Yes it is weak, because it is based entirely on her admissions. Confessions are the gold standard on TV shows, but in reality there must be corroborating evidence. By all accounts she is a liar. That actually makes her confession LESS credible than if she were a generally truthful person telling a consistent story.
It depends a lot on this third party and whether they witnessed the illness/injuries or was just told about it, and their details/impressions of severity. A good lawyer will tell the court something like this:
Lonzie spit up his dinner and had some minor discharge in his ears and seemed a little sleepy. He was prone to ear infections and had drainage tubes in his ears. He had no fever. Mom left the child with his regular caretaker. He has been on the wrong side of the law but had no history of violence against children. He promised to watch over Lonzie and let her know if his conditioned worsened. She planned to take him to the clinic first thing in the morning. As for the bruise, she was angry because Ruben didn't tell her about it but believed him when he told her it was accidental. Lonzie is a normal active toddler who falls down and gets bruises from time to time.
Forehead bruises are very common in active toddlers, any protruding body part that hits the ground or a table on the way down. The bruise behind the ear, however is a huge red flag...BUT Lonna is a not a professional and would not be expected to know that.
So, to reiterate, I am NOT defending either one of them, but they will have lawyers who will put on such a defense, and the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt with a "confession" that keeps changing. It's all going to hang on the corroboration. Hopefully they are getting more evidence and the case is growing stronger under the radar.
