Found Deceased KS - Lucas Hernandez, 5, Wichita, 17 Feb 2018 #14 *Arrest*

[Here&Now]

I agree that there was no new details given, but here is a summary.
Hope it makes sense.

Summary of Nancy Grace podcast:

Guests:

Kim Martin - effort to find Lucas with Missing pieces network
Karen Smith - forensic expert
Ashley Willcot - juvenile judge, founder of child crime watch
Dr. Chloe Carmichael - founder goal attainment, New York psychologist
Chuck Roberts - Crime stories investigative reporter

Kim:
The moment he disappeared is up for debate..
Emily was napping 3pm & woke up contacted police 6:14pm

Chuck:
Just moved into new home 10 days earlier - Lucas would have been unfamiliar with area
‘Step mother’ EG is 26
Shoes & coat still at home, unusually warm that day
May have gone outside on his own accord

School teachers ‘a very sweet boy’

Kim (on the topic of the search):

Police, swat team, canvassing neighbourhood
Early on they said it was not an abduction, there was no sign of any one in house or sign that anyone removed Lucas.

Chuck:

No forced entry etc. Canvassed neighbourhood - no strangers

Kansas police recording (Charlie):
Officers & K-9 units checked home and neighbourhood with no luck of Lucas

Karen:
Gives advice that EG’s associates and cell phone records should be looked at.
Rear door apparently open? Should take DNA swabs, finger prints.

Ashley:
Check for footprints and marks on windows/doors.

Chuck:
No sightings of Lucas since disappearance.

Dr Chloe:
Moving is one of the top 5 stressful events (NG) Dr. Chloe agrees; it poses emotional stress, poses cognitive stress.
Blended families - issues of anger, possessiveness
Where does loyalty lie?
Moving can cause a psychological storm (looking through photos etc.)

Kim:
Dad (JH), left for work on the 9th, worked 20 days on 10 days off, previously worked in Texas, switched to working in NM and works on oil rig.

Mom- last time in Kansas Jan. 1, lives in Oklahoma, she is devastated and in Wichita now.

(NG making it about herself[emoji849]/sympathising)....

Rumours, blame being thrown
Family being harassed, threatened, had to step back from searches

TOPIC = FINDING LUCAS

Karen (on the topic of neighbours):

Talks about sexual predators

NG mentions - LUCAS WARRIORS

Chuck:

Step mom is the ‘live in girlfriend’
More than a year together - ‘not a step mother’

Ashley:

Step mother? She says no.

Chloe:
It takes a special person to be committed to someone else’s children..

Kim:

EG has two older children -does not have custody of.
EG & Johnathan have a 1 year old daughter
Two older children - older than Lucas.. no specific age given.
They live with their father.
1 year old girl - napping with EG at time of Lucas going missing....

Lucas brown hair brown eyes, 4ft tall,
EG said 60lbs, actually 38-40lbs...

Ashley:

Red flag... she didn’t know weight, purposely lied? 38lbs is small for height.

NG - child extremely malnourished

NG - Last seen wearing black sweats, white socks, grey shirt with bear

Chuck:
Bruise on face. Not sure if police have connected that with case.
Lucas told family EG threw water in his face, kicked him, and EG was ‘mean to him’

Recording of Great aunt sally:

Multiple bruises on face and neck
Police didn’t think there was enough evidence..

(NG)Great grandmother stated:
Lucas was kicked and EG dragged him across room (reported concerns)

Kim:

Four or five people reported suspected abuse, from Lucas’ fathers family and bio moms family.
JH - unfounded, EG did not abuse.
16 photos. (Break your heart)
All over Lucas’ body.
‘Emily hurts me’
Called her Emily not ‘step mom’

Ashley:
Repeated bruises = different story.. intentional abuse.
System fail
System failed Lucas.. multiple reports etc.

Karen:
Check where bruises are located, old and new bruises? Abuse for a period of time
System failed Lucas
Should have been removed from home
Patterns to bruises?
Hand marks or objects?

(Kansas police - Gavin - 2 separate accounts of child endangerment) - recording being played.

Chuck:
What led to arrests:
Day before disappearance:
Took 1 year old to OG, later admitted to JH, she smoke a couple of bowls of marijuana, left him because he was sick and didn’t want to wake him up.

NG:
Step mom - requested a bond reduction..

Kim:

Find Lucas.. 99% sure recovery effort sadly
Doesn’t think anyone will pay until Lucas is found.
Area = vast, rural and a lot of private property
Need land owners to search
A lot of land to cover

Kim:

Landlord, saw Lucas peeking through window at 5:30pm on 16th. LAST VISUAL.

