Found Deceased KS - Lucas Hernandez, 5, Wichita, 17 Feb 2018 #19 *Arrest*

[Hatfield]

Hahahaha.....I will call it “talking trash and CPS”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks to you and others for helping to explain what likely went down today at the courtroom. It really helped.

 

[WildcatRunner]

Hahahaha.....I will call it “talking trash and CPS”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where do I get the registration form? 🤣[emoji38][emoji23]

Just thinking out loud...

 

[Charliegizmo49]

Does this mean that Jonathan doesn't get custody either? I am confused by this statement?

Okay I see now than He is the alleged father!

it appears that portion of the hearing was closed. The judge could have ordered a paternity test prior to ruling on any custody issue. At least at this point the year old baby is going to have a chance at a better life. I hope the judge can prevent any of thes people from getting her. And it doesn’t look good for EG MAINTAINING any visitation of her 2 older boys. and I would venture an educated guess the same judge is going to order the newborn straight into State custody. Then she will have lost all 4 kids and LUCAS.

If her motive was to get sympathy from people for LUCAS’ disappearance then she failed everything she was trying to accomplish. From this point forward it only gets worse for her.

 

[Insomnia Momma]

The attorney is trying to get the evidence from the phone thrown out since the judge allowed it to be entered on discovery awhile back. Once she was arrested she was reinterviewed as any discussions with police before that will be considered “off the record”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RSBM

Would this still apply if it was a post Miranda interview? At that point isn’t Miranda implied?

 

[GigTu]

What the attorney is saying is EG was arrested based on improperly obtained evidence and therefore she be immediately released from jail. The premise is that EG turned over her phone to help look for Lucas when the messages were found about the trip to OG. At the time the focus was on finding Lucas so nothing was done about it as most missing kids cases are resolved rather quickly. As time passed and it was looking more and more like something nefarious was going on and Emily was still able to have custody of her daughter, the courts had to find a way to get the daughter out of the home. The only way you can do that in KS is to charge a parent with a crime involving a child, preferably their own child. The endangerment charge is playing two parts, keeping Emily in jail where she can’t interfere with the search and keeping her daughter away from her.

The attorney is trying to get the evidence from the phone thrown out since the judge allowed it to be entered on discovery awhile back. Once she was arrested she was reinterviewed as any discussions with police before that will be considered “off the record”.

I'm a little bit confused on how this works. If you have something in your car and you give LE permission to examine it and they find contraband (for example), they can use that find against you in the court of law. You gave them permission to search. How is that different from a cell phone?

 

[ScarlettLin]

I'm a little bit confused on how this works. If you have something in your car and you give LE permission to examine it and they find contraband (for example), they can use that find against you in the court of law. You gave them permission to search. How is that different from a cell phone?

It’s not different - doesn’t mean an attorney won’t try to get it excluded.
There’s lots of precedents on phone and computer searches now too that the da I’m sure will use to defend the search of the phone as proper


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Charliegizmo49]

Does anyone know if the "alleged" is standard speak in these types of cases? I don't want to read too much into the word if it's SOP, if that makes sense?

@ESO? (Is there a top-level security clearance secret on tagging folk in threads? I'm incapable, apparently. )

JH AND EG are not legally married. Therefore until such time he is proven or legally declared the bio father, everyone attached to the legal proceedings will refer to him as the alleged father. The author of the DCF report may have usedvit purposely for a couple of reasons including limiting JH involvement until he comes forward and proves paternity. Although the was found to be unacceptable for placement, that may have simply been due to his lengthy absences re his work schedule. I don’t believe the reasons were stated.

EG had her first taste today in court to what is coming. If I could I would thank the judge for protecting that little girl.

 

[ESO]

I'm a little bit confused on how this works. If you have something in your car and you give LE permission to examine it and they find contraband (for example), they can use that find against you in the court of law. You gave them permission to search. How is that different from a cell phone?

Well it’s not really the same type of evidence. Digital conversations are not the same thing as finding illegal substances in a car. The argument that will probably be made is that the phone was turned over to search for evidence regarding Lucas’s disappearance, reading thru messages from the day before could be argued as outside the scope of searching for a missing child today. I’m not saying I agree or disagree about this, but it is an argument I have seen made in other cases. Also conversations between husband and wife are considered privileged, so if EG and JH are claiming common law married, then there could be the argument that LE were not allowed to read thru those messages.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Horror]

Finally caught up. Great information everyone thank you for filling some gaps in. This is a positive step forward for all children involved. Each case cements EG not having care of children. I am assuming each case that involved her care of minors would be permitted to bring forward as evidence into other judgements. So the boys father could bring today’s hearing information into his sole custody arrangements and then the state will bring both into the new baby. And all that will be bought as evidence into Lucas case.

ETA - Do not sleep Horror you miss out on removed posts 🤣

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chihuahua]

Yes it's hard when you "miss out" by sleeping.
Good thing I never sleep more than 3 hours at a time...:blushing:

 

[ESO]

RSBM

Would this still apply if it was a post Miranda interview? At that point isn’t Miranda implied?

