VA - Anjelica "AJ" Hadsell, 18, Norfolk, 3 March 2015 #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe HE'S the person AJ was referring to in her text with the friend?

Yeah but the cousin had the conversation with AJ so wouldn't she know who it is. She seems all kumbya like with him. But he does have that controlling and probably tries to throw on the charm personality. So most likely the younger high school age kids would be more easily manipulated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have to find the news cast but on one of the news cast Wh alluded/said that he knew at least one of persons of involvement which means there could be others that maybe worked together.
I'm confused on this statement : WH: Okay, without saying it out loud, but yes someone has brought themselves to the forefront. They did interview them three times. And let’s just say someone happened to see something that maybe they didn’t want them to see... maybe a friend, you know, was hanging out with someone. There was a search warrant executed on this person and their house

I did think that one was a bit confusing, but I think I figured it out. This is what I think he is saying:

Okay, without saying it out loud, but yes someone has brought themselves to the forefront. LE did interview this person three times. (Here I think he is expecting the audience to assume that what comes next is his explanation to how they arrived at the FOLLOWING search warrant. He's jumping ahead of himself.)Let’s just say a neutral party happened to see something that the POI didn't want them to see. Maybe a mutual friend, you know, was hanging out with the POI. There was a search warrant executed on the POI and their house.

I think he is saying that some kind of mutual/neutral friend was hanging out with the POI and saw evidence of Anjelica having been at the house (maybe the jacket? or something else? keep in mind this could be a lie or the truth so IDK) or saw them texting or something and then alerted LE or the family and they were able to get a search warrant.
 
WH: "But lets just say I asked, they showed me a few pictures of stuff that was found I really couldn’t tell if it was my daughter’s stuff. It was just generic stuff that could be anybody’s. But they didn’t show me a picture of the jacket. I said: wait a minute, my wife told me you found my daughters jacket. Ok well, [the cops said] “we don’t know.” I said what do you mean you don’t know? It’s a Longwood softball jacket with her name stenciled into it. [the cops said] “We cant verify it’s hers because...” – I don’t know where he was going because I cut him off. I don’t have patience anymore. You mean to tell me this person of interest could have bought a Longwood softball jacket and had her name stenciled into it... because of what reason? He just calmed me down - “handled me” that’s what I call it."

If your daughter was missing, and you were told the jacket she was last wearing was found in a POI's closet, and you had the chance to ask the homicide detective about it, WOULD YOU CUT HIM OFF when he was explaining why it was not verified? I'd be hanging on his every word!

I also like the revealing way he described the way the detective has to deal with him---' he handled me'
 
"Possible estrangement" -- I had forgotten when I first learned about AJ missing from her mother's post to our grad class group that I had the feeling that she was separated. I scrolled through her facebook pictures and saw no evidence of a man in the family until way back when youngest was around a year old. All the comments I was reading at the time was oriented around the Mom being so upset. "Come back, AJ. You're worrying your mom," type comments. Then a few days in, WH shows up and mom just disappears.

Over night as I was mulling the interview, I also keyed in on the truck. I can't understand how the truck could get dropped off and him get back to work. How he arrived at the gas station and then ended up late back to work, all by himself. How he was confused how the truck went from one side of the driveway to the other, since AJ must have driven to the gas station in it, right? And what gives me the WORST feeling is how he is so adamant about being late back to work, "FACT", and getting in trouble as if that somehow proves he didn't hurt her? WHAT? That is not an alibi. That's called opportunity.

My thoughts exactly. How else did she get to the gas station? And for that matter, why in the world would you choose a gas station to meet at for a money swap on your lunch break? Assuming of course, anything WH said in this interview is actually true. And that's a huge leap...
 
He said in interview "Longwood softball jacket" but she is not on the Longwood softball roster so unless she helps the team (score keeper or something), she would not have a Longwood softball jacket...plus Longwood Softball has a FB page and there is NO mention of her going missing (you'd think they have the flier on there or something). So I am thinking that (in your pic) is the jacket and it is Norview.

She is not on the Longview Softball team. She played club softball. See link.

https://www.facebook.com/Kristin8news/posts/378151839038128
 
I think something happened when he dropped off the truck.
He says MOM leaves at 7 he didn't say what time he dropped it off.
No one was home.

But who was there waiting to take him back to work after he dropped off his truck? I would assume a coworker on a company truck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
WH: "[the cops said] “We cant verify it’s hers because...” – I don’t know where he was going because I cut him off. I don’t have patience anymore.

If your daughter was missing, and you were told the jacket she was last wearing was found in a POI's closet, and you had the chance to ask the homicide detective about it, WOULD YOU CUT HIM OFF when he was explaining why it was not verified? I'd be hanging on his every word!