Consented to search of home, found texts (Facebook messenger) between her and JH, police say - glass was going to smoke and go to OG, use gift card
Made two calls

Kim:

No reason to believe boy made it through the night (her opinion)
Emily came home
LH made comment on landlord
She snapped..
Lashed out at him

Been sick for two or three weeks
Think it killed him..





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Thank you HayLouise for doing that! I don't understand how anyone could take the life or even cause harm to an innocent!! Where are you sweet Lucas?

 

[ScarlettLin]

The guest very forcefully states the multiple allegations plus bruises should have been investigated long before Lucas went missing.
Amen to that.

If it wasn't Emily, then Lucas' Dad should have found out who it WAS and removed THAT person from his life instead of cutting off family. It was frustrating to hear it said that JH says the abuse allegations are "unfounded". Someone was abusing Lucas. There are multiple pictures that make that case on the timeline, Missing Pieces Network has seen 16, she said. Multiple calls from multiple people. I'm going to have to sit on my hands about Dad for awhile and collect my thoughts.

If JH said the allegations were unfounded - and this is the first time I heard those words attributed to him, I had heard that he cut off his family for making reports, but not in those exact words- it makes me think Dcf did investigate, but they only use 2 designations. Unsubstantiated or substantiated. Now the interesting thing is unsubstantiated doesn’t necessarily mean there isn’t abuse. It just means they don’t have solid proof. Ks has a higher evidentiary standard than all other (as of 2014) states for substantiating a claim of abuse because substantiated puts the person on a registry and they can’t work with children at any licensed agency. There can be a preponderance of evidence and it still be called ‘unsubstantiated’ and the child removed or a parenting plan implemented.
They used to have three designations, unsubstantiated, substantiated and verified I think. So I wonder if he is confusing one word for the other.
http://amp.kansas.com/news/special-reports/in-need-of-care/article1281829.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zelda1010]

If JH said the allegations were unfounded - and this is the first time I heard those words attributed to him, I had heard that he cut off his family for making reports, but not in those exact words- it makes me think Dcf did investigate, but they only use 2 designations. Unsubstantiated or substantiated. Now the interesting thing is unsubstantiated doesn’t necessarily mean there isn’t abuse. It just means they don’t have solid proof. Ks has a higher evidentiary standard than all other (as of 2014) states for substantiating a claim of abuse because substantiated puts the person on a registry and they can’t work with children at any licensed agency. There can be a preponderance of evidence and it still be called ‘unsubstantiated’ and the child removed or a parenting plan implemented.
They used to have three designations, unsubstantiated, substantiated and verified I think. So I wonder if he is confusing one word for the other.
http://amp.kansas.com/news/special-reports/in-need-of-care/article1281829.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I absolutely wondered the same, about unsubstantiated possibly being the term. It was the guest's word choice, paraphrasing JH, imo, so he may or may not have used unfounded himself, as a substitute word or not.

Thank you for the concise explanation you provide about the different terms and how they are used in child protection cases!

Imo, we also don't know if he feels this way, still. That the abuse is unfounded. But that is certainly the impression I am getting and my heart still wants that to be legal maneuvering on his part to make EG think he's on her side. My heart is in the right place, but my brain says he very well may feel those bruises were not from abuse, still, to this day, and so I must sit on my hands.

 

[tnith]

Forgive me if this has been covered to bits, many aspects to unpack yet:


"Nearly two months later in April 2016, according to a police report, Glass allegedly held an ax handle while arguing with Hernandez after telling him she had been sexually assaulted by a male friend."


-feb 22, http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-bo...story-violent-fights-police/story?id=53274743

"The older boys were playing swords with rake handles." -feb 23, http://www.kansas.com/news/local/article201763589.html

I didn't hear the neighbor whom EG introduced herself to, say WHAT the kids were playing with (some of that interview was edited out), after EG's DV history comes to light- so does a 'witness testimony' of random household sticks.
A whole lot going on in those DV reports!

Is the journalist trying to 'paint the picture' or are there often 'wooden handles' about the Hernandez premises?
EG appears to be opportunistic about her chosen weapons & methods of acting out.

Until more info is released about LH or EG (personal), I'm back to sifting the ashes for the odd thing out... yes the whole thing is chock full of odd things, but one mess at a time.

 

[GigTu]

Can they make a case against her even if Lucas is not found?

 

[ScarlettLin]

Can they make a case against her even if Lucas is not found?

Absolutely, depending on what evidence they found to back up any charges


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chihuahua]

Yes most of us have read those court records along with others in the link thread for Lucas.
So sad the family dynamics that led to this "imperfect storm":gaah:. As for the "playing swords with rake handles" another poster here asked a very good question: Since they had just moved from an apartment, why did they have these? And where are the rake heads? Scary to even think about.
Just breaks my heart every time I think of all the lost chances for Lucas:heartbeat::heartbeat::heartbeat:. So many of his extended family members did report to social services but alas nothing was ever effective. They love him and they are surely in pain we cannot begin to fathom.
:moo:

 

[chihuahua]

Can they make a case against her even if Lucas is not found?

