I think I corrected you on this once before.
The only hominid for which we have DNA is Neanderthal, and it shows we are not closely related. But the lack of DNA does not eliminate other specimens as being in our ancestral line.
For the other hominids we have to rely on morphology. There is no problem with inferring relationships with several of the archaic humans, and from there on back.
This is one of the interesting specimens:
Some new fossils from Herto in Ethiopia, are the oldest known modern human fossils, at 160,000 yrs. The discoverers have assigned them to a new subspecies, Homo sapiens idaltu, and say that they are anatomically and chronologically intermediate between older archaic humans and more recent fully modern humans. Their age and anatomy is cited as strong evidence for the emergence of modern humans from Africa, and against the multiregional theory which argues that modern humans evolved in many places around the world.
I don't doubt that hominids were real, particularly homo erectus and the neanderthal; I simply do not think we're related to any of them, at least not via any process resembling evolution. Moreover, when you go back to Lucy and her kin, I strongly suspect you're talking about monkeys and not apes or hominids.