Friday, June 8, 2018

Stepmother of Lucas Hernandez Emily Glass Dead



Emily Glass, stepmother to deceased 5 year old Lucas Hernandez, was found dead early Friday in a Wichita home. 

Wichita police Officer Charley Davidson said during a press briefing that officers responded around 1:40 a.m. after Jonathan Hernandez called to report finding his former girlfriend, Emily Glass, dead of a gunshot wound upon arriving at his Wichita home.

Davidson said officers found a rifle at her feet and three suicide notes in the home. Hernandez said in a statement that Glass killed herself. Davidson said the official cause of death will be determined by the coroner's office.

Glass, 27, reported Hernandez' son, Lucas, missing on Feb. 17. She told police she last saw Lucas playing in his bedroom before she took a shower and fell asleep.

On May 24, Glass led David Marshburn, a private investigator hired by Lucas' father, to the boy's decaying remains. The boy's body had been hidden under a culvert bridge about 20 miles (32 kilometers) north of Wichita and covered with debris.

Emily Glass was indicated for deception and guilty knowledge in the child's death.  Her language revealed two things:  Lucas was dead and she knew where his body was located. 


A private investigator listened to her for 11 hours and obtained the location of the child's remains. 

This is analysis from March, 2018. 


Statement Analysis training can solve cases before an investigation commences. 

This is a telephone interview with a journalist. 



Q. There’s obviously a lot of rumors going on, a lot of things that people are saying about your stepson Lucas, just curious if there’s anything that you wanna say about that situation?
A. Ehm, yes, ehm, in the past, you know, there’s been times he's being a boy and playing with older brothers and his cousins, ehm he gets bruises. He has had some falls… ehm… falls, you know, it could be there or at the porch ehm……. (pause), I’m sorry, ?...

We first note that she avoids giving a description of a single event, injury or incident, but speaks only in general terms. This is not simply indicative of avoidance, but suggests ongoing child abuse issues by the subject. This is a typical pattern heard from parents accused of child abuse and/or neglect. Introducing the word "porch" would immediately cause a child protective investigator to focus on that area of the house.

"Tell me about your house" beginning with a general question, moving on to note any repetition and/or avoidance of "porch" in te language.

A legally sound interview is one that holds up best in court.

The avoidance of a specific fall is important. It is likely at this point where she says, "you know", that she is considering a specific fall; likely one of significance.

That he has fallen and has been bruising roughhousing is likely true, but note that it avoids conclusive language and any denial of causing bruises.  This is technically truthful in the sense that kids fall and bruise.  Yet note that she enters into a hina clause of the need to explain not how, but why, he got bruises, with "he's being a boy"; rather than "he got bruised playing with his other brothers."

The need to explain "why" (not "how") he bruised should be considered with the incomplete information about bruising.  It is likely that at this point, the subject is concealing another source of his bruising. 



Note also "with older brothers" drops a common pronoun of possession.  


Q. No, you’re fine, take your time
A. He’s my son too, you know. I may not have given birth to him, but he's my baby boy… (pause)… I take care of him every day, you know, ehm, I ? ah… (long pause), this is very painful that this is happening at a time like this, right now

In missing child case, we view the Linguistic Disposition towards the victim.

A parent, caretaker, relative or close friend will care for the safety and wellbeing of what the missing child is currently experiencing. The unknown can drive them to the point of trauma. Someone who cares for a child cannot bear the unknown; it goes against instinct and it goes against habitual care.

When the baby cries, the mother soothes the baby. When the child falls, the "boo boo" is kissed and comfort given.

When a child is in the hands of a stranger, in an alleged kidnapping, the focus of the subject is always going to be what the child is experiencing, which pales out everything else. The focus or "Linguistic Disposition", which is measured, is to be positive (measure) and the priority.

Here we find the subject expressing empathy for herself.

Analytical Question:  What is her linguistic disposition towards the victim's plight?

As a missing 5 year old, we expect her, his "mother" with her "baby" to indicate concern for his present circumstances.  

We continue to wait to hear empathy for the victim.  As "missing", we expect to hear human empathy over what he is going through at the time of this interview:  who is caring for him, is he getting fed, his favorite toy, etc.  

Similar to the McCanns'  interviews:  they showed no linguistic concern for what Madeleine was experiencing, as biological parents, because they knew Madeleine was beyond their help, intervention or concern. Concerned parents show no concern for a child for a reason:  the child is beyond their realm of parental concern.  

Video of McCann interview analyzed.  


Q. Do you have any idea where Lucas might be at this point?

The pauses have been added by the transcriber. A pause means the subject needs time to think, which indicates sensitivity.
A,… (long pause)…. ah… but if anyone does know, please say something because me and dad are worried sick… you know…. I keep thinking and keep thinking what could have happened, you know… And I keep thinking back to these two people… ehm… that were outside of my house a few days prior… ehm, ‘twas a black man and white woman

The word "but" refutes and/or minimizes by comparison, that which preceded it.

"please say something" is deemed "appropriate" but it is weak as analysts have noted. It may be due to the now common expression about "see something; say something" in the United States. We do, however, expect more, such as "call police right away", etc.

"say something" is appropriate (acceptable) but then she adds on why someone should "say something"

"because" she and the dad's comfort is disrupted. "...say something because me and dad are worried sick."

This is a positive linguistic disposition towards self. It is not an expression of concern for the victim.

One should consider that:
a. Step mother is sociopathic and has no concern for the child or
b. Step mother knows or believes that the child is beyond her concern.

This latter (b) was evident in the McCanns. I did not see sociopathic indications or elements in Kate McCann's language.

