Stepfather of girl, 18, who's was missing for 20 days arrested after breaking into home nearby

He claims he found the jacket she was wearing hidden the couch of the home

The stepfather of a teenager who has been missing for 20 days has been taken into police custody amid claims that he knows who has taken his daughter.

Anjelica 'AJ' Hadsell, 18, has been missing since March 2 and her stepfather Wesley Hadsell, 36, was taken into custody on Saturday after being interrogated by police for more than 15 hours.

Wesley has been locked up on six charges including four charges of obstructing justice, one charge of possessing ammunition after a felony and one charge of breaking and entering.

'I was just trying to make the evidence come to light. It's not like I had the jacket, I didn't plant the jacket, I didn't know anything about that. It was the fact of the overwhelming information that led me there.'

Wesley is currently being held without bond and the Norfolk Police Department are not currently refering to him as a person of interest or a suspect in AJ's disappearance.

If he's not a person of interest, and he's not a suspect, could the police be holding him to prevent him from messing up the current investigation? Especially by going in that home and finding that jacket, would that jacket now be inadmissible in a court of law against the owner of the home if it's later found he is responsible for the girl's disappearance?

Any LEO's can you help with this? Or Lawyers? Or would it be admissible since it was found by a civilian without a warrant, and not a LEO?

I understand the father's desperate need to find his daughter or the person responsible, but at the same time, I'd want that person in jail and not want to mess up the criminal investigation. But at the same time, I understand the need for vigilantism. I hope they find this girl to give this father some closure.

a reply to: Anyafaj

He's being held on six charges, none of which are really directly related to the crime. However, because he is being held without bond, they're lying if they say he's not a person of interest. He found her jacket under a couch, what are the odds of that??

Most criminals cannot resist returning to the scene of their crime, and often like to get as close to the police as they can because they get off on the whole sick thing. Either there is information missing, or he's guilty and they've got his cell bugged in case he blabs to a cellie.

originally posted by: FissionSurplus
a reply to: Anyafaj

He's being held on six charges, none of which are really directly related to the crime. However, because he is being held without bond, they're lying if they say he's not a person of interest. He found her jacket under a couch, what are the odds of that??

Most criminals cannot resist returning to the scene of their crime, and often like to get as close to the police as they can because they get off on the whole sick thing. Either there is information missing, or he's guilty and they've got his cell bugged in case he blabs to a cellie.

Certainly a possibly of course. Also apparently he had a lot of ammunition, but I noticed no gun was mentioned. He did have past crimes, but he claims past all that now, again, possible, then again who knows. I wish they had pictures of the house to see just how torn apart it was, or was it nice and neat? To determine how easy it might have been to find this jacket? Also, I'm curious it was released what she was wearing the day she disappeared, friends must have gave a description, since she was heading home.

Also, if the neighbor IS a suspect, what made him suspect the neighbor? Big if.

a reply to: FissionSurplus

Most criminals...

From what I understand most murders and missing persons cases in this scenario are largely unsolved. As in there are less cleared crimes then their are cleared meaning that the police would only have you believe they are better at this then what they really are or am I wrong?

a reply to: Anyafaj

There is a possibility that his being there, in the home he broke into, may have contaminated the location.

When the forensic services look into a location, they take tape lifts to pick up hairs, transfer of small trace evidence, they can take footprints from the carpets or floors, they examine fingerprints to be found in the location, and they look for blood.

When a person comes into contact with the world around them, they automatically collect about themselves the evidence of where they have been, and to a certain extent, what they have been doing. Forensic technicians find these evidences on any surface or object that a person might have come into contact with. The problems with this mans actions therefore, are two fold.

First, breaking into the house which contained the jacket, means that the police cannot base their investigation on evidences collected there, unless they discover another route of investigation which leads them to require to search the place. If they were to take the man at his word, and search the place anyway, they could be on shaky ground legally, in terms of securing prosecution in the event of criminal proceedings being bought against someone for the disappearance of the young lady in question.

But further to that, the step father has potentially contaminated what could be a crime scene, by getting his boot prints, finger prints, hair, skin, and trace evidence from HIS life, all over the place, something he would have found impossible to avoid. You can glove up, you can put your head under a balaclava to keep the hair and skin from getting out, but there really is not any way to one hundred percent avoid leaving some trace evidence in a place, not unless you went in wearing a paper suit, and were bloody careful about it!

