Found Deceased KS - Lucas Hernandez, 5, Wichita, 17 Feb 2018 #12 *Arrest*

[ScarlettLin]

Are we sure he was alone? LE did not charge her with anything involving LH being endangered.

LE initially had two charges against her- one for each child
The DA tabled the charge regarding Lucas because of the ongoing investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Reneeloveyou]

Are we sure he was alone? LE did not charge her with anything involving LH being endangered.

I think they are holding that charge at the moment, if they charge her LE will have to release there basis for said charge. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[n_6CC]

Could that be the 5:43 phone call maybe?
‘I see your son why aren’t you answering the door?’

ETA- i know he’s not her actual son but the LL may not
Pure speculation
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the calls were Made from the phone - that’s how it was reported- not received two calls-


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettLin]

I think the calls were Made from the phone - that’s how it was reported- not received two calls-


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I tend to agree. The affidavit is vague which is unusual to say the least. It says two calls made. Not made from. So strange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steelslady]

I tend to agree. The affidavit is vague which is unusual to say the least. It says two calls made. Not made from. So strange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps from someone else's phone the calls were made? Or was it just poor wording in the affidavit?

 

[n_6CC]

I tend to agree. The affidavit is vague which is unusual to say the least. It says two calls made. Not made from. So strange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think I assumed the phone calls were made because of this statement at the end of the affidavit. I could have interpreted that wrong.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Amonet]

I don't recall the exact wording but has now said that the landlord was the last person (other than EG) to see Lucas, and that was at 5.30pm when EG was at OG. If there had been someone with Lucas, then the landlord wouldn't be the last sighting?

 

[AFTM]

Emily has serious problems socially and as a human being...I think she has narcissistic tendencies...I see her heart as being a very cold one. I bet there is a reason she had the new child that would benefit her or the little girl would not of been born. Maybe a hold on JH. She knows what happened to Lucas and I can't see her confiding in anyone but JH.

MOO says the cow

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

What if LL called her while at the house?

EG smoked a couple of bowls in the garage around 3:30 p.m.
It was stated that EG made two calls from her cell, one at 4:53, the other at 5:43. She was not home at theses times but near OG. The LL saw Lucas peering out a window around 5:30.
EG was charged with endangering her daughter, who was with her between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
She was not charged with LH being endangered, who was at home during these hours.
All of this was on Feb. 16th.

It doesn't sound to me that LH was home alone. It sounds more to me that someone told LE they were with LH during this time and the LL saw LH peeking out the window. Did this person answer the door to the LL?
Is this who EG called, to let them know beforehand that the LL was stopping by? Then did she call them after the LL was there to see how it went? Was EG gone during this time to specifically avoid the LL? Did EG order more than one meal, using the gift card towards her purchase?

 

[interestedincases]

The landlord stopped by the rental house around 5:30 p.m. on Feb. 16th. He saw Lucas peeking out a window. That is all I know about the encounter.

I do not know what he did upon seeing Lucas. I do not know if he knew that Lucas was home alone or if he found out at a later date when questioned by detectives. I do not know which room Lucas was in at the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am so heartbroken to read this, UGH!!! Poor, sweet baby!

I have to put myself in LL's shoes. If I saw a kid peeking out the window, I would not automatically think he was home alone. I would think his mom/dad were there and NOT answering because they didn't want to talk to me. I wouldn't call police, I would call the tenant and leave a VM saying I'm here, why aren't you answering??!! then leave. UNLESS all curtains were open, and I could walk room to room and physically see no one else was home, then I would call. I would still think that the tenant was hiding though, I never in my wildest dreams would think a parent would leave a 5 year old home alone! Especially because sweet Lucas was so skinny, he might look younger to me.

I also can't rule out adult #2 being in the house with Lucas. But, if that is the case, why didn't she leave baby girl home also? MUCH easier to get food without a baby in tow! So #2 person doesn't make much sense to me but I can't 100% rule it out either.