Post Miranda just means that she was arrested and read her rights. Any information given during a regular interview isn’t necessarily on the record. So statements made post Miranda are always better to have when someone has been charged with a crime. At the time she handed over her phone to LE, she was not under arrest for anything because that happened the evening of Lucas’s disappearance. When she was arrested days later, based on the conversations that LE saw on her phone, it was after she was arrested and read her rights that the interview was conducted (possibly just a repeat of a prior conversation they had with her). At that time LE questioned her about the evidence found on her phone and from what I’m assuming, she admitted to driving while under the influence. This is so common that when she was initially arrested, before the affidavit had been released, I had guessed this is what she was being arrested for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ESO]

Police protective custody is supposed to be short term, protection from imminent threat. If the child can’t be returned to some family member at that point, they go into short term foster care and go through the child in need of care process and become custody of the dcf head person I can’t remember their title - from there they go into the foster system as foster child and may be put in short term foster (parenting plan/reintegration with family to be competed) or long term (going up for adoption)- in long term the foster parent gets ‘custody’ legally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually foster parents only get temporary guardianship, custody stays with the state. This is why foster parents can’t post pictures of their foster kids on SM or leave them with just anybody for babysitting.....it has to be thru approved respite care.

A child can still be considered a CINC and be in a parents home. That distinction just means that CPS is involved with supervising of a child. Part of the supervision doesn’t have to mean removal from the home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lonetraveler]

He was probably advised thru his attorney. He didn't protect our little Lucas from harm and other children are talking about he himself being abusive. How could anybody expect a little one year old to be able to even tell anyone if she was being neglected, unfed, etc. It's really best she's not in his care. He doesn't have a good track record.

Oh I fully agree that it is best she is not in her father's care, I just thought it strange that he did not contest.

 

[ScarlettLin]

Well it’s not really the same type of evidence. Digital conversations are not the same thing as finding illegal substances in a car. The argument that will probably be made is that the phone was turned over to search for evidence regarding Lucas’s disappearance, reading thru messages from the day before could be argued as outside the scope of searching for a missing child today. I’m not saying I agree or disagree about this, but it is an argument I have seen made in other cases. Also conversations between husband and wife are considered privileged, so if EG and JH are claiming common law married, then there could be the argument that LE were not allowed to read thru those messages.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, it’s more of a question of how police got the phone to search.
If it is with a search warrant, if they start finding things outside the scope they generally get the search warrant amended to include those things
If the phone/computer/digital device is turned over voluntarily, then it is all fair game pretty much- much like a voluntary search of your vehicle or home


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[perfectingpink]

2 weekend searches organized to find Lucas Hernandez

[....]

The post includes a poster from the "Finding Lucas Hernandez". The poster says the searches begin each day at 9 a.m. at Aloft Wichita, 3642 N. Oliver Street.

[....]

http://www.kwch.com/content/news/Public-searches-organized-for-Lucas-Hernandez-481111311.html

 

[ESO]

Actually, it’s more of a question of how police got the phone to search.
If it is with a search warrant, if they start finding things outside the scope they generally get the search warrant amended to include those things
If the phone/computer/digital device is turned over voluntarily, then it is all fair game pretty much- much like a voluntary search of your vehicle or home


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotcha, Emily voluntarily turned the phone over so it’s not really limited in its scope at that point. If LE had gotten a search warrant, they would have to be very specific as to what they were looking for on it. If they come across any other information, they would not be able to use that information until they requested another warrant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettLin]

Actually foster parents only get temporary guardianship, custody stays with the state. This is why foster parents can’t post pictures of their foster kids on SM or leave them with just anybody for babysitting.....it has to be thru approved respite care.

A child can still be considered a CINC and be in a parents home. That distinction just means that CPS is involved with supervising of a child. Part of the supervision doesn’t have to mean removal from the home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah yes you’re right I’m thinking farther down the line. It’s been a long day. Trying to condense my answer I did foul a bit of that up


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hatfield]

Gotcha, Emily voluntarily turned the phone over so it’s not really limited in its scope at that point. If LE had gotten a search warrant, they would have to be very specific as to what they were looking for on it. If they come across any other information, they would not be able to use that information until they requested another warrant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reminds me of those shows on TV like "Cops" where they pull someone over and ask "Do you mind if we take a look inside the vehicle?"

Suspect : "Sure go ahead. I've got nothing to hide."

60 seconds later......"Whooopsie"

 

[tnith]

Can you help me understand the difference of MH being I. Police protective custody, foster care and ward of the state?
Aren’t they all the same just different verbiage?

When I was in Protective custody (police hold) as a child, my parent still had custody of me but could not access me (safehome).

When I was a foster kid, my parent did not have custody but was still a viable option in the courts eyes as they assessed where I ought to exist, long term.

When I became a ward, the State was my guardian.

I hope this explains things a bit.

 

[flute4peace]

JH AND EG are not legally married. Therefore until such time he is proven or legally declared the bio father, everyone attached to the legal proceedings will refer to him as the alleged father. The author of the DCF report may have usedvit purposely for a couple of reasons including limiting JH involvement until he comes forward and proves paternity. Although the was found to be unacceptable for placement, that may have simply been due to his lengthy absences re his work schedule. I don’t believe the reasons were stated.

EG had her first taste today in court to what is coming. If I could I would thank the judge for protecting that little girl.

Would he not legally be considered the father even if his name is listed on the birth certificate? I remember hearing some quirkiness about all of that in KS.

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk