Found Deceased KS - Lucas Hernandez, 5, Wichita, 17 Feb 2018 #7 *Arrest*

[katydid23]

It's also interesting that EG claimed the abuse of her son was "an accident" and she "blamed the children". Sounds like EG and JH enable each other.

I wonder if the older kids that EG keeps implicating in the injuries to Lucas, MIGHT have been her own boys. Maybe the older sons play too hard with Lucas, as he is much smaller and probably not as used to it as they are---since they have grown up together and probably wrestle and play fight continuously.

So MAYBE Lucas got hurt by one of the older boys on Feb 4th, and JH reacted angrily and shoved the kid in the chest?

 

[rsd1200]

Yes there’s always two sides to a story. But it’s not typical for one parent to decide when the other parent can see the child. That’s why custody orders exist. So the custodial parent can’t refuse the noncustodial parent visits. I am having a hard time wrapping my head around a judge ordering such an arrangement.

It's more common than you think. My ex's mother was granted this arrangement. It was horrible. His father would call and ask to see the boys and she'd acquiesce, so he'd drive over to get them. When he'd arrive, she would stick her head out of the door and say, oh, sorry, it doesn't suit now. There was nothing he could do. The courts would not listen to him. Even after nearly 60 years, he's still got all of the court documents stored at his home. She ensured that they had very little contact with him, which was a shame because he is a good man.

When my divorce was finalized, in the same county, but different judge, the same line was put into my divorce papers. I told them to pull that out, and put in scheduled visitation. I didn't want that burden.

 

[Zelda1010]

This lands at random but regarding JH's lack of going on TV to beg for Lucas' return. I wonder if he hasn't been doing that because LE has already told him that Lucas wasn't kidnapped and going on TV to beg for Lucas' return would only continue a false narrative, redirecting resources away from finding Lucas to chasing down "I think I saw him with an one-armed dwarf at a diner" tips.

I have no clue what is going through that man's mind. But I sure appreciated the "one-armed dwarf at the diner".

 

[DAnthrplgst]

I wonder if the older kids that EG keeps implicating in the injuries to Lucas, MIGHT have been her own boys. Maybe the older sons play too hard with Lucas, as he is much smaller and probably not as used to it as they are---since they have grown up together and probably wrestle and play fight continuously.

So MAYBE Lucas got hurt by one of the older boys on Feb 4th, and JH reacted angrily and shoved the kid in the chest?

That's a very good possibility and would explain the redness bio dad saw.

 

[Mamabearto2boys]

I wonder if the older kids that EG keeps implicating in the injuries to Lucas, MIGHT have been her own boys. Maybe the older sons play too hard with Lucas, as he is much smaller and probably not as used to it as they are---since they have grown up together and probably wrestle and play fight continuously.

So MAYBE Lucas got hurt by one of the older boys on Feb 4th, and JH reacted angrily and shoved the kid in the chest?

I would have a hard time believing that the same kids (whoever they were) were continuously so rough with him that they continuously made such egregious bruises. An accident, once? Sure. But on a regular basis? No way. Kids are inherently kind and don’t want to injure one another.

That being said, IF that were the case somehow, I’d still consider it negligence on the parent’s part for allowing it to continuously happen.

 

[PetDetective]

Transcript of EG jail interview.
(furious, I'm going to have a cocktail or 3 and dinner with my husband, but will be back to rant tomorrow)

100% accuracy is not guaranteed.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1fAa1pXe_IXlv9WZ9uOizGk7X5PKrWLyr

You rock!

Ok, something I noticed that maybe FLA can answer. Does she normally say “um” before every sentence?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rsd1200]

I have no clue what is going through that man's mind. But I sure appreciated the "one-armed dwarf at the diner".

:laughing: That just cracked me up too. Much need levity DA!

 

[Busylady]

Do we know if he continuously had injuries or are we just seeing the same few incidents in pictures recycled over and over? There are so many pictures of Lucas where he looks just fine, but the ones with bruises are the ones being shown repeatedly.

I also wonder if being "rough" was just a way of life for them, police called on several occasions injuries reported but neither seemed to put a stop to it or leave one another over the violence.

 

[sleuther0192837465]

Forgive me, but I’m so angry & heart broken for this little boy:
So it wasn’t an abduction & he didn’t walk out the door on his own? What is really going on here? I’m so confused right now. I just want somebody to find Lucas...I’m so physically ill over ALL of this. It’s like he was everyone’s child, but no one’s all at once for as much as he was photographed & visited with all the different family members & as much as he was hurt & neglected...[emoji22][emoji174] Whoever JH thinks has him, PLEASE BRING HIM BACK so he is given the opportunity to know love & compassion. He will get it NOW. As he should have from the start. He could be with loving family members & heal from the pain inflicted upon him from those that were absent in heart. MOO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LisaWL7TR]

See middle of quoted post above

Y'all rock!

 

[n_6CC]

Great minds think alike. And after watching the interview on KWCH I have an opinion on why she kept saying she had to go and shouldn’t have talked to them. It seems to me she was changing the direction of the interview, trying to manipulate the conversation. Maybe she didn’t trust herself not to show her cards or get to close to the actual truth. I am in the camp that believes Lucas was gone long before the she reported it. I feel like the 16th is the likely date that whatever happened happened.

Hi- I am now wondering if the 2nd child endangerment charge on Lucas wasn’t charged because they know he wasn’t there on the 16th in the evening when the violation of endangerment occurred. Where was she, and Lucas at 3:00 the 16th? My only other thought is the 11th (providing he wasn’t at school of course) As maybe she left the baby alone taking a nap on the 16th and ran to the store to grab some
Thing real quick- got caught on CCTV, they initially charged her with two counts thinking Lucas was there- and then found out something different when it was investigated. The 11th makes sense too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[flute4peace]

Oh no, I don't think he made it up or hurt his own son. I'm just saying that whatever happened may not have been as serious as the documents state OR EG did it and the boys blamed JH to protect mom.

The timing of all of this has me all confused. He claims the child showed marks on the 4th. Is there any proof of this? Did he make a report anywhere? Was JH arrested for it? And if not, why did he wait 3 weeks, until after she was arrested, to come forward with it? To help LE in their inquiries about JH, perhaps? I can see that happening: Det is interviewing him & asks if JH had ever hurt the kids, Dad says "well as a matter of fact, this thing happened a few weeks ago" and the Det advises/encourages him to file a report?

Pure speculation

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

 

[Paddleboarder]

Having seen my share of these types of relationships I don't believe for one second EG kicked JH out or broke up with him. For starters, if she said she didn't then her ex would have run to court to get whatever custody she had revoked, so it's in her interest to lie about the situation with JH. Second, if she kicked JH out she wouldn't have been able to keep Lucas around, she would have been required to turn him over to someone (state, dad, some other member's of mom's family since mom was limited in her custody of Lucas), I believe EG would turned Lucas over because had she really kicked JH out as soon as bio mom or her family caught wind they would have raised a ruckus, esp since they have photos of abuse that occurred at the hands of EG. EG seems like a very selfish-narcissit, only concerned with her own happiness, if have JH around made her happy then she wouldn't give him up just to make her ex happy, know what I mean?

On the question of this court document and the apparent injury to EG's son. I see some folks speculating that maybe it was JH abusing Lucas, but I don't believe that is the case because Lucas' injuries occurred when JH wasn't around. I can't help but wonder if whatever happened with EG's son was a one-off since there have been no other allegations of abuse made against JH that I'm aware of OR if this "red" mark was as bad as the doc makes it sound. Remember, we're talking about a dad here who wants to keep his kids away from EG for whatever reason, so any suspect mark on the child is going to be used as evidence to prove abuse. I'm NOT saying this didn't happen I'm saying there is more to the story and as usual media is taking the tabloid route without investigating first.

Exactly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[n_6CC]

I suggest everyone to re-watch the full interview with this thought in mind: EG's statements may be literally true (and perhaps she is practicing for a polygraph.) http://www.kwch.com/video/?vid=475560153

What if Lucas accidentally died sometime after February 11 when he was last seen. EG is genuinely grieved, but knows if she reports it she will definitely lose her kids, and maybe JH. So, she decides to get someone to help her. Suppose she calls someone from a payphone and that person is the black smoking man who comes to the house. He agrees to help her. Recall there is a white SUV backed up to the driveway on Feb. 13. I am not sure whose vehicle this is (and Kansas does not open motor vehicle registration records except to law enforcement).