The other problem with trace evidence, is that one person can lay down evidence, and another person can pick it up, simply by brushing a surface, or picking it up in the tread of a boot. So no matter which way you slice it, whether we are talking legally, or forensically, this break in was very ill advised at best, and at worst, suspect. If the man is a former criminal himself, he ought to have damned well known better, since methods such as those described above, will have been used to catch him out, no doubt.

a reply to: Anyafaj

The poor Man may simply be desperate to find his step daughter. Misery and/or uncertainty can play havoc especially so in times of tragedy.

I really hope the poor lassie turns up alive and well and the family in question can put this event behind them and move on with there lives.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Anyafaj

There is a possibility that his being there, in the home he broke into, may have contaminated the location.

When the forensic services look into a location, they take tape lifts to pick up hairs, transfer of small trace evidence, they can take footprints from the carpets or floors, they examine fingerprints to be found in the location, and they look for blood.

When a person comes into contact with the world around them, they automatically collect about themselves the evidence of where they have been, and to a certain extent, what they have been doing. Forensic technicians find these evidences on any surface or object that a person might have come into contact with. The problems with this mans actions therefore, are two fold.

First, breaking into the house which contained the jacket, means that the police cannot base their investigation on evidences collected there, unless they discover another route of investigation which leads them to require to search the place. If they were to take the man at his word, and search the place anyway, they could be on shaky ground legally, in terms of securing prosecution in the event of criminal proceedings being bought against someone for the disappearance of the young lady in question.

But further to that, the step father has potentially contaminated what could be a crime scene, by getting his boot prints, finger prints, hair, skin, and trace evidence from HIS life, all over the place, something he would have found impossible to avoid. You can glove up, you can put your head under a balaclava to keep the hair and skin from getting out, but there really is not any way to one hundred percent avoid leaving some trace evidence in a place, not unless you went in wearing a paper suit, and were bloody careful about it!

The other problem with trace evidence, is that one person can lay down evidence, and another person can pick it up, simply by brushing a surface, or picking it up in the tread of a boot. So no matter which way you slice it, whether we are talking legally, or forensically, this break in was very ill advised at best, and at worst, suspect. If the man is a former criminal himself, he ought to have damned well known better, since methods such as those described above, will have been used to catch him out, no doubt.

That's what I was thinking, anything they gain from his knowledge can technically be called "fruit of the poisonous tree". (WAY too many crime shows) They have to find a way that THEY would have gained it regardless, and without HIS DNA on it. So essentially he could have screwed the case for them, unless, that was his intent to begin with??? Which could be a possibility.

a reply to: Anyafaj no offense ,but if it was my stepdaughter ,and I found her jacket, in a house that I suspected, of being the person who abducted her , wouldn't wait for the police to conduct my own investigation physically, and it would yield results

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Anyafaj

The poor Man may simply be desperate to find his step daughter. Misery and/or uncertainty can play havoc especially so in times of tragedy.

I really hope the poor lassie turns up alive and well and the family in question can put this event behind them and move on with there lives.

Whether the stepfather was grief stricken and not thinking clearly, or involved and wanted to implant himself in the investigation and muck it up, no matter what, I hope that girl is alive and well somewhere, however it's been 20 days and no contact from her, which is never a good sign.

originally posted by: darylpriest
a reply to: Anyafaj no offense ,but if it was my stepdaughter ,and I found her jacket, in a house that I suspected, of being the person who abducted her , wouldn't wait for the police to conduct my own investigation physically, and it would yield results

I know what you mean. I'm a very protective Mama bear when anyone messes with my kid.

a reply to: Anyafaj

I tend to agree 20 days is rather an extended period of time to go with no contact or information as to the girls whereabouts or condition. Lets just hope the she turns up safe and sound rather than turning up dead or worse becoming one of the millions of missing young adults and simply another statistic.

Also, they can't discount that he may have been planting evidence to lead the police in a dif direction.

a reply to: Anyafaj

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Also, they can't discount that he may have been planting evidence to lead the police in a dif direction.

a reply to: Anyafaj

Very true, especially if HE is a suspect and the police just aren't saying so. He could have tried to plant the jacket to misdirect the investigation and tried playing "Oh looky what I found." Only the police may not be buying it.