Saturday, October 13, 2012

Mom SuperGlues 2 Year Old's Hands for Potty Training


Warning:  horrific story. 

Parents do snap over children that repeatedly wet their beds and it only takes a moment for the unthinkable to happen.  Here, however, was a pattern of abuse.  The judge rightfully recognized that the mother was, as a child, abused, but her childhood abuse did not excuse her from her actions. 

Yet, where are her other children today?  


A Dallas woman who beat her 2-year-old daughter and glued the toddler’s hands to a wall was sentenced Friday to 99 years in prison by a judge who described his decision as a necessary punishment for a brutal, shocking attack.
Elizabeth Escalona did not react immediately as State District Judge Larry Mitchell pronounced the sentence at the end of a five-day hearing. Prosecutor Eren Price, who originally offered Escalona a plea deal for 45 years, had argued that she now thought the 23-year-old mother deserved life.
Judge Mitchell said his decision came down to one thing.
“On Sept. 7, 2011, you savagely beat your child to the edge of death,” Mitchell said. “For this you must be punished.”
The beating left Jocelyn Cedillo in a coma for a couple of days.
Escalona’s other children told authorities their mother attacked Jocelyn because of potty-training problems. Police say she kicked her daughter in the stomach, beat her with a milk jug, then stuck her hands to an apartment wall with an adhesive commonly known as Super Glue.
Jocelyn suffered bleeding in her brain, a fractured rib, multiple bruises and bite marks, a doctor testified. Some skin had been torn off her hands, where doctors also found glue residue and white paint chips from the apartment wall.
Escalona pleaded guilty in July to one count of felony injury to a child.
Price said Escalona would be eligible to apply for parole in 30 years.
The prosecutor repeatedly sought to portray Escalona as a liar, a monster and an unfit mother. She forced Escalona on Thursday to look at enlarged photos of the bruises her attack left on Jocelyn.
Price argued Friday that if a stranger had beaten Jocelyn the same way, no one would hesitate to give that person life in prison. Escalona had mishandled a “beautiful gift” of a daughter and failed to recognize what she had done, Price argued.
“The 45-year recommendation was for somebody who was going to take ownership of what she did, appreciate what she caused,” Price said.

Sending her to prison for decades would protect her children’s future, Price argued.
You can give Jocelyn and her brothers and sister peace,” she said. “You can give them peace, so that when they’re sitting around the dinner table at Thanksgiving with their big family, they’re not worried that their mother is going to come walking through the door.”

Defense attorney Angie N’Duka asked for probation or a prison sentence shorter than 10 years. N’Duka argued that her client was a “train wreck” waiting to happen before the attack, the product of a broken home, abuse and a childhood that included illegal drugs and hanging out with gang members.

N’Duka repeated that she did not want to minimize the injuries from the attack.
“They are despicable, but then the question is, ‘What is justice for Jocelyn?’” she said, adding later: “Giving Elizabeth the opportunity to be a better mother, giving her the opportunity to get counseling services, will be justice for Jocelyn.”
Escalona’s five children, including Jocelyn and a baby born after the attack, are in the care of their grandmother, Ofeila Escalona.
Judge Mitchell listened to both lawyers and took a short break before delivering his sentence.

The judge said he believed many of the allegations that Escalona was abused as a child. “And again, outside of the context of this trial, I think even the state would find you to be a sympathetic figure, because they prosecute people for what was done to you,” Mitchell said. “But I can’t consider that evidence outside of the context of this trial.”

Of whom was Escalona abused?  By her own mother?  Did her own mother fail to protect her from another?
Note where the children are currently living.  