In step mother's other statements, she does not indicate, even in the small sample, sociopathic indicators. We would need more sample to work from. She is concerned about herself, and shows no concern for the victim.

She then introduces two people.

She is thinking a lot, and is, at this question, very aware of the interviewer.  

She introduces "these" two people.  The word "these" indicates closeness.  With such closeness, we might wonder what the relationship and quality of contact was.  If she suspects them, we expect "those people" along with suspicion and linguistic concern for Lucas. 

We should consider the possibility of "narrative building" (story telling) with the language of, "a black man and white woman."

We should also be concerned about a drug purchase. There may be elements of fabrication stitched together with reality. 

This next question and answer impacts the previous analysis. 

Did she say "standing" outside?  If so, we can compare how "standing" is analyzed with how "staying" is analyzed below. The editing of the article is worthy of criticism. 




Q. Do you know them?
A. No, they were staying outside ? approx…. approximately 3 early morning, so I went out there and be like, hey, is everything okay, do you need to come inside or you stand here or you … stay here just like… no, I felt like I offended them or something… eh. And I said okay, I'm sorry, it's cold outside and I didn't know if you needed to come in, you know. I was just being nice. They stuck around for maybe 10, 15 more minutes. I actually did snap a picture of them walking away because I wanted to send it to their dad to say hey this is what's going on. Because I'm at home alone.

a. "standing outside" analysis
b. "staying outside" analysis

a. "standing outside":

They were not "outside", but they were "standing."  This is a body posture that indicates lack of movement.  Therefore, in her mind, time is stopping with this increase of tension.  This suggests that the presence of "these" two people is now very important to her.  In her mind, time is now stopped.  What follows is critical; even if there is falsehood within the account (such as race/sex):

"standing outside" slows down the pace and now introduces language:

"talking

This is an indication of her involvement in the communication.  As we progress through the statement, pause here and enter into her verbalized perception of reality. 

"standing outside"
"talking" and
"smoking a cigarette"  



All of these observations are unnecessary. Yet for the subject, they are critical. 
She compares the time ("actually") with another time.  This is to affirm the "stopping" of time in her statement.  This suggests that there was more communication between her and them than she wishes to let on.  We are now given more insight:

a.  "so I went out there" tells us that she has a need to explain why she went out there, because she anticipates the interviewer asking her. She is pre tempting the question.  The interviewer may not have even thought of the question had she said, "I heard two people talking outside my house..."

b.  ""so I went out there to be like hey is everything okay?"

She goes on to explain, again, why she went out there. 

We now can safely know:  She went outside with them for another reason. The reason is so sensitive to her that she employs deception (two blues here). 

What was the reason?

c.  "to be hey like is everything okay?" indicates the need to be seen as a good person.

This helps answer the question, "Why did she go out there?"

We may know that she went out there for something that makes her "the bad guy"; that is, for an illegal illicit reason. 

This could be a drug purchase.  This could be worse. 

Either way, it is related to the disappearance of the child. 

The use of "like" is to avoid telling us the genuine, but to characterize instead. 

She continued:  

Do you need to come inside? Are you stranded? 

She did not say that she said these things.  This lack of verbal commitment is narrative building. 

They were just like, no and just like looked at me like I offended them or something.


The communication was intense, with "looked at me":  

 "And I said okay, I'm sorry. It's cold outside and I didn't know if you needed to come in. I was just being nice. They stuck around for maybe another 15 or 20 minutes. I actually did snap a picture of them walking away because I wanted to send it to their dad to say hey this is what's going on. Because I'm at home alone."

We now know why she keeps "thinking" about them.  As narrative "strangers" she "actually" (dependent, comparison) "did snap" a picture of them walking away.  

She anticipates being asked, "Why did you take their picture?"

She anticipated this so intensely, that she revisited the explanation even further.  The tension ("I'm sorry") is high and she was "just" (dependent, comparative) being "nice."  This tells us she is comparing her behavior with something else.  

Staying Outside 

There is a significant difference between the words.  We are not certain which she said.  

b.  "staying outside" indicate that the subject attempted to get them to come indoors (as stated) but their refusal is something that was very important to her.  Remember, she was asked a "yes or no" question only. 

Every word after the word "no" becomes critical. 

We note that in this recall, she portrays herself as the "good guy", which in analysis indicates the opposite. 

We note that she has given them a good deal of volume of words, which must be compared with:

What we know about the victim. 

What do we know about the victim from the step mother's words only?

This answer is important. 

She relates him, repeatedly to herself, via possessive pronoun. 
She changes him, linguistically, which must then be viewed in each specific context. 
She avoids using his name. 
She talks about him being bruised, avoiding all specifics, tagging "normal" (factor) which indicates to the contrary, removes herself from the equation (care for self; not victim, by sending him elsewhere) and introduces some words that likely indicate specific child abuse/neglect events, including the porch and cooking. 

Note that Neglectful parents often boast on how accomplished their children are in terms of self care that is not age appropriate. 

"I'm sorry" often finds its way into those with guilt, no matter what context it is found in. 

By them "staying outside", they did not yield to her will.  This is very important:

Her will, whatever it was, in context of Lucas being missing, was not followed.  

I am very concerned about this difference.  She anticipated being asked, "Did you take a picture of them?" which is not something an investigator or an interviewer would have thought to ask without some prompt from her.  This is how we see the high level of sensitivity in the word "because" in her statement. 


Q, Did you end up sending that picture to Jonathan?
A, Yes, I did, I did : he’s my baby boy…. he has sisters and he has brothers. He's so loved

She wanted proof of someone's presence regarding the disappearance of Lucas.

She claims ownership repeatedly in the context of this picture. Was she under some form of threat, prior to this event, where others said they were going to remove him from her custodial care? Was money involved?


Q. Now, Emily, I hope you understand I do have to ask you because of, you know, the arrest and because a lot of rumors; did you hurt Lucas?
Q. I did not. I would never hurt my son.

The follow up should have been something about the two people hurting him; this would have given her opportunity, according to her profile, to shift the blame to others. It was a missed opportunity, but it is easy to criticize the interviewer here, but he was up against "the clock"; that is, anything he says could cause her to hang up.


Q. Do you have any idea what could have happened?

poorly worded. Better, "What happened to him?" By using "any idea", he allows her to drift from what she knows; away from experiential memory and on to hypotheticals or former news stories or simply imagination. Although these can produce information from analysis, best is to use the Assumptive method: she knows what happens and has a psychological need to release it verbally.

A. Pause.. I mean, I have ideas but that ideas, I mean… ehm… I really should have spoken to you, ehm… through my attorney, but eh… I have (one thing?)

Here is the entrance of the need for an attorney. It was worth taking the chance by the interviewer, but it did produce defensive posture.

To have kept her on the phone, (I don't know if there was a time limit but there may have been), best to ask her things according to her own language. He did see her focus on self. Therefore,

"Tell me what you did for him"
"What was a typical day of caring for him like for you?" (note focus on her)
"Did anyone ever help you caring for him?" *(note avoidance of his name; we avoid using his name if she avoids using his name. We allow her to gain comfort by distancing herself from him).

"Were you his primary care taker?"
"Why didn't others help you?
"What could others have done to make things better for you?"

This slow progression of questions allows her to be exactly who she believes she is: the victim.

There may have been a 15 min time limit.
OK, yeah, is there anything else you wanna say?
I do want peop… I mean, I do want people to know my side, I’m just not there yet, you know… ehm…  ‘cause there is a huge history between Lucas’ family from New Mexico and I and all of the accusations… A majority of the time when he had gotten hurt and ended up with bruises, he wasn't under my care because I would send him off with my cousins and there's older boys over there and he's a very little, small boy and he can get hurt easily and when he's playing with older boys who are like 10 years old, even though we'd say hey Lucas be careful. We had to tell him all the time you know, be careful

Note that she did not call him "Lucas" in her Linguistic Disposition. Here we have Lucas' family and what "we" "would" say. This is not her linguistic disposition towards him, but further distancing language and blame shifting.

Here she uses a form of subtle distancing regarding the bruising. First, she shifts the bruising away from her responsibility with the needed explanation of why this is so.  Rather than saying, "he bruised at his cousins'" she gives a more lengthy explanation.  This takes extra effort which, for a 5 year old, may be unnecessary. 



Next, she switches from "I" to "we", which indicates:  she does not want to be psychologically "alone" in context of bruising.

Who is the victim?

We had to tell him all the time you know, be careful
The flow of the interview is better discerned than the edited news story. Here we find the flow, or context, to be more natural and clear.

Who is the victim in this event?

The linguistic disposition towards the victim indicates a subject in need of persuasion of her audience of being a good mother. Yet, she does not tell us anything about him of significance until this point:

We had to tell him all the time you know, be careful

We now know.

What happened to Lucas was Lucas' fault. His behavior brought this on. "We" did not tell him to be careful; we "had to tell him all the time", not just sometimes. He would not listen. This was his fault.

She is the victim and even as such, she wishes to be the victim with someone else ("we") which further tells us of her own personal responsibility in what happened to Lucas.

If Lucas had only listened to "them" ("we") then they would not have had to tell him this "all the time." This is taxing and it is to show concern for herself and the other person, and not for the victim.

Verbalized Perception of Reality

Statement Analysis recognizes that the words one uses is not reality, but the subject's own verbalized perception.

Lucas' behavior "made" her and someone else "have to" caution him. It was so often and so taxing that it was "all the time." Plus, he had to wear a pull up because he always had accidents.

The Linguistic Disposition towards the victim is Negative.

He "deserved" what befell him in the step mother's verbalized perception of reality.

We hear this in the language of child abusers...routinely.

Q. So you’re saying that all of those bruises and those things from the pictures and the accusations are all from him being a little boy and playing with other boys?

leading questions should be avoided; they allow for conclusion and to use his language. It is to directly reduce her stress.

A. Absolutely. Him and my older boys would be rough around the house and they would even get rug burn, you know, just normal boy things

"Absolutely" is persuasive and unnecessary. She continued to avoid any specific event (timing) but introduced:

"normal" which indicates anything to the contrary and

"burn" which means child protective investigators needed to check the victim's feet for cigarette burns in prior reports as well as current investigators seeking to learn if fire was used to cover a crime.


Q. Is there anything that you would want to say to Lucas if you could right now?
That I love him very much and I want him home

She loves him. She wants him home.  

How is he doing?

Q. Is there anything you want to say to the people who are saying you had something to do with this?

This is a good question and it allows for her to deny the obvious; particularly as she is in jail.
A. No, ‘cause that's on them it's not my concern

She avoids issuing a denial. She puts the burden upon "them" (this is very insightful for how to conduct the interview) and we now see that she is not concerned about them.

She is not concerned about Lucas.

She is, however, thinking a lot about "these" 2 people.

She may be banking on creating doubt by using them as a tangent.

Q. Can you tell me more about what happened that Saturday when he disappeared?

He asks for "more", instead of, "What happened when he disappeared?" It is a subtle mistake. It produces "just" below:
A. Just the fact that I took a shower and he took a nap like we always do. I put him down for a movie in his pull up because, you know, he has accidents when he sleeps so that's why he had a pull up on. Ehm… he had fallen asleep after my shower which is why I went down… I gotta go

Sexual Abuse is indicated in the language.
Possible drugging of child
She "put him down" as a 5 year old child. I believe her. This may have been a habit. It could be anything from cough syrup to illegal drugs so she could get her "shower" and "nap."

Reporter: I understand

Analysis Conclusion:


Analysis Conclusion: Deception Indicated in the disappearance of her step child, Lucas Hernandez.  She is not only deceptive, but she withholds critical information while seeking to shift blame to another.  

The language indicates both substance abuse and child abuse.  She may have drugged the victim. 

Victim Blaming

The human brain seeks to justify wrongdoing.  Child abusers (and child killers) are often skilled in the subtle blaming of the victim.  In shaken baby cases, the subject says things such as, "the baby would not finish her bottle" or "he would not stop crying" which puts the blame upon the victim's behavior. 

Emily Glass blames Lucas Hernandez.  He would not listen and he made her (and someone else) always have to tell him to be careful.  This is a very subtle justification for what befell him. 

It was his fault.  

The context is vital:  the child is "missing" and the expectation is that the parent or caretaker will show a majority of the language (priority) with what the child is going through currently.  This is something that can drive a parent crazy with worry.  Yet, the parent's focus is so acutely honed in upon the child, that the parent will neglect his or her own health, which is reflected in the language.  It is all about the child. 

Kyron Horman. 

There are some examples of this in the blog, such as the missing boy, Kyron, of which his mother's language (Desiree Young) should be compared to his step mother's, Terri Horman's language.  One indicates nothing but concern for Kyron, while the other shows guilty knowledge of his death.  

Setting:  Note the need to explain why the 5 year old wore pull ups is stated in a jail house, while the child is alleged to be missing. 

She denied "harming" him but did not deny killing him or selling him for drugs. If he was taken in a drug transaction, for example, she is not the one who "harmed" him, but the recipients did.  This is compartementalizing of guilt. This minimization is consistent with her subtle blaming of the victim. 

Sexual Abuse

 Although I need more for a definitive analysis, I believe he was likely sexually abused as was his step mother in her childhood. The explanation for this is beyond the scope of a blog entry.  Advanced Analysis Training for social workers, therapists and Sex Crimes Units goes into linguistic indicators of such, and explores it from the psycho-linguistic profile. 

The two people are very important to her and may be something she is concentrating upon for the purpose of shifting blame from herself by creating a doubt.  Even with elements of fabrication, this may be her hope as she is, indeed, giving it much thought. 

Also, the need to pull in the "father" is to be noted.  She may shift blame to him in some manner, down the road, and he is likely a source of child abuse, including exposure to domestic violence, in the child's short life. 

Psycho-linguisitc profile:


Emily Glass is a strong candidate for obtaining a confession (or admission) in an Analytical Interview. Given the correct interview and a well chosen interviewer, she could give up the information on what happened to him.  The interviewer should use her words as much as possible, and an empathetic male interviewer may prove most effective.  He should be very willing to "clear" her in any manner possible.  She wants to speak.  

Tangent



In the interview, let Emily Glass  be the "victim" in the interview and pity her for all her "endless struggle" to keep him "safe."  Let the scenario of "...if only others had supported her in getting him (Lucas) to be careful..." 

Let her be the "good mom" who is misunderstood.  

Bluff 

The interviewer should be willing to "expose" information about a "suspicious male seen in the area" and allow her to alleviate her guilt of neglect.  She should be taken through her own childhood and the failure to protect she, herself, experienced growing up.  She should be permitted to focus on herself, and how much she sacrificed for Lucas and how she did the very best she could, with so little support from others...and so on.  

She does not present as challenging in this short phone interview. If the interviewer will allow her to separate areas of guilt in the interview, and then allow her to accept only a small area of guilt ("self medicating" instead of drug abuse) and permit her "freedom" from child abuse, she is likely to reveal what happened. 

Like the McCanns, she shows no concern over what he is going through in the present, while "missing."

She knows he is not "missing" and she knows he is beyond her care. 


Deception Detection Training.

We offer seminars for law enforcement, business, private sector, social workers, medical professionals, lawyers and all those interested in lie detection, content analysis and profiling.

Our profiling is used to identify the authors of anonymous threatening letters and emails.

Advanced Seminars available for Sex Crimes Units.

Complete Statement Analysis Course is done in your home, at your own pace, with 12 months of e support. Joint Seminars with Steve Johnson, retired detective and analyst, with hand writing analysis.








84 comments:

MP said...

This is terribly sad, Emily Glass clearly did not want to face justice, she leaves a young daughter.

From Lucas' mom.

Jamie Taylor-Orr, said in a statement released Friday that Glass "chose to end her own life." "This is not the ending we would have chosen for Emily. She was the only person on this earth who could tell us what the last moments of our child's life were like," the statement said. "We wanted answers and we still want justice. Our hope is that the truth will still come out, that there will be answers to the many questions we have."

BornToCrochet said...

Peter, This is shocking news! Do you think she was overwhelmed by guilt?

Laura said...

I dont think it was guilt.

Lucia D said...

Do you think there is any chance she confessed to what she did to Lucas in her suicide notes?

rjb said...

OT:

Peter, I hope you are going to cover the Netflix show "The Staircase" like you did with "Making a Murderer." I'm watching it now and think I'm picking up on some things. I would love to read your analysis, especially of the interview with the ex-wife.

Peter Hyatt said...

When someone expells info as she did, there is a void that takes place afterward.

She’s empty and no longer “relevant” and...

She was facing lengthy prison and universal hatred.

We now have two regrettable deaths.

It is sadness upon sadness.

When analysis is done and truth revealed, when possible, confrontation takes place where professional services can be mercifully administered.

Many years ago this was not the case and ask the mask was pulled off a child abuser, there was a gap of time.

He hung himself.

I do wish This woman coukd have been watched.

Peter.

Peter Hyatt said...

PS: yes to guilt. How much guilt, how much fear, self loathing, fear of what prisoners would have done etc etc. I don’t know.

I’d need a very lengthy statement to know her to understand. But “yes” to guilt. Guilt is not always remorse, nor does it lead to change.

Guilt can lead to suicide. Some fear actually adding more guilt by living one more day, and prefer death.

It’s complex.

Peter

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Momto7activeboys said...

Peter, I bet you are correct, the guilt was there, but remorse was too subtle an emotion to penetrate her darkness. Very sad all around.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Momto7activeboys said...

Imagrandma, I always enjoy your sharp posts. You're one of the great delights of coming here. Can I say "I hope you smiled today!" Blessings dear one.

tania cadogan said...

BBM

A Wichita, Kansas woman, who helped locate the decomposing body of her ex-boyfriend's son, was found dead Friday morning with a gunshot wound to her head along with three suicide notes and a rifle at her feet, according to police.

Emily Glass, 27, was a person of interest in the death of 5-year-old Lucas Hernandez after she led a private investigator to his decaying body under a bridge at the end of last month.

Glass’s former boyfriend, Jonathan Hernandez, called police around 1:40 a.m. after he found her body inside his home, saying she killed herself, Wichita Police Officer Charley Davidson said during a press conference.

But the official cause of death will be determined by the coroner’s office.

In February, when Glass reported Lucas missing, Hernandez was not at home and Lucas’ mother, Jamie Taylor-Orr was not living in Wichita at the time. While Hernandez was absent for weeks at a time for work, Glass would watch her daughter and Lucas together. She told police she last saw him playing in his bedroom before she took a shower and fell asleep.

On May 24, Glass led David Marshburn, a private investigator hired by Lucas’ father, to the boy’s decomposing remains under a bridge covered with debris about 20 miles north of Wichita.

It’s unclear if an autopsy and toxicology examination will determine how Lucas died because of the decomposed state of the body.

Police arrested Glass on suspicion of lying to authorities but she was freed as a person of interest in the ongoing case.

Hernandez said he no longer believes or supports Glass and was a “bit confused by” her release from jail in an interview for the podcast “Crime Stories with Nancy Grace” that aired Monday.

He also told Grace that Glass revealed to the investigator she panicked after she found Lucas dead in his bed one evening or morning, along with a recording of Glass in a shaky voice: “I can't do jail. I can't!”

Hernandez and Taylor-Orr said Glass “chose to end her own life” in a statement to the Wichita Eagle.

She added: "This is not the ending we would have chosen for Emily. She was the only person on this earth who could tell us what the last moments of our child's life were like. We wanted answers and we still want justice. Our hope is that the truth will still come out, that there will be answers to the many questions we have."

In an unrelated case, Glass was acquitted of child endangerment in which the prosecution accused Glass of smoking marijuana and driving her daughter to a restaurant one day before Lucas went missing.

In that case, documents revealed that Lucas was frequently seen with bruises and cuts, and once with black eyes. Officials were told at least twice that Lucas was being abused and the documents reportedly detail the boy's dysfunctional and violent family life.


The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/06/08/kansas-woman-found-dead-after-leading-investigator-to-boys-body.html

As a matter of interest and because i am a suspicious Hobs i would be interested to know if the suicide notes were confirmed as being written by her as in language and handwriting and also what the 911 call was like when her body was found,

If, as claimed, she found him dead in bed and panicked, what happened the night before, or even the day before?
Given the revelation of repeated cuts and bruising and that officials were allegedly told twice that Lucas was being abused, why was nothing done , or seems to have been done?
Will they now be investigating the former boyfriend?

There are still many unanswered questions.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sarahsmiles said...

Peter, It seems like she was blaming the boy (pathologizing him) by croticizing normal traits of a young child. I wonder if there is unconscious projection going on with these child abusers.

Jen said...

Peter, What do you think about all of these copycat suicides...Kate Spade, Bourdin, etc?

Anonymous said...

Could she be covering for the older boys actually abusing him and the strangers who she invited in her house hid his body?

Anonymous said...

The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that each year approximately one million people die from suicide, which represents a global mortality rate of 16 people per 100,000 or one death every 40 seconds. It is predicted that by 2020 the rate of death will increase to one every 20 seconds.

deejay said...

Isn't anyone else suspicious here? She kills herself right as the dad came home?? She used a rifle, which is really hard to aim at your own head. (They are too long to hold- so you have to aim it while pushing the trigger with a toe-- not easy to do.) She killed that poor little boy, so this may have been revenge, similar to the woman found hanged in California. Since this is such a messy family- the police should at least determine if the dad could have killed her. Bullet trajectories, powder burns, etc. should be checked. It just seems odd to use a rifle.

Bobcat said...

Hobs I agree with you, the boy's family wasn't caring for him either.
They call him "child" instead of using his name in their statement.

"He has had some falls… ehm… falls, you know, it could be there or at the porch ehm……. (pause), I’m sorry, ?..."

Very sad. RIP.

Anonymous said...

3 suicide notes? Sounds pre planned.

Anonymous said...

Someone must have made an issue of his bruises or it wouldnt have been brought up. And she places him with the older boys when bruisng happened

ima.grandma said...

We have her written statement testified and submitted into legal court proceedings accepted as a statement of fact. The statement is available for examination as a matter of public record. The decision of the court was executed as legal binding judgment. If and when the suicide notes are made available for public viewing remains to be seen. Ethical and legal considerations will need to run its course.

Lucia D said...

I have those thoughts too. The medical examiner's report will be interesting.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jim89 said...

Deejay,

Of course it was murder, not suicide. The 1st thing I thought is "hmmm...3 suicide notes found right near her...that's the exact same thing as Hernandez' jail "suicide" (aka murder) with 3 suicide notes right at his feet. And she blew her own brains out? Unlikely...very rare for women to use that technique for suicide.

Jim89 said...

Ive known people locked up in Walpole...the guards leave the cells unlocked at night hopimg the prisoners will kill each other. Hernandez was killed. Glass was probably killed too.

ima.grandma said...

Whoever these “older boys” are, someone in a child protective governmental position is obligated to satisfy the requirements set forth in state administrative code, rules and regulations.

Jim89 said...

Anon at 10:11, That doesnt surprise me. Im surprised more people dont commit suicide. I see on FB how people shun mentally ill pepple...I treat them like normal people & comment on their posts etc. Now everyone on FB is posting that stupid quote about "Youre not alone...reach out""" pretending they are so concerned about suicide/mental . health . The truth is, in our darkest hours, we are lucky if there is ONE person who gives a shit or will listen. Very lucky. Most depressed people plummet to suicide bc they are treated like pariahs. I go out of my way to treat mentally ill people kindly bc but for the grace of God, there go I. God has sent me a listening ear in my darkest hour, miraculously. One person makes a difference, one kindness. We live in a very selfish & arrogant world.

ima.grandma said...

One in torment, especially a weak vulnerable person, is usually too afraid and helpless to inflict self pain. Assistance is required. It’s a myth that weak people selfishly commit suicide. Strength is the most critical component associated with the psychological profile of suicide. This personality trait is not seen in the subject.

Jim89 said...

Good observation, Ima. Certain illnesses will give a person suicidal ideation though.

ima.grandma said...

Yes, variables exist. The quotient quantifies as further studies are completed and published.

ima.grandma said...

Shame exponentionally interferes with the computation of the formula for predictable suicide.

Jim89 said...

Is there a way I can show someone a facial composite?

Me said...

Im not making this stuff up. I showed one person but did not say who the other half of the face was matched together with mine (both high school grad pics) & they were like "holy shit". I dont want anyone to know. Yeah I know I sound batshit crazy but Im
not.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...

The formula begins with the onset of thoughts one cannot comprehend. The confusion created in the mind is not understood. Impulsive reactions and avoidance of reality only exacerbates the situation until the psyche is out of control. Searching for pain alleviation, they seek enabling people and substances for restoration of sanity.

Me said...

What does that mean? "the onset of thoughts one cannot comprehend"?

Peter Hyatt said...

If the incomprehensible thoughts causes the brains ability to interpret pain, are they thus now discernible?



Peter Hyatt said...

Shame allows for identification and sourcing.

It’s articulated. Even if irrational it is identifiable and as such, dependent upon the source, helpful in predicting suicide.

Mike Dammann said...

"I did Lucas so wrong. I did him wrong."
This is listed as part of a recording left by her.

Mike Dammann said...

'I can't do jail, I can't!'
This one she said as well. She knew what she was facing and how prison inmate often treat inmates who are in there for hurting a child.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...

Invisible pain of chameleons at their best.

Me said...

Good question, Peter. I would think they would be discernible at that point. Thank you for helping clarify...I sometimes find Imagrandma's intellect a bit above my own.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
habundia said...

I listened to the interview he did with Nancy Grace (although i dont like her), i thought the father responded very calm and in some odd way very "relax".

Sure I am aware people can be totally different when home alone with their family and closed ones then they are when strangers are present, but the father didnt seem mad at all. He wanted anwsers but then again who knows what happens in the heat of the moment he could have snapped. Still I think she couldnt face the reality she caused a child to die and then hid the body and played an act since.....now the truth was revealed (body found with her help) she knew she was 'caught'

I my view she was a very selfish person till the end!

habundia said...

"I actually did snap a picture of them walking away because I wanted to send it to their dad to say hey this is what's going on."

"To their dad....who's they? Where did 'they' come from?

I was thinking....if his father was that often away for such a long time why didnt Lucas live at his mothers home when his father was not present? Especially when he was bruised that often and she had to go to court for suspicion of child abuse.
Why was he at her care to start with? Not as to blame but just curious why this boy was failed by so many as it seems��

Saint Theresa said...

What makes you think they’re “copycat “, I see nothing that even hints at either case is at all tied to the other only in ring in two very different successful businesses. No beef here. Just wondering what makes you post that. ‘‘Tis all.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
EdmundEarle said...

Mr. Hyatt, I have just discovered your blog, and I must tell you it is a most enticing combination of fascinating study into statement analysis, as well as the comments I find both profoundly insightful as well as entertaining. As a retired investigator from London, you may picture me as I am, pipe in hand, long plaid robe, sitting with the moonlight streaming in across my desk as I chuckle and marvel at what I am reading. I have a feeling that many a night will be spent perusing this blog. Good work, and well done, sir!

Mike Dammann said...

"Every human being is a puzzle of need. You must become the missing piece and they will tell you anything."

Very true.

"I'm a piece of sh*t. Do what now? I'm a piece of sh*t" says Glass in the recording.

"I did Lucas so wrong. I did him wrong. And that's the God honest truth," she goes on to say. "I can't do jail. I can't."
http://www.kake.com/story/38323058/i-cant-do-jail-podcast-reveals-more-in-emily-glass-recording
http://www.crimeonline.com/podcast/

Watts said...

"I actually did snap...." Is this an embedded admission from Emily Glass?

CptKD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Saint Theresa said...

Well said, man...I’m with ya.

CptKD said...

I'm questioning THIS Suicide-Call!

THAT said, the Investigating Officers HAVE NOT 'Technically' Labeled this Death a Suicide!
They're waiting for the Autopsy Results . . .
It's the Boy's Father, Jonathan Hernandez & The Bio-Mom Who HAVE Publicly STATED It as such ...

I DO NOT Believe THEIR Statements hold Weight - Nor do they carry much Water!

CptKD ⚖

CptKD said...

HERE - HERE!
I'm right 'Alongside' - Of the TWO of you!

CptKD 💕 xo

Duane11 said...

One has to question first alongside the linguistics, then forensics, returning to and confirming the investigation. There should not be celebration until such time.

CptKD said...

She IS - A Most 'SPECIAL' Human Being & The 'TRUEST' of Kinds, of Lady's ...
She is also one who 'Hosts' - A Trusting & Tender; Albeit now, a touch 'Tentative' ... Of BRAVEST & Fiercest Of Heart's!
Ima. Is a genuine 'Blessing' - A 'Soothing' Salve for the Soul!
&
Your Comment 'Momto7'
Lifted my Spirits - RIGHT When I needed it most!
I'd like to Thank 'You' for THAT! 💕

CptKD ⚖ x

CptKD said...

"There should not be celebration until such time."
Quoted from the above Comment, made by Duane11 @ 1249hrs on 6/11/18

I have to respond here & Point out . . .
There should NOT Be - ANY 'Celebration'!
Of any kind - At any time!
In any of these kinds of Cases!

There is NOTHING To be 'Celebrated' - If I may be honest!
Not by either/or 'Connected' Family. Nor via the Friends, affiliated through any involved party!

Crimes such as these, are DEVASTATING To those who are affected . . .
As I can assure you, there is NO 'Party' to be had - When embroiled & Forevermore etched, INTO & Attached, to THIS Savagery & Sadness!

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

Well well well?

Chloe Ayling kidnapper sentenced to 16 years in prison
Milan court convicts Lukasz Herba of kidnapping British model and demanding ransom

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/11/chloe-ayling-kidnap-plot-prison?CMP=fb_gu

Duane11 said...

I agree, anon, LE's conclusions & police work will be immeasurably helpful since the stepMom already started "singing".

tania cadogan said...

Hi John I saw. I thought she was excused having to appear in court which, if true was a big surprise and how could justice be served if she could not be cross examined. I still think she was involved as a Co conspirator rather than the victim based on all the discrepancies and changing stories. I hope he a peals as is his right under Italian law as per know and sollecito. I also hope if she was excused appearing,that they haul her as back into court. Apparantly she is suing for almost £500,000 which he is likely to be ever able to pay. Something is seriously off with her version off events.

Amyl Nitrite said...

https://www.dailywire.com/news/31710/bill-clinton-makes-most-amazing-freudian-slip-ever-hank-berrien?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

Slick Willy had a Freudian slip.

John mcgowan said...

Hi, Tania

Cases of this ilk, usually take a long time to be resolved, one way, or the other, years in fact.
Her language (in interviews and written) is littered with inconsistencies, temporal lacunae, an abundances of dropped first person pronouns, (I) she, at times, talks in the second person.

As we know. A event so traumatic (recalling so soon after, should be stamped with the pronoun (i) ), should ( in true will recall) be etched on ones mind forever. Speaking, using the second person, You, is distancing language.

Q: she maybe distancing herself from the trauma?
A: Not so soon, before she has processed the event.

It (her story) is not universal.

I still believe, going by her words, and language, she has pulled the "proverbial wool" over whomever was investigating.

tania cadogan said...

I agree John, i hope the guy appeals and his defence demand she testify. Who would let the alleged victim not testify as to what they allegedly suffered?
She looks to be trying to make a bucket load of money from this.
Even her version of what he did and how he supposedly offered to pay her ransom sounds unbelievable.
What kidnapper would offer to pay the ransom of his victim and who would abduct someone and then release them because they are a mother?
even stories written by children have a more believable plot line.

John mcgowan said...

Next stop, reality Tv etc..$$$$$$

EdmundEarle said...

I wouldnt be so quick to reach that conclusion anon, nor to act to haughty. There is no place for that kind of attitude in crime investigation. A tempered approach is the only way to proceed.

EdmundEarle said...

Well, I'd say I'm flattered, Momto7, although to be honest, that may be a slight misnomer...more like happy and feeling open to you and your thoughts. I've been retired for a long time, and to say it is refreshing to have others interested in these unsolved cases to talk to is a slight understatement. Thank you for your kind and soothing words. I'm just relaxing with some scotch, some Peter Hyatt statement analysis blog, interspersed with some Thoreau and good tobacco in my favorite pipe.

Victoria Stubbert said...

How could she lead the P.I.
to his body if she didn't do it/participate (at the very least in the burial)
Maybe her daughter was threatened to be next?
Maybe she couldnt tell what happwned due to blackmail/fear of retialation via hurting her daughter or maybe she did commit a murder.
I'm not sure

Peter Hyatt said...

The single most reliable element is human language.

Step mom indicated guilty knowledge of the child’s death.

Momto7 said...

Where was Dad during all the times she watched the boy? Was he really away?

Peter is right. Her language showed guilty knowledge of his death as well as sexual abuse from her own childhood.

Someone was punishing Licas with harsh punishments like standing outside in the cold. Mom enabled it by not defending him or calling cops. She may have been a victim of DV. I believe Lucas died either from freezing to death or a blow to the stomach. Someone was sexuslly abusing him and stepMom knew about it.

Peter Hyatt said...

150%


https://nypost.com/2018/06/12/nhl-stars-wife-accuses-teammates-girlfriend-of-shocking-harassment/

Lucia D said...

"there is a 150% chance that my fiancé Monika and I are not involved..." A complete social introduction, showing he feels a good relationship with her, the accused. Stated in the negative. And hmmm the word "chance" leaves open a possibility (a chance) that they are involved. Hyperbole aside, it is an awkwardly worded statement that avoids a direct denial. "We totally understand" is not only to share and spread responsibility, but to weaken "understand" with a qualifier. They wish "to solve this and figure it out" is redundant, the extra words, violating the principle of the shortest sentence being best. A very stumbling and unreliable statement, arising from the subject's need to deceive.

trustmeigetit said...

The main question I still have is why was she only a person of interest.

She took them to the body.

trustmeigetit said...

Depending on who you ask, both we’re connected to the Clintons. An awful law of Clinton associates have committed suicide.

Sadly nothing may ever really come of that theory even if it’s true.

trustmeigetit said...

I was wondering too. I was going to look to see if he has made any statements.

trustmeigetit said...

She likely would have faced the same fate as this poor child. I kinda wish she had.

Anonymous said...

It makes no sense that she wasn't charged with conspiracy to cover up a death. Even if she just KNEW about the body and its location and had no involvement, still, she would be charged! The cops must have had her wiretapped to see what "Dad" would say to her. That is the only possible reason they could have let her go free.

navon said...

@wisalallen
May 29

How are you suppose to feel when your life partner is missing? How long do you exhaust yourself from searching every coastline? How many days left of hope do I have before it’s time to start grieving? All I want is this to end. I just want to hold him and tell him it’s okay.

@wisalallen
May 29

Now that the holiday is over, I’m praying we can notify more authorities and have media coverage. I don’t care if anyone thinks its a lost hope, I just want his body to be found. I just need closure. I haven’t seen anything on any police or media site and it’s so heartbreaking

https://twitter.com/wisalallen?lang=en

Interesting statements on her twitter regarding a missing fiance. Only missing a few days. Just wants his "body" to be found........

MP said...

His is not a straight answer.

Why say chance, as if there is some uncertainty, and beyond 100% anything higher is unnecessary and even impossible,

trying to convince?

He does not say there is 100% certainty she was not involved, he talks about chances like there is a bet or a prediction, deceitful.

He knows for sure, no "chance" involved.

Also, his girlfriend has been accused, he has not, but he uses "we" to protect her.

"We totally understand there’s no place for cyberbullying,”

This seems to minimize what has been going on, according to reports. Someone has relentlessly targeted this woman, even after she lost her baby.


(I know people's appearances have nothing to do with SA, but the accused harasser reminds me of Jodi Arias, what a contrast between the two women's faces.)

Hey Jude said...

Why does he speak for his fiancée, and also assume joint non-responsibility for the harassment? He is including himself in something vile, of which, it appears, only his fiancée had been accused.

“We have nothing to hide.”


Alrighty....

John mcgowan said...

“There is a 150-percent chance that my fianceé Monika and I are not involved in any of the accusations that have been pursued (that are) coming our way. We totally understand there’s no place for cyberbullying,” Hoffman said in a statement. “We’ve offered to cooperate and do anything it takes to find out who is doing this, and support (the Karlssons). Obviously this is a tough time that they’re going through, and we want to find out who is doing this, because for some reason it’s coming into our court, and it’s 150 percent that it’s not us.

This shows he has a level (%) of chance not being involved or" "that it's not true". If this is his measure of truthfulness (most use 100% when measuring honesty/truthfulness) and another said you are 100% not involved, would he then say that they are wrong. We would then look to see if you uses any percentage below this ( 150%) to convince us of veracity in any subject (including this), if he does, we can then say (going by his language/interpretation) he is deceptive and or doesn't believe what he is saying, including this topic.
Also, if use any percentage higher than 150% to measure honesty, we can, again, conclude he doesn't believe what he is saying is true, including this case.
It (150%) is repeated making it sensitive, it's also in the negative.

Hey Jude said...

It's like saying there's more than a really high chance that his fiancée and he are not involved - it's hard to be convinced by someone who, rather than address the accusation against his fiancée, and defend her character, introduces chance, and with it the possibility that they are are both involved. He was not the one who was accused. His fiancée is accused - rather than make a straight denial, or express anger or upset at the accusations, which would be expected, he says they "totally understand there's no place for cyber bullying" and that they intend to 'support' her accuser. Meek and weak, if falsely accused - he speaks for his fiancée but he makes no effort to support or defend her. If he can't say it...

"for some reason It's coming into our court" - could he mean as in a return volley?

---

Maybe he is aware that forensic examination of their downloaded Facebook and other data could show activity from both their ISPs numbers at their physical locations at the dates and times offending posts were made.