If that is the theory, she makes it through the entire interview without blatantly lying (except maybe about the identity of the people she claims she saw, but maybe she did photograph two people walking down the street for cover). She did not "hurt" Lucas (accident maybe with drugs). She does not know where he is (only her conspirator does). Lucas "fell asleep" when EG did after her shower (and maybe did not wake up). It was that emotional point in the interview for her at which she ended the interview. His death was too real to her. She may be lying about the bruising, that it is all roughhousing, but those are not lies that would implicate her in what happened to him and she can deal with that. Perhaps we believe her grief, but this theory explains both grief and wrongdoing.

JH has been silent. He is last recorded saying he believes his son is alive a week ago. Perhaps his silence is also grief and instructions from LE that the less they let a conspirator know they know, the better.

Thoughts?

I just responded to a quote saying the 11th as well- our VI said the white SUV is Emily’s. Unless he was in school, my idea is the 11th- She didn’t think about being heavily investigated when she “ran to the store” on the 16th without the children and wAs probably caught on camera doing it- Her daughter was probably sleeping and Lucas was already gone by the 16th


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[flute4peace]

Hi- I am now wondering if the 2nd child endangerment charge on Lucas wasn’t charged because they know he wasn’t there on the 16th in the evening when the violation of endangerment occurred. Where was she, and Lucas at 3:00 the 16th? My only other thought is the 11th (providing he wasn’t at school of course) As maybe she left the baby alone taking a nap on the 16th and ran to the store to grab some
Thing real quick- got caught on CCTV, they initially charged her with two counts thinking Lucas was there- and then found out something different when it was investigated. The 11th makes sense too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think they tabled the charge re:Lucas because they don't need it right now. That way if she happens to bail out, they can bring that tabled charge to keep her in custody. Good strategy (If that is the case here - I'm speculating).

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

 

[Soulmagent]

I think they tabled the charge re:Lucas because they don't need it right now. That way if she happens to bail out, they can bring that tabled charge to keep her in custody. Good strategy (If that is the case here - I'm speculating).

Sent from my SCH-I435L using Tapatalk

I think those first charges stem from the first few things she shared with the investigators. Later the investigators had evidence of what she said not being true. So in order to preserve a case of yet to be identified charges ,they cannot charge her with those charges because it conflicts with the theory of the case. IMO ONLY ...legal dance ..

 

[Mamabearto2boys]

Off topic: Social media comments are extra ridiculous tonight. I actually just googled “Arkensaw River” thinking that maybe that was actually the name (and spelling) of some local river that I know nothing about. Now I’m just ashamed of my browser history.

 

[n_6CC]

I think those first charges stem from the first few things she shared with the investigators. Later the investigators had evidence of what she said not being true. So in order to preserve a case of yet to be identified charges ,they cannot charge her with those charges because it conflicts with the theory of the case. IMO ONLY ...legal dance ..

That’s exactly what I am thinking now. Before, I was more of the “holding onto that 2nd charge” before all of this other information came out, and Henry put the timeline together . All of it together really paints a better picture for me, of course that picture can change at any moment-lol. Praying everyday for that little boy and the life he endured- I wish I had a glimmer of hope inside that still authentically believed he was still with us here on earth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LietKynes]

Off topic: Social media comments are extra ridiculous tonight. I actually just googled “Arkensaw River” thinking that maybe that was actually the name (and spelling) of some local river that I know nothing about. Now I’m just ashamed of my browser history.

RSBM

WS is a much more impartial and balanced site to visit to read accurate news.
Which is why most of us are here.

 

[GigTu]

Off topic: Social media comments are extra ridiculous tonight. I actually just googled “Arkensaw River” thinking that maybe that was actually the name (and spelling) of some local river that I know nothing about. Now I’m just ashamed of my browser history.

Hilarious. Huhked onn fonix.