Mother and partner face life in prison for toddler's death

Two-year-old Laia died; her mother faces life in prison

Laia was two years old. The jury hearing closing arguments in her death trial receives the verdict form on Monday at 10:30 a.m., deciding between acquittal and conviction for her mother, Vanesa Muñoz Pujol, and her partner, Cristian Lastanao Valenilla. Prosecutors allege the child was systematically drugged and beaten to death. Both defendants deny the facts, blaming each other. The prosecution seeks life imprisonment with parole eligibility. If found guilty, presiding judge Alfonso Ballestín will set the sentence.

The prosecution’s case

The prosecutor’s narrative relies on both action and omission. During the 48 hours it took for peritonitis to develop, the accused saw the girl was ill but did not seek medical help, making them liable by omission. One is also accused of delivering the final blow that severed the duodenum.

The autopsy revealed a "concausa" of death: water entering the child’s system after being submerged in cold water hours before dying. Traces of cocaine, hierba, and antidepressants were found.

Manuel Hatero, lawyer for the biological father, argued treachery due to the victim’s vulnerability, cruelty, and an "inhuman intent to increase pain." He mocked the mother’s demeanor during testimony.

Why prosecutors argue murder

Prosecutors cite treachery and cruelty to elevate the charge from homicide to murder. However, the prosecution noted a nuance: they believe the defendants’ intent was not to kill the child.

This contradicts the requested penalty. Life imprisonment requires specific legal qualifications. Thus, the debate focuses less on the facts—which are largely undisputed—and more on legal classification and individual responsibility.

Conflicting defenses

Vanesa’s lawyer, Teresa Font, claims her client "did not realize the severity," blaming only Cristian. His lawyer, José Antonio Alonso, argues his client was "subjugated to her will." In his final statement, Cristian said he "never knew this could happen."

These defenses cancel each other out. The jury must decide which to believe or reject both. This is common in dual-defendant cases, where each side makes the other the primary witness against them.

Three prior custody removals

Social services had previously removed custody of three other children from the mother. This minor protection file has become a secondary focus of public criticism.

Some argue abusers should be barred from their children, while others note custody removal is a judicial decision subject to review. Unconfirmed rumors exist about the biological father’s custody status.

Is psychopathy innate or learned?

This question haunts such cases. Some view it as congenital and chronic, defined by empathy deficits. Others argue these profiles stem from severe childhood trauma.

Examples support both views: Mary Bell (UK) suffered abuse from age four; Beth Thomas (US) recovered after adoption. Whether this explains the difference remains unknown.

---

The verdict will determine if it was murder and who is responsible. It will not explain how a two-year-old ended up in a home where she was allegedly drugged for months, nor why no one intervened sooner. That is where the story fails.