mother, other family members, they're saying, oh, these can be prejudicial and inflammatory. So you shouldn't allow them to speak if there's a conviction in this case. And then in the alternative, they say, okay, well, if you don't deny that, then we want you to videotape these for the appellate record so the appeals court can see it in video, not just a transcript. So I've never heard of victims being, I've heard of the statements being limited, but not barred from a criminal case. That these victims have the right, the families of the victims have the right to confront the individuals convicted and the individuals

facing sentencing. And this judge will not bar them from confronting the person who's convicted of killing Matty Soto if he's convicted. And they will have the right to stand there and face him and tell the jury their victim impact statement. I do not see any circumstance where this court will prohibit them from standing there and giving their victim impact. Now, the court may limit them. The court may say you can't curse at him. You can't yell at him. You can't direct him individually and say things to him directly. But I see no circumstance in which this court will grant the defendant's motion, the defense's motion, and allow him to be addressed via video or in some other way. In Florida, especially, we have something called Marcy's Law.

And in Marcy's Law, it allows the victim to be heard. We have Victim's Bill of Rights here in Florida. And in this particular case where we see how this child was murdered, how this child was victimized, I see no circumstance in which this victim's family, her next of kin, people who loved her, wouldn't have the opportunity to address the jury, to give victim impact, or I see any way that this victim's family would be limited in doing that in front of a jury at a sentencing phase. Yeah, it's just there are a lot of interesting requests in this case that I really haven't seen before. I mean, I really,

I don't think I've seen the Pope brought up before. That's really interesting. You know, the one thing I think they will get, they're saying, okay, we want him to not be in restraints during the trial and he should have a regular writing implement. Not, I guess, maybe not a crayon or something, but I mean, I can, they're going to get that one. No big deal. They'll get that. They don't want the jury seeing that he's in shackles. They don't want the jury seeing him brought in orange. They'll get that. But look, I get it. You know, you gotta, you have a horrible case. This is going to be a very hard factual case for the defense to win on the facts. They are fighting to keep this man alive. That's what they're fighting for. Because when you look at the facts, you look at the evidence, they have an

uphill battle to avoid a conviction. They're fighting to keep him from being executed. And we see these multitude of motions to do that. We don't see factual motions. We don't see motions in limity right now to keep out evidence. We see motions in limity to keep him from getting the needle. And that's where they're at right now. Yeah. Well, we'll be waiting for those other motions. Anthony Rickman, thank you so much. Thank you for having me. Okay. So now to Matty's former choir teacher.

I brought that up earlier here in the show. His name is Italo Brett Bonini. At Matty's school, he simply went by Italo Brett. Bonini is 25, and the FBI says that he met two prepubescent boys on Discord and offered them money in exchange for them showing him their genitalia on the video screen. The FBI says Benini admitted to the conduct. It's a really sad thing, and it makes you wonder whether Stearns' lawyers will try to use this somehow at his trial. Will they try to cast Italo Brett as an alternate suspect? Stranger things

have happened, but I don't think it's going to work because it would be easy enough to see whether Benini was communicating with Maddie. Benini was interviewed by police during the investigation, as were Maddie's other teachers. Did she ever talk to you about her home life, anything that was going on with her? Anything like that? No. She never said anything to you? Did at any point, did she ever disclose any sort of physical or sexual or mental abuse to you? No. She never said anything to you? Did at any point, did she ever disclose any sort of physical or sexual or mental abuse to you? No. Okay.

Did she mention anything to you about having any suicidal ideations, ever making any attempts at suicide? No. Okay. Did she ever express to you at any time if she had any mental or medical diagnosis no okay did she discuss any taking any medications with you for anything no the only time i've ever seen her take anything was tylenol and you haven't in your opinion you haven't seen her have any sort of signs that she's been depressed since beginning of school year at all or any suicidal like she

just seemed pretty normal very you know very happy, very happy, easy making her friends. You know, she had, she, I would say she bloomed a lot more in third because she had her friends there. So she was more outspoken and more confident. You know, she's very helpful in my class. She even organized my piano once because it was all papers on top of it. She put all together and just, she wanted to do that. So, you know, that's not really,

not the same thing off about her. Now, there's no indication at all that Italo Brett had anything to do with Maddie's death or disappearance. I want to be clear about that. He was scheduled to be deposed in the murder case late last month, but that may not have happened given his arrest. Stephan Stearns' trial on the sex crimes case was scheduled to begin this month, but his attorneys have asked for a continuance. The murder trial, as I mentioned, is scheduled for this September. And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Ian Jeanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.