I agree. My initial thought was that he was definitely tripping over himself trying to tie things together towards the end. In the interview, that pause after "we can't verify because..." made it sound like he intended to finish the sentence but then forgot what he was supposed to be saying. So there is an awkward pause and then he kinda brushes it away by changing the subject.
 
I did think that one was a bit confusing, but I think I figured it out. This is what I think he is saying:

Okay, without saying it out loud, but yes someone has brought themselves to the forefront. LE did interview this person three times. (Here I think he is expecting the audience to assume that what comes next is his explanation to how they arrived at the PRECEEDING search warrant. He's jumping ahead of himself.)Let’s just say a neutral party happened to see something that the POI didn't want them to see. Maybe a mutual friend, you know, was hanging out with the POI. There was a search warrant executed on the POI and their house.

I think he is saying that some kind of mutual/neutral friend was hanging out with the POI and saw evidence of Anjelica having been at the house (maybe the jacket? or something else? keep in mind this could be a lie or the truth so IDK) or saw them texting or something and then alerted LE or the family and they were able to get a search warrant.


Interesting. Something is kind of coming together for me.

We have a weird connection with this POI, who apparently found the credit card. AND COINCIDENTALLY, Uncle D was right there to take a picture of that evidence.

Is Uncle D a 'mutual' friend? Did Uncle D just happen to see this jacket? or something else?
 
But who was there waiting to take him back to work after he dropped off his truck? I would assume a coworker on a company truck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

or his brother with the white compact?
 
I'd sure love to hear what local LE thinks of this interview. To me, it reminds me of the smell every spring when the local farmers fertilize the fields for the first time.

MOO
 
With this interview, I'm convinced she never left the house alive, which would explain the freakish gas station "stare down," the red truck returning without AJ being seen, and much more, I'm extremely sorry to say. This is a not very smart very dangerous man, it seems to me.

Okay, so thank you, again, great job with the twilight zoney interview.
I agree. SM ends around 10:30pm on the 1st. She likely went to sleep at that time. She could have been awakened by "perp" on the 2nd and then she would no longer be in control of her phone therefore her SM. (IMO)
 
I think this entire thing of someone texting her is nothing more than a guy wanting to go out with her.
she feels like she shouldn't be talking to him because she has a BF but just maybe wants to keep talking to this guy. "HELP"to me was her asking for input "what should I do"?
 
And the same goes for the 200 bucks. According to the interview, the boyfriend just had his birthday yesterday? Or very recently. Why the big hurry for the $? The only time I have ever met my teen at the gas station was when she was out of gas and needed to get to work. Would you leave your job to give your daughter money to buy her boyfriend a present, when she had about 10 days until his birthday?


What was the big hurry?

Yes, not to mention - HE SPECIFICALLY SAYS that they never even discussed what she wanted money for. He just showed up and gave her $200 because he "figured" she wanted to buy a GoPro since he overheard them talking about it.

Um, so he overhears her saying she wants to get her boyfriend a GoPro. Then, a week later, she calls him in the middle of the day and asks him "can I get some money" which she never does. WH just ASSUMES she wants the money to buy a GoPro? Then gives her $200 then and there? Doesn't say "how much money do you need?" or "why do you need money?" at any point? That was maybe something he maybe should have brought up while they stared at each other in the gas station. She would have just bought the thing online anyway IMO.
 
And where were they the week before that he overheard the gopro convo? Wasn't she at Longwood?
 
>>There is no evidence of foul play. They have now publicly said they are not ruling out foul play. To me, that’s a small victory for my daughter because before they said there was no evidence of foul play. So, just those words. If people would listen to the media, just those words are hope that we’re moving in a direction. -WH>>

Why is this a victory? As a parent, this would make me sick. This is not good news.
 
I think this entire thing of someone texting her is nothing more than a guy wanting to go out with her.
she feels like she shouldn't be talking to him because she has a BF but just maybe wants to keep talking to this guy. "HELP"to me was her asking for input "what should I do"?

I think every pretty 18 yr old has at least one 'creeper' that texts and lurks and makes it awkward. But it is a big leap from having a teen crush and wanting to hang out, and kidnapping someone by force. Would this kid text her for weeks, park in her driveway in broad daylight, then abduct her--without thinking he would be known? Seems a bit of a stretch. JMO
 
>>There is no evidence of foul play. They have now publicly said they are not ruling out foul play. To me, that’s a small victory for my daughter because before they said there was no evidence of foul play. So, just those words. If people would listen to the media, just those words are hope that we’re moving in a direction. -WH>>

Why is this a victory? As a parent, this would make me sick. This is not good news.

It could only be seen as a victory if you knew and accepted she was dead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
47
Guests online
2,310
Total visitors
2,357

Forum statistics

Threads
600,616
Messages
18,111,304
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top