EG is such a $#@%#@$

 

[ScarlettLin]

EG smoked a couple of bowls in the garage around 3:30 p.m.
It was stated that EG made two calls from her cell, one at 4:53, the other at 5:43. She was not home at theses times but near OG. The LL saw Lucas peering out a window around 5:30.
EG was charged with endangering her daughter, who was with her between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
She was not charged with LH being endangered, who was at home during these hours.
All of this was on Feb. 16th.

She WAS charged with endangering Lucas in the initial arrest
The DA did not yet pursue that charge


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Reneeloveyou]

The thread is open again.

Some reminders:

If you see a post that violates TOS or is offensive in some way, please alert on it and move on. Do not reply to the post because now you have compounded the problem for cleaning up the thread. Thank you to the members who alerted and moved on.

If your post starts with words like, "I know we aren't allowed to..." then DON'T post what you were about to post. If you know it isn't allowed, then it isn't allowed. Period.

Please stay on topic and focus on where Lucas could be. Do not sleuth the landlord. Do not speculate about what the landlord may or may not be feeling now.

Do not post about visions or dreams. We don't allow that type of speculation on WS. We need facts and links. We are also VERY lucky to have 2 VIs in this case. I can't tell you how many cases I wish we had even one VI.

Lets remember we aren’t supposed to speculate what the LL may or may not be feeling. I don’t want to see this get shut down.
ETA: I’m not a mod, just wanted to bring this to the current discussion as others may not have seen it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steelslady]

I wonder if it's a possibility that she left him restrained or confined somewhere that he wasn't meant to, or even be able to, get out of but he somehow managed to? Like wouldn't it be too risky to just leave him free to unlock the front door and go for a wander if he was left home alone? Might be a reason to put him in a pull up too if he was restrained and not able to get to the bathroom.

Or maybe she was too high and hungry to even care if he went out of the house, who knows.

This is entirely possible, but God, I pray it not to be true.

 

[AFTM]

She WAS charged with endangering Lucas in the initial arrest
The DA did not yet pursue that charge


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess they can't charge her with endangerment on that day when they think she killed him on that day. Think about it..

So they must be pretty sure something happened to him on the 16th....

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Tippy Lynn]

So Lucas was well enough to stand at the window. I was of the opinion that perhaps he was so unwell at that point that he wasn’t able to leave his bed, or may not have even been conscious. The fact that he was able to be up and about changes my mind about what I think happened. Unless he went downhill within a matter of hours (became septic or something) maybe him being sick did not play as big of a role as I thought it did. Back to the abuse angle and her losing it on him. Thoughts?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We don’t know the floor plan for their house, but LH could have been laying in bed or on the couch and peeked out the window. MOO

 

[Steelslady]

I think I assumed the phone calls were made because of this statement at the end of the affidavit. I could have interpreted that wrong.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Great, so now it's possible that she herself didn't make the calls from her phone.

 

[kkdj]

Wouldn't it be easier with a 5 year old than a baby? She left him because she's a disgusting human.

not for a male babysitter.

 

[ScarlettLin]

I guess they can't charge her with endangerment on that day when they think she killed him on that day. Think about it..

So they must be pretty sure something happened to him on the 16th....

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

That’s the thing, they tabled that charge because it’s part of the ongoing investigation and to pursue that charge they would have to detail what they have in the affidavit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chihuahua]

My heart is breaking. I feel like media someone big needs to interview EG it will make her ego feel big and maybe some slip ups maybe interview her supporters. But now we lawyers involved so maybe not. Does your gut tell you if LE has enough to charge with out a body. And how many have ever been convicted without a body?

I agree but I'm glad E.G. is in custody. In the Trenton Duckett case there was a horrible outcome when the mom was basically caught lying to NG. I'm not going to post a link but I'm sure many of us remember.
Trenton was never found IIRC.
:moo: sad case too

 

[AFTM]

not for a male babysitter.

Yes most male's would not want to watch little one. There are so many ideas that are good ones but I think she wouldn't of went to eat and had the man at home. Maybe ran to store or something but men always want to eat.. no offense there guys.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk