Found Deceased KS - Lucas Hernandez, 5, Wichita, 17 Feb 2018 #21 *Arrest*

[Kuyluc2764]

But Lucas WAS there. After she told her ex she had kicked JH out (2/4) when the boys came for their visit on 2/11, when the neighbor saw them...
Whoah
It said in documents regarding her visits that she got the boys Wednesday and Sunday for a few hours
Valentines Day was a Wednesday
Then we also have the lie to JH about where Lucas was on VD
I’m starting to see the edges....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is something I have been wondering about. I have never heard any mention Emily having her son's on Wednesday's. I know it says that in the court order but the court order also says that Emily was supposed to have the boy's every other Sunday and we know that she had them 2/4, 2/11 and she was supposed to have them 2/18 but that was cancelled and rescheduled because of the disappearance of Lucas. So I wonder if maybe Emily and the boy's father had a different plan worked out? Maybe due to school and work or something else? Because it seems to me that Emily had them every Sunday, not every other. Also, another neighbor reported seeing Lucas, Emily and "the little brother" (MH) a few days before Lucas was reported missing, that would have been Wednesday and Emily's boy's were not with them. Although, I don't believe a time was stated so it could have been earlier in the day. I don't think it is extremely relevant but it is something I have wondered about.

 

[Deleted member 221026]

Who is the two way confidante? I’m not aware of anyone appointed to check on EG or Luke.

Who is the two way confidante? I’m not aware of anyone appointed to check on EG or Luke.

I have an opinion that is'nt validated anywhere in MSM. I freely admit to that. I believe (IMO) a family member of EG is a participant in the dynamics of the overall reflected relationship between JH and EG, and is involved in their complicated communications. I state this opinion as a result of my general thought process and isn't meant to offend anyone, especially you PD. I will restrict further comments until/if validated information is either provided or discounted.

 

[perfectingpink]

Yes, typically. But to me Lucas isn't typical. His father works 12ish hours away.
And EG is living in JH's home. Even with both on the lease. I thought EG was a SAHM. JH pays the bills. EG feels she's owed the world I'm sure. I think her X would have more perspective.
In time Lucas being there would bring question.
I would not expect anyone with a child to just "get out". I mean no disrespect..... EG's X doesn't seem like the type to be immature & not think out the consequences to a 5 year old up & moving from his home in a few days. And without a parent to boot. Where's Lucas living?
Lucas has 3 caretakers, all of which need to be supervised with children, IMO. Those 3 can't think past their next pack of smokes. EG's X appears to be an functioning adult. I think Lucas being gone would be more of a concern for EG's X. Than it would be more concerning to him than Lucas being there. If EG & X talked.

I do think EG's older boys coming for a visit is the reason she had to call LE. And couldn't wait a bit longer until closer to JH coming home to report Lucas missing.
Lucas was gone then. Lies matter now.

I am not aware there has been any indication Jamie was not able to have her children unspervised and I think we have to be cautious about making the assumptions about her. Time and time again we have seen parents do exactly what Emily has and abuse to the point of fatal harm and time and time again it is evident these parents should have seen beyond themselves and placed their child in an environment they think is better. We plead with parents to please put your child first and do what is better for them not what makes you feel good. This, is what Jamie did and unfortunatly we have the outcome we do by no fault of hers. I really do not want to see her villified for doing her darndest to make the right decision for Lucas.

 

[WillenFan21]

JH knew about Lucas' abuse. Let me re-iterate, he KNEW. He didn't miss anything. He was informed of abuse concerns in the spring of 2017 by the NM relatives. That's on record in the Wichita Eagle. It could have been earlier than that, but that's the time-frame of a confirmed confrontation with both JH and EG. And what did he choose to do when confronted, even when the photographs and testimony was right in front of him? Deny it and punish any relatives who dared bring up or report concerns for Lucas' well-being by cutting off access to him. Punishing even his own mother, Lucas' grandmother.

Whether or not JH physically harmed Lucas himself, he was complicit in his continued abuse and willfully chose not to believe his son over EG or do anything at all to help him escape from the ongoing abuse. Instead, he decided to inflict emotional retribution on those who cared, who wanted nothing more than to protect the poor boy from harm.

This is just my personal opinion, but I think the facts of the case support this.

Totally agree! And honestly if he laid his hands on EGs son then there is no doubt in my mind he laid his hands on his own kid. I’m not saying he had to do with the disappearance. I am however saying that I will not rule out the fact he was abusive to Lucas also. JMO MOO and I’m not sorry for saying it either!

 

[Kuyluc2764]

O/T question, but what is MOO and IRLC mean? I have been trying to figure it out. And am I the only one who actually reads it like a cows moo? LOL

 

[Hatfield]

JMO
The dynamics of the JH to EG relationship is very complex. Its much more complex than when I first started to learn about this sad case.

Ive tried to decipher most of it and this is just some latest opinions on it.
I think it started out as mutually beneficial to both of them.

First with the simple agreement of EG trying to play house and watch LH and baby girl while JH worked away. EG's benefit is she is trying to get some improved visitation custody agreement for her two boys. Her main goal was to use the child sitting as proof in court to get agreement changed and give her a "win" over the Ex. JH benefit is obvous as he needed someone to watch the kids while he was away at work.
So both EG and JH benefit from the agreement.

Then what evolved was something almost more important to them both. EG would serve for JH as a Proxy Antagonist to JO. EG could get under her skin and cause friction and pain to JO without JH having to do it or even speak with her.
Enter physical fight with EG punching JO in the face and no telling what else.

The flipside of that is JH would also begin to serve for EG as a Proxy Antagonist to her Ex. Enter physical marks being left on one of the boys and no telling what else to cause him grief.

All the adult motives behind the relationship did not serve to be for the best interest of the children. They were being used as ammunition for other weapons.

It was all bad enough but then a final miscalculation on both their parts. They did not get along at times and instead of being on the same army against a common enemy they fought amongst themselves and EG began to get back at JH by hurting his son. Which ruined her chances at faking to the courts that she was a responsible parent to try to change the custody agreement.

Once EG saw that she had no chance at getting a better custody agreement against her Ex then LH was not needed to her anymore and she likely blamed him even though it was her own horrible behavior that caused it. Enter Lucas going missing.

She is arrested and all of this in turn causes her daughter to be taken away. She probably somehow is blaming LH for that too along with partial blame of JH for not being around to help her.

What a mess. Even if 1/2 of this is close its a total mess.
And who pays the most again. The poor children.

 

[finishstrong]

O/T question, but what is MOO and IRLC mean? I have been trying to figure it out. And am I the only one who actually reads it like a cows moo? LOL

You’re not the only one!

I once wondered also why people were going around the threads moo’ing at each other. Luckily, someone ask before I moo’ed back at anybody. [emoji15]

This link may help you:
Websleuths Lingo

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193885

 

[Kuyluc2764]

You’re not the only one!

I once wondered also why people were going around the threads moo’ing at each other. Luckily, someone ask before I moo’ed back at anybody. [emoji15]

This link may help you:
Websleuths Lingo

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193885

Oh this cracked me up. I was not aware that there was a lingo dictionary here. Awesome! Thank you!

 

[1bratmom]

I am not aware there has been any indication Jamie was not able to have her children unspervised and I think we have to be cautious about making the assumptions about her. Time and time again we have seen parents do exactly what Emily has and abuse to the point of fatal harm and time and time again it is evident these parents should have seen beyond themselves and placed their child in an environment they think is better. We plead with parents to please put your child first and do what is better for them not what makes you feel good. This, is what Jamie did and unfortunatly we have the outcome we do by no fault of hers. I really do not want to see her villified for doing her darndest to make the right decision for Lucas.

I understand. I can promise that wasn't my intent. And guarantee it won't happen again. It's gets really old always having to explain why I have SHAME even behind a keyboard. Why I refuse to condemn people I don't know. I don't see the need tear anyone down for a theory. It doesn't even serve my ego to do it.
I hang my hat on treating every single person with worth. Bad choices doesn't take away anyone's value. I can see a persons bad choice & still see a persons value. How could anyone grow without self reflection? Self reflection that adds value.

I would never never forgive myself if I thought for 1 second anything I posted hurt Jamie. Lucas is a picture & a story to me. Lucas is her baby.

That will never be lost on me.


Good Luck

 

[Amonet]

Here's a link to little Lindsey's thread:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?85800-WA-Lindsey-Baum-10-McCleary-26-June-2009

I think it's worth noting that Lindsey's remains were found 145 miles from where she was last seen alive/known to be and once again, as we see in so many cases, her remains were found by hunters.

The distance is incredibly interesting to me, but her case is quite different from Lucas'. I do think some criminals will drive farther than we think, though, to dispose of a body.

Someone posted a map in that thread showing Lindsey's last known location and then the place where her remains were found. What surprised me was that it appears the perp drove down major roads. I am fascinated by how road networks play into travel routes from crime site to dump site. Taking the major route makes it more practical, I think, to be able to go a longer distance. But I also think there must be confidence that it doesn't matter if the vehicle is caught on a traffic camera?

I find it doubtful that EG would have taken a higher-trafficked road, but it was dark so maybe that would reduce the traffic on the major roads and enable her to feel safe enough on them, especially if she has a sense of arrogance that she's not going to get caught. So I no longer entirely rule out the major roads like Kellogg if she could travel down there without the car's plate being identified after-the-fact by LE trying to figure out her whereabouts. But where could a road like that take her?

 

[Kuyluc2764]

Someone posted a map in that thread showing Lindsey's last known location and then the place where her remains were found. What surprised me was that it appears the perp drove down major roads. I am fascinated by how road networks play into travel routes from crime site to dump site. Taking the major route makes it more practical, I think, to be able to go a longer distance. But I also think there must be confidence that it doesn't matter if the vehicle is caught on a traffic camera?

I find it doubtful that EG would have taken a higher-trafficked road, but it was dark so maybe that would reduce the traffic on the major roads and enable her to feel safe enough on them, especially if she has a sense of arrogance that she's not going to get caught. So I no longer entirely rule out the major roads like Kellogg if she could travel down there without the car's plate being identified after-the-fact by LE trying to figure out her whereabouts. But where could a road like that take her?

I feel like she would have been super paranoid to be driving anywhere super late because she didn't have a drivers license. Not only did she not have a license, hers was suspended. I don't think she would have went far just for that simple reason. If she were to get pulled over she very well could have went to jail. My thought is that she took the freeway. I don't know how the freeway is in Wichita but in Topeka there are hardly ever any police officers, highway patrol, sheriffs, etc. If not the freeway, back roads she was comfortable with.

But that is entirely going against her being arrogant about getting caught. If she was that cocky, any type of flat surface she could drive on legally would be fair game.

 

[kshultz06082]

I am going to try to ask this question without confusing anything. How did CPS and the judge who were handling her case with her 2 sons manage to overlook the fact that even though she did not have custody of her own two sons, and very limited visitation with them which was supervised up until October (I think) of last year, she was able to have Lucas in her home 24/7 and "care" for him? If she could not be trusted with her own 2 sons, why did they leave Lucas there? It had to be known by both CPS and the judge, because IIRC, the fact that she was caring for him was part of her petition to get further visitation with her own 2 boys. This has really been bothering me, because CPS and the judge should not have allowed her to care for Lucas either, IMO. Am I just off in left field somewhere?

Or MH for that matter.... jmo!

 

[andalso]

The hand print is the only thing that left a mark on EG's son. Yet, my opinion, there was more that EG's kids had to have seen... and at 6 and 7 years old, they would be able to fairly clearly verbalize what they witnessed in the EG/JH household!!
Sadly, they likely had a front row seat to all kinds of horrible things and thankfully their father took notice of that!! I think EG's kids father should be commended. Then there is JH, I have personally given up on him. In my opinion, he failed.

 

[deedee21]

JH is charged with battery to EG 6 yo child for “smacking and pushing” him.

Imo EG went after LUCAS in retribution.

Its how they lived. It’s how they fought. It’s clearly been the case
Since the judge ordered her to parenting classes. Which she failed to attend.

This was NOT her first inappropriate outburst. Imo no one recognized the terrible danger any of those children were exposed to in that home. By the time a judge sees these cases it’s repetative and long term. DCF should have removed those kids after investigation before the original accusations were made months ago.

I hope shes having these outburst in jail.
Or is that one place she does not feel so tough.

 

[PhoneJockey]

There’s a group of us working on legislation to change this [emoji172]

Excellent! Would that be nationwide legislation, or limited to Kansas (for now at least)?

 

[Charliegizmo49]

Pb. I’d love to help w legislation. 30+- years exp.

 

[Charliegizmo49]

JH knew about Lucas' abuse. Let me re-iterate, he KNEW. He didn't miss anything. He was informed of abuse concerns in the spring of 2017 by the NM relatives. That's on record in the Wichita Eagle. It could have been earlier than that, but that's the time-frame of a confirmed confrontation with both JH and EG. And what did he choose to do when confronted, even when the photographs and testimony was right in front of him? Deny it and punish any relatives who dared bring up or report concerns for Lucas' well-being by cutting off access to him. Punishing even his own mother, Lucas' grandmother.

Whether or not JH physically harmed Lucas himself, he was complicit in his continued abuse and willfully chose not to believe his son over EG or do anything at all to help him escape from the ongoing abuse. Instead, he decided to inflict emotional retribution on those who cared, who wanted nothing more than to protect the poor boy from harm.

This is just my personal opinion, but I think the facts of the case support this.

I AGREE. I WAS GIVING HIM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT BUT WHEN HE WAS TOLD BY RELATIVES. LUCAS SUFFERED FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR?

These people obviously dint don’t have any morals. Abuse leaves lifelong scars that never heal. I’m experience and opinion.

Each time

i drive by

Olive Garden

Im reminded

of EG. and i

dislike her

more each

Time.

 

[Charliegizmo49]

I feel like she would have been super paranoid to be driving anywhere super late because she didn't have a drivers license. Not only did she not have a license, hers was suspended. I don't think she would have went far just for that simple reason. If she were to get pulled over she very well could have went to jail. My thought is that she took the freeway. I don't know how the freeway is in Wichita but in Topeka there are hardly ever any police officers, highway patrol, sheriffs, etc. If not the freeway, back roads she was comfortable with.

But that is entirely going against her being arrogant about getting caught. If she was that cocky, any type of flat surface she could drive on legally would be fair game.

The problem is that if she was transporting human remains LE would have found a scent. Lucas may have been alive. Or she had help and a borrowed vehicle.

I am am not pointing fingers at anyone, but he could be anywhere. I’m still worried and not questioning the landlord sighting. He hadn’t seen Lucas enough to be that familiar with his face. We don’t know how much of him “peeked through the curtains” and if it was enough to clearly identify Lucas. This all makes more sense if he was not there and EG had much more time to take him further away. And I’m saying this with respect.

My neighbors child was peeking at me through wooden blinds and I couldn’t tell which of the 3 girls it was. And I know these kids. This was in broad daylight.

 

[Charliegizmo49]

Good night Sleuthers. Sleep well and may God hold you in his heart till morning. Lucas will be found.

And EGs legal pergatory is just beginning.

 

[kkdj]

The hand print is the only thing that left a mark on EG's son. Yet, my opinion, there was more that EG's kids had to have seen... and at 6 and 7 years old, they would be able to fairly clearly verbalize what they witnessed in the EG/JH household!!
Sadly, they likely had a front row seat to all kinds of horrible things and thankfully their father took notice of that!! I think EG's kids father should be commended. Then there is JH, I have personally given up on him. In my opinion, he failed.

EG's ex sounds like a decent man. He has gone thru whatever it takes to protect his boys. Obviously they needed his love and protection from their own mother. Thank goodness they have him.