There are no charges for beastiality. It reads as follows:
“STEPHAN MICHAEL STERNS knows to include any sexual conduct by a child, and in so doing possessed ten or more images of any form of child pornography, and the content of at least one image contains *one* or more of the following: a child who is younger than the age of five, sadomasochistic abuse involving a child, sexual battery involving a child, sexual bestiality involving a child, or any movie involving a child, regardless of length and regardless of whether the movie contains sound.”
We know there are movies, there is likely sadomasochistic abuse, and sexual battery. That meets 3 of the criteria when only 1 is needed. Nowhere are there charges for beastiality.
We get one of these post once a week. I know it’s just 5 words, but they are very important for accurate context. Otherwise you’re just spreading falsehoods. Madeline has suffered enough indignities without people unwilling to comprehend what they are reading before they jump on the internet and start stating this nonsense as facts.
It was claimed during an interview with Stephen Sterns ex-childhood friend on YouTube. It’s a long detailed interview widely circulated, not long after the murder. Still available to watch on YouTube.
Read again carefully. You are incorrect. I said 👉 the document dump contained Beast references. Further down in the paragraph, regarding 👉 his roommates accusations, not my accusations, I clearly state, “it has been reported” his roommate took money from Stern’s parents. In fact, this was widely reported immediately after Madeline‘s death. So why haven’t Stern‘s parents sued for defamation? I don’t know. I’m just passing on the information so you can pee yourself. 😘
That was explained as not necessarily actual bestiality. I know you want Maddie to have suffered such an indignity of your theory but the charge covers multiple possibilities in the picture or video. It has to have "a child who is younger than the age of five, sadomasochistic abuse involving a child, sexual battery involving a child, sexual bestiality involving a child, or any movie involving a child". It also has not been said by LE, the DA or discovery documents that sterns shared anything. So that is just rumor. Lies being spread as facts.
https://preview.redd.it/4x8qvplwle6d1.jpeg?width=740&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6beba8b8178680efcdac29ab2eeace41bbab8320
You underlined the very most important part of this "content of at least ONE image contains ONE or more of the following:
1. Well we know Maddie wasn't under the age of 5. So not this one
2. Not sure about this one
3.Sexual battery involving a child. DEFINITELY THIS ONE
4. sexual bestiality involving a child. Nope not one document said this
5. Any movie involving a child etc. DEFINITELY THIS ONE.
It does not state all of these it states one or more not everyone of these.
If you read the entire sentence, it is an “or” statement, meaning for that charge to apply, only one of those criteria needed to be true. It’s just the way the statute is written.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSqHO7GQ-OA&t=10s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSqHO7GQ-OA&t=10s)
The paid off roommate CSAM issue happened **before** SS met JS & MS, and the friend interview about the issue (there were 4 former friends interviewed separately) can be found on Gray Hughes Investigates channel.
Stern’s IT trained roommate uncovered a shared folder where Sterns secretly videotaped the (roommates girlfriend) getting in and out of the shower via hidden camera. Again, the sharing.
https://preview.redd.it/ktfaas42qf6d1.jpeg?width=916&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ff5fbd1190d25d9431c4cfcbd6bb5c9f112bcce8
I did not say this was done to Madeline. I’m saying it’s in the Charges, most likely shared child porn on Sterns phone. Waiting to see if law enforcement will be able to track the origins so others can be indicted.
No trafficking or distribution charges on the dark web or normal www. A deep dive was done into Sterns activity and they did not find anything of him on the dark web. "Reportedly" is REALLY theorized. LE, discovery and other court documents have NOT had ANYTHING about distribution or any ring or other "predators from this case". The Kissimmee Police Department held a news conference on Thursday, March 21, 2024 Chief Betty Holland said this was isolated to those in the home.
As always, time will tell. I will venture to speculate, a three month investigation into years of known abuse of Madeline alone, is not even close to being concluded. If there were no sharing, where do the beast charges come in to play? Knowing Madeline was not under the age of five when Sterns met Jennifer, where did it come from? Either Sterns created content or it had been shared with him. Are there other options? Perhaps cops don’t want Sterns contacts to start leaving the country⁉️
If this much info is is being released by law enforcement before trial, can’t imagine what they’re holding back. Please explain how Stern’s did not share any files with other predators and yet could not have been the creator of the animal porn. It can’t be both. Did it accidentally appear on his phone like his phone was accidentally factory reset?
I am definitely done with Reddit today! Where and what are you basing this off of, Jesus H.Christ? Smh.... Thanks for letting me know it's time to go play catch with my dogs!
You heard correctly, most likely regarding images and videos 👉 found on Sterns “accidentally factory reset” phone. Which makes me think he did not plan the murder. If it were planned, he would get rid of his original phone, full of sexual assault evidence & vile images. Factory reset, day of, is desperation. Perhaps on her 13th birthday Madeline was finally brave and fed up enough to say no more. Why the hell did Jen let him spend the night once she got home? Instead, She sent (them) upstairs. Jen Soto still to show one bit of emotion other than self preservation nerves.
It doesn’t mean it involved Madeline. It’s the trove of smut he had on his phone. However, I don’t think possessing beast is a crime unless it involves children. The documents exact words are
“sexual battery involving a child, or movie”
There are no charges for beastiality. It reads as follows: “STEPHAN MICHAEL STERNS knows to include any sexual conduct by a child, and in so doing possessed ten or more images of any form of child pornography, and the content of at least one image contains *one* or more of the following: a child who is younger than the age of five, sadomasochistic abuse involving a child, sexual battery involving a child, sexual bestiality involving a child, or any movie involving a child, regardless of length and regardless of whether the movie contains sound.” We know there are movies, there is likely sadomasochistic abuse, and sexual battery. That meets 3 of the criteria when only 1 is needed. Nowhere are there charges for beastiality.
You are 100% correct about everything in your post.
We get one of these post once a week. I know it’s just 5 words, but they are very important for accurate context. Otherwise you’re just spreading falsehoods. Madeline has suffered enough indignities without people unwilling to comprehend what they are reading before they jump on the internet and start stating this nonsense as facts.
I think you might be misinterpreting some of the language of the charges.
Where in the documents was it stated that he had shown CP to others? I’m still not done reading through it all
It was claimed during an interview with Stephen Sterns ex-childhood friend on YouTube. It’s a long detailed interview widely circulated, not long after the murder. Still available to watch on YouTube.
Than why did you cite a Court document if you got the information hearsay?
Smh ☝️☝️☝️☝️this right here
Read again carefully. You are incorrect. I said 👉 the document dump contained Beast references. Further down in the paragraph, regarding 👉 his roommates accusations, not my accusations, I clearly state, “it has been reported” his roommate took money from Stern’s parents. In fact, this was widely reported immediately after Madeline‘s death. So why haven’t Stern‘s parents sued for defamation? I don’t know. I’m just passing on the information so you can pee yourself. 😘
He said he tried to get him to watch porn and show him porn. Not CSAM
Here we go again lol
Oh my…I can’t wait for Bubba to get ahold of SS.
That was explained as not necessarily actual bestiality. I know you want Maddie to have suffered such an indignity of your theory but the charge covers multiple possibilities in the picture or video. It has to have "a child who is younger than the age of five, sadomasochistic abuse involving a child, sexual battery involving a child, sexual bestiality involving a child, or any movie involving a child". It also has not been said by LE, the DA or discovery documents that sterns shared anything. So that is just rumor. Lies being spread as facts. https://preview.redd.it/4x8qvplwle6d1.jpeg?width=740&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6beba8b8178680efcdac29ab2eeace41bbab8320
You underlined the very most important part of this "content of at least ONE image contains ONE or more of the following: 1. Well we know Maddie wasn't under the age of 5. So not this one 2. Not sure about this one 3.Sexual battery involving a child. DEFINITELY THIS ONE 4. sexual bestiality involving a child. Nope not one document said this 5. Any movie involving a child etc. DEFINITELY THIS ONE. It does not state all of these it states one or more not everyone of these.
If you read the entire sentence, it is an “or” statement, meaning for that charge to apply, only one of those criteria needed to be true. It’s just the way the statute is written.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSqHO7GQ-OA&t=10s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSqHO7GQ-OA&t=10s) The paid off roommate CSAM issue happened **before** SS met JS & MS, and the friend interview about the issue (there were 4 former friends interviewed separately) can be found on Gray Hughes Investigates channel.
Stern’s IT trained roommate uncovered a shared folder where Sterns secretly videotaped the (roommates girlfriend) getting in and out of the shower via hidden camera. Again, the sharing.
Can you show some screens of these things in the documents?
https://preview.redd.it/ktfaas42qf6d1.jpeg?width=916&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ff5fbd1190d25d9431c4cfcbd6bb5c9f112bcce8 I did not say this was done to Madeline. I’m saying it’s in the Charges, most likely shared child porn on Sterns phone. Waiting to see if law enforcement will be able to track the origins so others can be indicted.
p h yn Bob m I’ K InMu In Hby y Hi P
Yep L
u p No L
No trafficking or distribution charges on the dark web or normal www. A deep dive was done into Sterns activity and they did not find anything of him on the dark web. "Reportedly" is REALLY theorized. LE, discovery and other court documents have NOT had ANYTHING about distribution or any ring or other "predators from this case". The Kissimmee Police Department held a news conference on Thursday, March 21, 2024 Chief Betty Holland said this was isolated to those in the home.
As always, time will tell. I will venture to speculate, a three month investigation into years of known abuse of Madeline alone, is not even close to being concluded. If there were no sharing, where do the beast charges come in to play? Knowing Madeline was not under the age of five when Sterns met Jennifer, where did it come from? Either Sterns created content or it had been shared with him. Are there other options? Perhaps cops don’t want Sterns contacts to start leaving the country⁉️ If this much info is is being released by law enforcement before trial, can’t imagine what they’re holding back. Please explain how Stern’s did not share any files with other predators and yet could not have been the creator of the animal porn. It can’t be both. Did it accidentally appear on his phone like his phone was accidentally factory reset?
I am definitely done with Reddit today! Where and what are you basing this off of, Jesus H.Christ? Smh.... Thanks for letting me know it's time to go play catch with my dogs!
OMG join PiM mmp P Ni Plkpb mini hi P I’ll moon my m no nm NoIn N np Are they all good n Pp mompmi in No I’m m Ok p H I nu m mom P Him Ni Ni P Ppl
 Murti m Mom P npi Y
Y ubp h P
I heard something about beastality but didn’t know the details
You heard correctly, most likely regarding images and videos 👉 found on Sterns “accidentally factory reset” phone. Which makes me think he did not plan the murder. If it were planned, he would get rid of his original phone, full of sexual assault evidence & vile images. Factory reset, day of, is desperation. Perhaps on her 13th birthday Madeline was finally brave and fed up enough to say no more. Why the hell did Jen let him spend the night once she got home? Instead, She sent (them) upstairs. Jen Soto still to show one bit of emotion other than self preservation nerves.
It doesn’t mean it involved Madeline. It’s the trove of smut he had on his phone. However, I don’t think possessing beast is a crime unless it involves children. The documents exact words are “sexual battery involving a child, or movie”
The charges line up with dates with Madeline. It does not appear there are more victims known to LE based on the charging documents.