Definitely. It's been done before. They rely heavily on forensic evidence. Also on circumstantial evidence in many cases, which is sometimes the strongest.
:moo:

 

[GigTu]

I should have been more specific. I meant with the evidence we cannot see in regards to Lucas' disappearance, and the accompanying multiple complaints of abuse, in your opinion is that going to be enough to lock her up for a long time so she can't have access to children, ever?

 

[ScarlettLin]

I should have been more specific. I meant with the evidence we cannot see in regards to Lucas' disappearance, and the accompanying multiple complaints of abuse, in your opinion is that going to be enough to lock her up for a long time so she can't have access to children, ever?

IMO
They have substantial evidence to make such a case against her- based on the judge ruling to not lower her bond on a seemingly ‘minisciule’ charge. Not that I find it minuscule but legally speaking with the sentencing guidelines for that charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kuyluc2764]

I just wanted to comment on something mentioned in the podcast. The baby, MH is 1 years old, right? So JH and EG were definitely together for longer than a year. So that was some misinformation. The other thing I wanted to comment on was when it was said that when LE ruled out abduction and Lucas just walking out that it's a big clue, I agree with that. I also believe that the judge not lowering EG's bond is a VERY big clue that LE has something pretty substantial on EG and they have more evidence then we may think. IMO

 

[chihuahua]

IANAL so someone else with more knowledge will chime in. We don't know because we don't know the evidence. But in general, I don't think the charge she is currently facing is enough to keep her locked up for long. She's already been granted visitation with her daughter.:gaah:
:moo:

 

[Charliegizmo49]

They have her in custody and imo if she bails bonds on the single charge they will bring forward another. She isn’t going anywhere. Imo

 

[ScarlettLin]

IANAL so someone else with more knowledge will chime in. We don't know because we don't know the evidence. But in general, I don't think the charge she is currently facing is enough to keep her locked up for long. She's already been granted visitation with her daughter.:gaah:
:moo:

Ooh where was that, I haven’t seen about her daughter?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Charliegizmo49]

I would also venture to guess those child visitations are for a short duration and tightly supervised. No one can afford anything happening to another child.

 

[Charliegizmo49]

I have not seen that either. Jail visitation if ordered isn’t a positive thing for anyone.

 

[GigTu]

I know she requested visitation with the baby and i THINK it was granted. Considering she is in jail for neglect and endangerment of that very child, I find it extremely contradictory to the charges. In other words, it doesn't make sense that they would grant her visitation to a child she is in jail of endangering. If she is so dangerous she should not be able to see the child and no one in their right mind should bring that child to see her. If they are using the little girl as a tool to get her to talk, that's just another example of exploitation of a child, by her and everyone else. Protect the girl, don't expose her to a dangerous woman. JMO

 

[phoenix16]

I should have been more specific. I meant with the evidence we cannot see in regards to Lucas' disappearance, and the accompanying multiple complaints of abuse, in your opinion is that going to be enough to lock her up for a long time so she can't have access to children, ever?

<br>
<br>If the evidence they have can prove EG is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt then yes it can put her away for a long time and she won't have access to the kids. It all really depends on the jury in the end. Even with a body it is not guaranteed that she will be found guilty. This could need up like Casey Anthony's trial. She couldn't be found guilty because that sweet baby's body was so badly decomposed they couldn't figure out&nbsp; COD or really get any forensic evidence and all the other evidence they had was not conclusive enough for the jury. Basically it depends on if the jury thinks the evidence is strong enough to say she guilty and that evidence doesn't show that there could be an alternate scenario of what happened. They might have enough evidence to charge her but if they think the evidence is not strong enough they might not go the trial. It all depends and what they have and what the jury will say.

 

[ScarlettLin]

I Know she requested visitation with the baby and i THINK it was granted. Considering she is in jail for neglect and endangerment of that very child, I find it extremely contradictory to the charges. In other words, it doesn't make sense that they would grant her visitation to a child she is in jail of endangering. If she is so dangerous she should nto be able to see the child and no one in their right mind should bring that child to see her.

I thought the judge hearing the bond reduction left the no contact decision up to the judge over the CINC case. Which I haven’t heard any info on when that case is scheduled to be heard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zelda1010]

I thought the judge hearing the bond reduction left the no contact decision up to the judge over the CINC case. Which I haven’t heard any info on when that case is scheduled to be heard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There was a post here about visits with MH. And PB commented that she wondered if it had been made public, so it stuck in my brain. Maybe kansas.com article.

ETA found link courtesy of post by Henry...good thing it was quoted though, cuz I get page not found, now.:gaah: