Found Deceased KS - Lucas Hernandez, 5, Wichita, 17 Feb 2018 #16 *Arrest*

[hopingicanhelp]

While I agree with you in theory, and have full confidence in LE, I'm just not convinced that he isn't in the landfill. I don't even know why I feel so strongly about it - just a hunch, I suppose. It seems the most simple explanation, IMHO. I know I keep talking about it; my apologies to those who are sick of hearing it .

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

Oh, I hate to say I think it might have been EG's easiest option. I was just trying to give a reasonable answer why the landfill may not have been searched--it may have been at some point, I don't know--but it sounds like finding anything there if it's not caught prior is nearly impossible

ESO? Am I remembering correctly? Do you know the protocol for communications between LE and waste companies after a missing persons report?

 

[hsprinkel]

I feel like we are getting close. Spring is here, once old man winter lets go. I think he will be reveled then.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

 

[DAnthrplgst]

I feel like we are getting close. Spring is here, once old man winter lets go. I think he will be reveled then.

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

Either the arrival of Spring will reveal Luke or once they have that big festival in Wichita he might be found. I still stand by an earlier comment I made, at this point I'd rather EG get a sweet deal in exchange for revealing Lucas' location then playing hardball and Luke being potentially lost forever. I know most of you disagree with that sentiment but my thinking is a person like EG will eventually screw up again and will land in jail. Even if she doesn't her life is essentially over, she'll never get a decent job and when JH eventually comes out of this fog and dumps her she'll be lucky if she can find another man to take her in.

 

[chihuahua]

I respect your opinion.
I think it should be up to the family that actually loves and misses Lucas to decide whether EG gets a "sweet deal" or not.
:moo:

 

[Kamm5]

Right now she thinks she doesn’t have to deal. I truly think she believes no body no crime. I guess I pray that they have enough proof to get her convicted of something besides child endangerment

 

[Paddleboarder]

My apologies but I seem to be having trouble getting in touch with Paddleboarder.

If anyone is in contact with her could you please have her email me at [email protected]?

Thank you,
Tricia

Thanks everyone. I’ve been working with a local family and haven’t been on much today. I emailed Tricia earlier this evening.

 

[chihuahua]

Thanks everyone. I’ve been working with a local family and haven’t been on much today. I emailed Tricia earlier this evening.

Understandable. Also take care of yourself PB.
Chi

 

[flute4peace]

I could never get sick of reading anything you write. Great seeing you post again, you've been missed. I don't doubt your theory at all.

Oh my goodness *warm fuzzies*. I enjoy your posts, as well!

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

 

[flute4peace]

If I were EG’s attorney, I think I would use this defense. After all, if there’s ever a trial, her attorney just needs to create reasonable doubt. We don’t know what statements EG has already made to LE, though. She might have painted herself into a corner already with her story of what happened on Saturday.

Heck of a defense strategy, right there!

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

 

[flute4peace]

No matter how she disposed of the body, she was taking a risk of being caught disposing the body or of the body being found. It may not be easy to dispose of a body, but I think some methods are less risky than others. For example, if she was driving around with a corpse in her vehicle, she not only runs the risk of getting pulled over en route to her dump site, but she also runs the risk that human remains detection dogs will alert on her car later. Murder and body disposal are inherently risky.

The other part of my theory is that she was high, and therefore not necessarily of the mind to be strategic in her disposal method/plan. I also think the delayed report was due to her waiting until she sobered up, so as not to incriminate herself re: drugs.

All my own opinions.

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

 

[flute4peace]

Thanks everyone. I’ve been working with a local family and haven’t been on much today. I emailed Tricia earlier this evening.

Glad to her you're ok! Sending prayers for your new case. You are greatly admired!

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

I do not think so


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why do you think that she didn't have them on VD? Her ex only called to cancel the Sunday visit after Lucas was missing, to my knowledge. She had told her ex she kicked out JH after the 4th incident, so Lucas not being with her on the 14th would seem normal I would think, at least in her mind.

 

[kkdj]

Do we know if EG had her sons on Wednesday 2-14-18 for her 2.5 hour visit? It was her parenting time with them, after all.
That might be something important to know in the timeline.
We do know Lucas was not with her as she claimed JO took him that day.
As I recall JO had open visitation with Lucas so there wasn't a court ordered schedule. I wonder how much EG told others JO had Lucas when in fact she didn't.
I wonder if, since EG told JH that JO took LH on Valentines day if he thought JO still had him on the 16th when EG took their daughter to OG when in fact he was left home alone, and witnessed by the LL.
This can only make sense to us on here! Lol! :scared:

 

[Somer]

I just wanted to point out that LE didn't really "come out and tell us" about the Olive Garden info. That info was in court documents that supported her arrest on child endangerment charges, and was obtained by a media source under the Freedom of Information Act. So LE wasn't dropping hints.

Thank you for that clarification.

 

[Somer]

i think the baby daughter was too young to be problematic, so it was easy for EG to use her as a display of what a great mommy she was. Basically, using the baby as a tool.

Also, I suspect the baby was very snuggly so fulfilled EGs need for intimacy somewhat, but not completely. She's probably the type of woman that prefers babies. After they turn 3 or so she's ready for a new baby and the now toddler is just a nuisance.

Bottom line, the baby was useful to EG in multiple ways. Lucas was nothing more than a burden.

100% agree with this.

 

[kkdj]

i think the baby daughter was too young to be problematic, so it was easy for EG to use her as a display of what a great mommy she was. Basically, using the baby as a tool.

Also, I suspect the baby was very snuggly so fulfilled EGs need for intimacy somewhat, but not completely. She's probably the type of woman that prefers babies. After they turn 3 or so she's ready for a new baby and the now toddler is just a nuisance.

Bottom line, the baby was useful to EG in multiple ways. Lucas was nothing more than a burden.

It could be all of this. But I think the biggest thing the baby was useful for was trapping her man.

 

[chihuahua]

Still thinking of you Lucas and everyone that is searching for you in their own different ways.
Chiraying:

 

[MsMarple]

According to the affidavit filed by her sons' father, Glass was allowed to have her sons for two and half hours every Wednesday and for seven hours every other Sunday.

She did not complete a court-ordered class on “parenting in a home with anger/violence nor a co-parenting class,” the affidavit says.
The father says in the affidavit that Hernandez, identified as Glass’ boyfriend, “got physical with our youngest son” on Sunday, Feb. 4. The injured boy is about 6 years old, according to the birth year listed for him in the court document.

“The children reported the incident to me as soon as I picked them up after parenting time,” the father said in the affidavit. He took photos of the injury. “And although it was 4-5 hours later, there were still red marks on (the boy’s) chest with visible fingerprints. His chest was still red the next day.”

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article208094544.html#storylink=cpy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know we're aware of most of the information in the article but for me, reading it tonight pulled together a "picture" of Emily Glass that IMO we've all intuited in one way or another. Here's my "picture:"

EG has no real interest in being a mother.

She did not complete a court-ordered class on “parenting in a home with anger/violence nor a co-parenting class,” the affidavit says.

EG is okay with violence in the home. She doesn't take responsibility for her own actions and instead becomes angry and blames others. She has no insight into her behavior.

The father said in the affidavit that Glass told him “that her boyfriend (Jonathan Hernandez) said that the mark was ‘an accident’ and that she kicked him out after it occurred.”

“She then became angry, blamed the children’s behavior and hung up on me.”

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article208094544.html

IMO EG's lack of insight is a key factor that keeps her from talking about Lucas. She just isn't wired to understand that people can see through her lies and attempts to manipulate others. I believe that she truly believes she is going to walk out of jail a free woman. She's so self-focused that she's blind to logical reasoning.

IMO her actions will come back to bite her in the :behind: but she'll never comprehend that it was her own doing. MOO.

 

[katydid23]

Either the arrival of Spring will reveal Luke or once they have that big festival in Wichita he might be found. I still stand by an earlier comment I made, at this point I'd rather EG get a sweet deal in exchange for revealing Lucas' location then playing hardball and Luke being potentially lost forever. I know most of you disagree with that sentiment but my thinking is a person like EG will eventually screw up again and will land in jail. Even if she doesn't her life is essentially over, she'll never get a decent job and when JH eventually comes out of this fog and dumps her she'll be lucky if she can find another man to take her in.

By 'eventually screw up again' ---do you mean she will likely beat up another child or make one go missing ? I think she probably would if she got the chance. Which is why she should stay locked up, in my opinion.

 

[margarita25]

I still think these boys need questioned. A special questioner can do this without these boys even knowing they are being questioned if done correctly. I would almost bet these boys have seen EG do things to LH and possibly can help in ways no one has thought of. Just saying it can never hurt to try.

I would assume this has been done. Moo.
(child psychologist? )

******

(I'm reading here and recognizing posts by victims of abuse themselves who have been brave enough to share their stories in other threads.)

******

Oh my goodness *warm fuzzies*. I enjoy your posts, as well!

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

We need as much good energy as we can get here...in all these "cases"...

Little Lucas, Not Forgotten!

Ps... flute4peace, you started Lucas' thread...you and Pink and all the locals here and beyond...amazing...if anyone is to be found through collective love, energy and EFFORT, it is Lucas.

right now she thinks she doesn’t have to deal. I truly think she believes no body no crime. I guess i pray that they have enough proof to get her convicted of something besides child endangerment

^^^^this.