He then announced the sentence. A relative of Escalona’s began sobbing and screaming, “No!”
N’Duka told reporters that Escalona had asked afterward, “What about my children?”
N’Duka said the sentence was “way too harsh” and suggested the widespread attention her client’s case had received contributed to the sentence.
“It’s a lot of pressure, a lot of pressure on the parties,” N’Duka said.
Price said afterward prosecutors decided to ask for a longer sentence after receiving more evidence they wouldn’t have had if Escalona had taken a deal for 45 years.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am concerned about these children being placed in the hands of this g/m. Where was she during those years her daughter was being abused (IF she was), and where has she been during the times this baby was being abused? Surely she saw 'some' evidence earlier on that the mother was beating/abusing her baby. These things don't begin all in one day!

Furthermore, I believe this g/m wanted her abusive daughter set free so she could take care of her OWN kids. She doesn't want them; and I agree, it would be hard for a g/m to have to raise four more kids, now five, with the addition of a new baby, but she is being self-centered and thiking only of HERSELF to want this daughter free to pelt out MORE abuse on her helpless children. It was only a matter of time before she killed this little toddler!

By golly, it IS possible for a g/m to raise a large family that is not her own. I know of a g/m in North Dakota, (my former hubby's g/m) whose daughter-in-law died in childbirth (his mother) with baby #7, the oldest child being only 12.

They lived on a large cattle farm of many rods (acres). The widowed g/m moved into the home, took over and raised all seven children AND RAN THE FARM all by herself. The children's father, (her son) died in a tragic accident two years later then she had no help at all other than that of the children. In those days, there was no welfare or subsidy to help with these children, not even food stamps. BY GOLLY, she DID it. PLUS sent some of them to college. My hubby worshiped the ground she walked on until the day he died.

However Peter, I do NOT understand or agree that people snap over the childs' bed wetting issue. Snapping and whipping the child does NOT change the sheets on the bed, it does NOT prevent the child from ever wetting the bed again. It does not heal your anger.

When a child wets the bed they did not mean too, they were asleep and had no control over their bladder. No child wants to lay in wet pee, or wants their parent to find out they wet the bed. NO CHILD wants to be slapped, yelled at, criticized or beat for wetting the bed.

The child either went to bed hungry, was having frightful nightmares, was reliving some fear in their mind in their sleep, or either their bladder had not fully developed. To punish them only causes them MORE fear prior to going to bed and while they are sleeping, and MORE bed wetting. They become very nervous children if punished for something they could not help.

It is CRUEL and abusive for a parent or other caretaker to lose patience with a child who has wet the bed. It is ABUSE to punish them for this accident that they had no control over. What they need is love, understanding, comfort; NOT CRUEL ABUSE whether mental or physical!

Yes, I have raised three children and not ONE was ever criticized or punished in any way for wetting the bed. I simply changed their beds, held, comforted, and told them it was okay and everybody went peacefully back to bed.

Burtonbratzz said...

Yet Sandusky only gets 30 years. Sigh... This woman should go to jail for a very long time but I'm not sure 99 years is the answer here. It sends a message, no doubt, but in cOmparison to other crimes and punishments, what message does it really send? Food for thought.

enigmaticstatic said...

I am concerned all six of these kids have been placed with the grandmother who obviously failed to protect, raise, and guide her own daughter! Six kids is a lot for any one to handle, How could this gm possibly give all of these abused and broken children the individual attention they will need to get their selves back together again?
Mothers learn to parent, discipline, communicate and set boundaries through their own parents. This woman's parents have created a heinous monster. These kids need to placed with people who will be able to help them come to terms with the abuse they have likely suffered all of their lives. It will be a long hard road to get them into recovery and a good state of mind.
If the mother of these six kids abused a two year old this way what could she have done to her other older children over the course of time? I am sure they were also subject to the same treatment as their sister but there has never been any justice for what they have suffered. It is time now for these kids to finally have their needs met by being followed closely by CPS and I hope the state doesn't let them down.

CEC said...

She will be eligible for parole when she is 53. If she gets out then, that's still plenty of time for her to re-insert her miserable self into her children's lives. At least they will be old enough to avoid her, should they choose. I worry about her children right now. Monster's own monster mother should not be allowed to raise them.

Apple said...

