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

[Coloradogirl]

Kudos to the Hoisington Police Department for their quick work. I pray we see some answers for Lucas soon...

 

[chihuahua]

I guess it's called a spoiler. A lot of them have this. I wonder if hers does. They stand out to me, like eyelashes on a VW bug do.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-OEM-0...318495?hash=item2853110e1f:g:4SAAAOSwHLNZS3g0

Don't know if they all have them but I've seen my share that do. It would make it more distinctive to me. Hoping to see photos of it posted soon.
:moo:

 

[chihuahua]

Could the EG phone calls made be to her home, checking on Lucas to see if he was awake? Hungry?

Sadly I don't think so I'd like to be able to attribute normal human and motherly characteristics to EG but I'm finding that impossible.
:moo:

 

[Steelslady]

BBM
I'm not so sure about that.

How are those kids related to Lucas disappearing? They're innocent kids! They're not responsible for his disappearance.

I get what others are alluding to, but for the time being, they should not be involved in this what so ever. You folks do realize that there are people that are trying to sleuth EG's ex and his kids? Do people not realize the potential danger and even bullying her kids are probably living with right now, all because of their mother's actions? The less attention drawn to them and the more attention to finding Lucas is important right now. I am sure eventually EG's ex will handle this in the courts when the time comes.

 

[chihuahua]

I do not condone anyone virtual stalking or harassing anyone.
Period. Whomever people sleuth elsewhere is their business, just not on WS.
ETA the other kids are likely witnesses in this case and I feel very sorry for them.
:moo:

 

[kkdj]

How are those kids related to Lucas disappearing? They're innocent kids! They're not responsible for his disappearance.

I get what others are alluding to, but for the time being, they should not be involved in this what so ever. You folks do realize that there are people that are trying to sleuth EG's ex and his kids? Do people not realize the potential danger and even bullying her kids are probably living with right now, all because of their mother's actions? The less attention drawn to them and the more attention to finding Lucas is important right now. I am sure eventually EG's ex will handle this in the courts when the time comes.

I didn't say they had any responsibility. That is a misrepresentation of what I meant.
Other than that, I agree with you completely. They should be left out of this.

 

[tnith]

Very curious about the choice to leave out the move from apt to house, and failure to keep LH in preK after that ('sick').
Those events stand out as an intentional distancing from a certain part of LH's life and those who were familiar with him, to my mind.

I have always wondered whether the move was pre-empted by eviction notice (unplanned) or motivated by lease ending & searching for another home? Why this location- near to preK but not in walking distance-wouldn't expect a kindergartner to walk that distance to school when transitioning to regular days next fall.

Some food for thought.

 

[kkdj]

I do not condone anyone virtual stalking or harassing anyone.
Period. Whomever people sleuth elsewhere is their business, just not on WS.
ETA the other kids are likely witnesses in this case and I feel very sorry for them.
:moo:

Bingo!

 

[ScarlettLin]

Very curious about the choice to leave out the move from apt to house, and failure to keep LH in preK after that ('sick').
Those events stand out as an intentional distancing from a certain part of LH's life and those who were familiar with him, to my mind.

I have always wondered whether the move was pre-empted by eviction notice (unplanned) or motivated by lease ending & searching for another home? Why this location- near to preK but not in walking distance-wouldn't expect a kindergartner to walk that distance to school when transitioning to regular days next fall.

Some food for thought.

PB said they moved because of space. They had 4 people in a 1BR apartment, which back in my rental days would get you an eviction. The rule then, I don’t know if it still is on the books, but the rule was ‘2 heartbeats per bedroom’
I also read others saying dcf has guideline for children having a bed/separate bedroom for opposite sex etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Amonet]

How are those kids related to Lucas disappearing? They're innocent kids! They're not responsible for his disappearance.

I get what others are alluding to, but for the time being, they should not be involved in this what so ever. You folks do realize that there are people that are trying to sleuth EG's ex and his kids? Do people not realize the potential danger and even bullying her kids are probably living with right now, all because of their mother's actions? The less attention drawn to them and the more attention to finding Lucas is important right now. I am sure eventually EG's ex will handle this in the courts when the time comes.

That's fair and good reasoning for the timeline on the FB page. But on this forum I think it's okay for us to consider EG's possible state of mind over the past weeks, so if we copy the timeline from the FB page maybe we could add the 4th Feb incident info to our own version of the timeline?

 

[Busylady]

My only thoughts are that the JH being accused of striking one of the children, which could potentially play into EG losing unsupervised visits again is very important to her mindset and could be a factor in what happened to Lucas. There was a lot going on in Feb.

 

[Busylady]

The timeline is fantastic thank you so much for all the hard work. I am a little confused by Feb 11th, I thought in EG interview she stated that the 2 people she took a picture of was a few days before Lucas went missing and that it was early morning hours not at night. Was it confirmed that the pic was sent 2/11 and at night and EG was giving misinformation in her interview?

