Do we know for sure that there was physical contact by LE, as opposed to written charges after the fact? Tia. I know there was the document with the address, etc...
I don't see how it could be any other way.
Wouldn't that be some sort of false charge if it was written up after Lucas went missing?
Moo
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
If evidence was reviewed on 2/21 as part of the ongoing investigation into the missing child 2/17, that proved EG endangered any children from 4pm-6 on 2/16 then there is nothing nefarious there. LEOs don't join the force for the paperwork, I'm thinking.
I think we have the 2/21 (date of arrest) paperwork that was marked as on view or something. Date of incident was 2/16 and may have been input into the wrong box initially.
Imho, LE didn't know until 2/21 (ironically at 18:16, around the same exact time that Lucas was reported missing, or a ppwk anomaly because of the original case being brought to LE attention at that time?) that there was evidence of endangerment on 2/16 from 4pm - 6pm and made the arrest promptly.
Was this an error that the family court is working on? Was this a tip? Who knows, but while I wouldn't be surprised to hear this was a family services delay/error in forwarding the important info to the right people (in this state, at this time), I don't believe LE coverup based on this one hand written police incident report. Jmo