Burtonbratzz,
I agree, Sandusky should have been sentenced 100 years.

CEC said...

I agree with you both. I liked the 300-400 year terms that were speculated prior to sentencing, and that is what I thought the sentence might likely be. Since the sentencing, I have heard the speculation that the reason the judge gave him 30 is because of the appeal that will be coming. If he had given him anything like the 99 - 400 range of years, Sandusky's lawyers could argue that the judge "had it in for him by sentencing him to so many years". By sentencing a 68-year-old to 30 years, it would accomplish the same thing (life sentence) and not give Sandusky any favors on his appeal.

Lis said...

I want to focus on the lawyer's words:

"Giving Elizabeth the opportunity to be a better mother, giving her the opportunity to get counseling services, will be justice for Jocelyn."

Giving her the "opportunity" to be a better mother also gives her the opportunity to continue to be a terrible mother or worse, to become a murderer. Giving her "the opportunity to get counseling services" - really? that is supposed to be some kind of solution? She sees that as "justice" for a little girl who barely lived through this beating?

This brings me to another point. I think it is high time that the public got to see the success statistics of court-ordered counseling. You cannot order people to want to change and those who do not want to change do not change regardless of counseling. The public has way too much trust in the idea that court-ordered counseling has an impact on people like this.

Libby Munro said...

She is a monster, and she should not be given the "opportunity" to finish what she started by murdering that precious little girl. The "opportunity" to be a better mother presented itself DAILY before this horrific attack. I do wonder though about the 99 year sentence when murderers get less. A 19 year-old father just got 3 months in jail for murdering his 6 month-old daughter. What is up with all these enormous sentencing variations?!

Wreyeter72 said...

I think Peter meant there have been many cases where the abuse, even murder, was blamed on a parent being angry about bedwetting. I agree with you - I don't scold my kids when they have an accident either. It's parents who dont want their children to interrupt their self-serving, horrid lives who abuse children.

Anonymous said...

If only, Lena Lunsford, Justin D, Jerice Hunter, and many other of these murderers/abusers, would have encountered judges like this one in their paths, none of this nonsense would have happened, and these babies would be alive.

Kudos to the judge for ridding these children, and society from this monster. We definitely need more people like him in our legal system.

Light The Way said...

Just *3 months* for abusing your child to death? That's disgusting.

I can see someone who momentarily snapped getting less time than this Esalona wench, though, even if their child died and hers lived..
Why?
Because, taking the time to find a tube of super-glue and then affix her toddler firmly to the wall, BEFORE beating her nearly to death shows that this was a deliberate act involving forethought, and NOT a situation of having "momentarily snapped"...
There were minutes of time involved with prepping her daughter for that beating---minutes where she could have chosen to stop and show mercy.

BostonLady said...

Unbelievable. This mother is a monster and she does not deserve any second chance. Her lawyer is nuts to even suggest that the mother get probation, counseling and a chance to be a mother. The sentence is not too harsh. They should have sentenced her to 99 yrs in jail after they super glued HER hands to the wall and beat her so she could have an idea of what she caused her 2 yr old baby.

I'm very disturbed that the children are living with the monster's mother. If she was truly abused by her own mother, the children are not safe there either.

No reason is good enough said...

I agree with you 100%! What child wets their bed in the middle of the night on purpose? I would tell my children to get clean pj's, after I changed the sheets, I washed them up and put them back to bed. I never embarrassed or got mad at them for an accident.

I was verbally, mentally & sometimes physically abused as a child. I can remember the yelling, the horrible words and the "spankings" I got for my mothers alleged misbehaving on my part. I vowed never to do that to my children and I never have. Sure I've almost lost it with them at times, but I gave myself time out, I never hurt them.

Being an abuser because you were abused is not a reason to harm your children! Break the cycle. Let your children live the life you wish you had. Don't make excuses, get help BEFORE you touch a your child. Please.

Nic said...

How is placing the kids in the custody of "gramma" lost on the judge?

Wow