 

[cvaldez1975]

that depends on the state. in CA there is no such rule and thank God because its expensive af here. lol

PB said they moved because of space. They had 4 people in a 1BR apartment, which back in my rental days would get you an eviction. The rule then, I don’t know if it still is on the books, but the rule was ‘2 heartbeats per bedroom’
I also read others saying dcf has guideline for children having a bed/separate bedroom for opposite sex etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zelda1010]

that depends on the state. in CA there is no such rule and thank God because its expensive af here. lol

It might even just depend on the landlord. We had friends sneak a baby in a studio apartment (temp military station in FL years ago). Many leases put a cap on the number of occupants.

 

[tnith]

PB said they moved because of space. They had 4 people in a 1BR apartment, which back in my rental days would get you an eviction. The rule then, I don’t know if it still is on the books, but the rule was ‘2 heartbeats per bedroom’
I also read others saying dcf has guideline for children having a bed/separate bedroom for opposite sex etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So! Thank you for clariyfying- I'm an absolute beast about particulars. Either we are working off of word of mouth (JH & EG's claimed reason) or this is under the presupposition of DHS monitoring the household & caseworkers mailing notices as well as keeping appointments as per family plan (from NM!?). Something I have seen alluded to but not confirmed (Guardian ad litem, or caseworker names, copies of motions, etc.)

Have been lurking and poring over the threads trying to separate what feels to me like 'presumptive' here-say (lacking 3rd party publication providing evidence of state involvement), from confirmed all-parties-witnessed-and-verify-actions.
This concept of 2 persons per household has not come up on the west coast- could be regional or county I suppose- big deal to me as this familial group is scattered between NM & KA (both states likely to have differing rules)... the closer to the true circumstances under which EG operated the household she was 'in charge of' the more likely we will be to determine 'immutable' circumstances from those she claimed in effect & manipulated her realm with.

To me, this means the difference between isolating & thoroughly disappearing LH over a period of time to elimiate as many 'prying eyes' as possible/surrounding self with 'allies'... and a crime of passion 'dumping' him in a span of few hours risking many uncontrollable factors.

It may seem menial to everyone else, but the movements in 2018 appear heavy with significance in my eyes. Things taken for granted as fact should very much be gone over with a fine tooth comb.

 

[ScarlettLin]

that depends on the state. in CA there is no such rule and thank God because its expensive af here. lol

True - I should’ve clarified, living in and renting in Wichita as I have


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

PB said they moved because of space. They had 4 people in a 1BR apartment, which back in my rental days would get you an eviction. The rule then, I don’t know if it still is on the books, but the rule was ‘2 heartbeats per bedroom’
I also read others saying dcf has guideline for children having a bed/separate bedroom for opposite sex etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I also think EG was trying to get overnight visitation with her boys and they needed more than a one bedroom to accomodate the court. It looks to me that getting her boys was very important to her. But the reasons the courts took away her rights she only tried to make look better by her words and appearances. But she just wouldn't live it. She was an abuser and a stoner with little to no concern for others and lacked good judgement. She couldn't fake those parts of herself. When they came to light either thru Lucas's tells, JH's acts, her own children's tells or her own actions or words it upset her profoundly. Getting found out was a constant worry. The LL coming over and seeing Lucas alone didn't help matters. Her driving high didn't help matters. She just couldn't/wouldn't live right for the well being of the children.

 

[ScarlettLin]

I also think EG was trying to get overnight visitation with her boys and they needed more than a one bedroom to accomodate the court. It looks to me that getting her boys was very important to her. But the reasons the courts took away her rights she only tried to make look better by her words and appearances. But she just wouldn't live it. She was an abuser and a stoner with little to no concern for others and lacked good judgement. She couldn't fake those parts of herself. When they came to light either thru Lucas's tells, JH's acts, her own children's tells or her own actions or words it upset her profoundly. Getting found out was a constant worry. The LL coming over and seeing Lucas alone didn't help matters. Her driving high didn't help matters. She just couldn't/wouldn't live right for the well being of the children.

100% agree with this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MzOpinion8d]

I'll bet her ex didn't know of the times she left Lucas alone. That would give him lots of ammo to not let his boys be unsupervised with her. Holy Toledo! She just recently got unsupervised visitation with her own boys and she makes the choices to get high , leave a 5 year old home alone (a sick one to boot) and drive a 1 year old around while she's under the influence! And she thinks it's ok and she's going to get away with it! What is wrong with her?

Especially when her court papers had the judge specifically stating "future drug use will indicate EG's decision not to be a parent". Not sure of the exact phrasing but basically he was saying her parental rights to her sons would be terminated if she chose to do drugs.

 

[kkdj]

It might even just depend on the landlord. We had friends sneak a baby in a studio apartment (temp military station in FL years ago). Many leases put a cap on the number of occupants.

I worked as a manager several years ago managing 211 apt. units. They were all 2 bdrm, 1 bath. I could not allow more than 6 occupants to reside in one apt. I'm in CA. It was my impression that the number of bathrooms was the bigger deal.