Wesley Hadsell Arrested 21-22 March 2015

[Happyshoes]

Agreed, and because of his past criminal history I look for a minimum of 5 years. Also, if this was the 2013 charge from the cell phone info; he is still looking at the 2015 ammunition charge, and since they also found drugs during that search - that ups the anti even more.

JMO MOO

Correct-a-Mundo - is that a word?? Anyway, that's why I was saying they should get all 3 charges together, decide on a sentence, etc. I don't know enough to know how it works but they definitely get to keep him in jail. Where he belongs, imo.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by hey-Debbie View Post
Marissa Jasek twitted this:
Wesley Hadsell to plead guilty to purchase, possession of ammunition from 2013 incident according to federal attorney @WTKR3
— Marissa Jasek WTKR (@MarissaJasek) October 28, 2015
Wesley Hadsell to plead guilty to purchase, possession of ammunition from 2013 incident according to federal attorney @WTKR3

Well the charge from 2013 is listed as a .40 caliber handgun --thereby a weapons charge (tho I suppose he'd have had ammo if he and AJ were shooting it in the video on his phone) -- but it was written up as a handgun charge. The ammo charge is 2015... So which is it. ?

Respectfully bolded by me, unsure what document you are looking at, but from the Pacer Documents, prev and the superseding one filed Oct 21, 2015 that split the 1 count into 2, all I see is Ammo, no guns.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Norfolk Division
H'-fcrD
r? IN QPErN COURT_
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
WESLEY PAUL HADSELL,
Defendant.
CRIMINAL NO. 2:15crl 16
18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) & 924(e)
Felon in possession of ammunition
(Counts 1 and 2)
Forfeiture: 18 U.S.C. § 924(d) and
28 U.S.C. § 2461(c)
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
OCTOBER 2015 TERM - at Norfolk, Virginia
THE GRAND JURY CHARGES THAT:
COUNT 1
(Felon in possession of ammunition)
From on or about December 23, 2013, to on or about December 31, 2013, in the citiesof
Norfolk and Chesapeake, Virginia, in the Eastern District of Virginia, the defendant, WESLEY
PAUL HADSELL, having been previously convicted in a court ofa crime punishable by
imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, did knowingly and unlawfully possess in and
affecting interstate and foreign commerce ammunition, that is Winchester .40 S&W caliber
ammunition and Geco 9mm Luger ammunition, said ammunition having been shipped and
transported in interstate and foreign commerce.
(In violation ofTitle 18, United States Code, Sections 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) and 924(e).

THE GRAND JURY FURTHER CHARGES THAT:
COUNT 2
(Felon in possession of ammunition)
On or about March 20, 2015, in the city of Norfolk, Virginia, in the Eastern District of
Virginia, the defendant, WESLEY PAUL HADSELL, having been previously convicted in a
court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, did knowingly and
unlawfully possess in and affecting interstate and foreign commerce ammunition, that is Geco
9mm Luger ammunition, said ammunition having been shipped and transported in interstate and
foreign commerce.
(In violation ofTitle 18, United States Code, Sections 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) and 924(e).)

 

[arkansasmimi]

Filed today, Oct 28, 2015

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Norfolk Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. Case No. 2:15cr116
WESLEY PAUL HADSELL,
Defendant.
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW MOTIONS PREVIOUSLY FILED
Comes now the Defendant, Wesley Paul Hadsell, by counsel, and hereby move this
Honorable Court to enter an order granting Defendant leave to withdraw the pre-trial motions that
he previously filed in this matter. In support hereof, Defendant states as follows:

1. Mr. Hadsell is before the Court having been named in a two-count Superseding Indictment
charging felon in possession of ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) and
924(e).

2. Trial is scheduled for November 25, 2015.

3. In preparation for trial, the defense filed several pre-trial motions. None of the motions
have been adjudicated by the Court.

4. Mr. Hadsell has recently accepted a plea offer from the Government whereby he will plead
guilty to Count One of the Superseding Indictment pursuant to a plea agreement. For this reason,
as well as based upon previous discussions between counsel, rulings on the motions are no longer
necessary. Thus, the defense moves to withdraw his previously filed motions.

5. Defense counsel has discussed this motion with counsel for the Government. The
Government does not object to this motion.
Wherefore, Defendant moves for the entry of an order in accordance with this motion.
Respectfully submitted,
WESLEY PAUL HADSELL
By: /s/
Of counsel

****Count 1 is:
COUNT 1
(Felon in possession of ammunition)
From on or about December 23, 2013, to on or about December 31, 2013, in the citiesof
Norfolk and Chesapeake, Virginia, in the Eastern District of Virginia, the defendant, WESLEY
PAUL HADSELL, having been previously convicted in a court ofa crime punishable by
imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, did knowingly and unlawfully possess in and
affecting interstate and foreign commerce ammunition, that is Winchester .40 S&W caliber
ammunition and Geco 9mm Luger ammunition, said ammunition having been shipped and
transported in interstate and foreign commerce.
(In violation ofTitle 18, United States Code, Sections 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) and 924(e).

 

[arkansasmimi]

Does anyone have the documents that show the charges for the evidence they found on his cell phone from the shooting range? I don't ever remember them ever saying he was being charged with gun possession only the ammo.

From the Affidavit to search the hotel room: *the affidavit submitted to get the search warrant for the cell phone is what was sealed by NPD, and we the public have not been privy to that) No gun is noted in any of the documents that I have seen as being found/seized only the ammo seized from hotel room on March 21 warrants. JMHO

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
II. PROBABLE CAUSE
on page 2/3

7. On August 24,2015, NPD conducted forensic analysis of HADSELL's cell phone
pursuant to a search warrant. On HADSELL's phone is a video of A.H. shooting what
appears to be a Glock handgun at the Norfolk County Rifle Range in Chesapeake, VA.
The associated metadata showed this video was taken on 12/31/2013 at approximately
noon. On August 25, 2015,1 spoke with a manager at the Norfolk County Rifle Range.
He provided me with a portion ot he sign in log book from 12/31/2013 at that rifle range,
and my inspection of that document shows a "Wes Hadsell" entry, along with an A.H.
entry, on that date.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Further, I don't think that WH would leave his room with ammo in plain sight. He knew that anyone could have access to his room (housecleaning staff, hotel personnel, manager) while he was not there.

My theory is:
In the wee hours of Saturday, March 21, 2015, WH was caught by surprise in his hotel room by LE. Maybe he was preparing to go "fishing" and needed his ammo, so he took it out of the A/C vent. He would not have had time to hide the ammo. At that time, LE served two warrants on him: (1) a warrant for his arrest, and (2) a warrant to search his hotel room.

After survelling him, I'm sure LE considered WH a flight risk. That would explain why he was immediately arrested and taken into custody at his hotel room. I think the warrant itself states the time that he was served and placed under arrest. I really don't think WH went down to the Station House voluntarily on Saturday morning.

I seem to recall (feebly) that in one of his jailhouse interviews with Joe Fisher he mumbled something indicating that he'd been there many hours being questioned by LE; he said they would not let him go. That was because he was under arrest. I think Fisher asked WH whether he had already been under arrest when LE questioned him. After hedging, he reluctantly admitted that he guessed he was.

These may be wrong, and probably are!

My Opinion Only.

Respectfully bolded and I understand you saying its your opinion.

Per new information from the Gov response, the do confirm that WH went to the NPD on Friday March 20, 2015. His arrest date is Saturday March 21, 2015 I uploaded these documents they are in one of the threads on the Index no Discussion JMHO

GOVERNMENT=S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
pg 5/22 under heading:

BACKGROUND
I. The Norfolk Police Department Investigation

The same day of the search warrant, the defendant went to the Norfolk Police Operations
Center to answer questions of the detectives. Ultimately, the Norfolk Police Department arrested
Mr. Hadsell on various charges that day while he was still at the Police Operations Center.

 

[arkansasmimi]

JMHO, as to why the 2013 charge plea ... they have the video, but they also have the documentation from the gun range with WH and AJ being there. The Def had argued in their Motions about wanting to see the Affidavit to get the search warrant.

The March 2015 ammo charge .. again JMHO goes back to the Obstruction charge in the B&E. This is where they used (according to the documents) AB testimony of the ammo in the hotel room. IIRC VI #3 CF wife, said that her Mother in Law didn't want to pursue the charge. Unsure if that has anything to do with all those charges getting dropped.

JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

I agree.

I guess I would go further and believe that that he will be let out of jail on time served very soon.

Motivation for Prosecutor to agree to plea: 1) They want to keep the affidavit sealed because a) info in it is being used to build a murder case or b) the affidavit was weak. 2) Time and money come into play. (basically what Ms. AZLawyer said.

Motivation for WH to agree: The only thing I can come up with is that he would get out of jail. Otherwise I think it would be worthwhile for him to see that affidavit behind the search warrant.


Possible extra motive for Prosecutor: Get more evidence for murder case. WH can't keep quiet and once he is out I think it is only a matter of time before he gives a new exclusive interview with a new story. And every time he speaks it may trigger someone else giving an interview. And so on.

It will also be interesting to see how he interacts with others, as that could indicate an accomplice.

I think its confusing because there are diff Pros involved. AJ case is with NPD, they dropped their charges against WH (4 Obstruction, B&E and the Ammo) Feds picked up the AMMO... Fed Pros is who the Plea is with. So if I understand correctly the Fed Pros have nothing to do with the ongoing investigation with NPD. If any charges come up with AJ case, it would be from Pros in Norfolk. Which that is who has filed the warrant that not served for the drug charge. So it not over yet with WH and NPD. JMHO and I could be very wrong.

 

[hey-Debbie]

Filed today, Oct 28, 2015

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Norfolk Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. Case No. 2:15cr116
WESLEY PAUL HADSELL,
Defendant.
[B]DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW MOTIONS PREVIOUSLY FILED[/B]
Comes now the Defendant, Wesley Paul Hadsell, by counsel, and hereby move this
Honorable Court to enter an order granting Defendant leave to withdraw the pre-trial motions that
he previously filed in this matter. In support hereof, Defendant states as follows:

1. Mr. Hadsell is before the Court having been named in a two-count Superseding Indictment
charging felon in possession of ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) and
924(e).

2. Trial is scheduled for November 25, 2015.

3. In preparation for trial, the defense filed several pre-trial motions. None of the motions
have been adjudicated by the Court.

4. Mr. Hadsell has recently accepted a plea offer from the Government whereby he will plead
guilty to Count One of the Superseding Indictment pursuant to a plea agreement. For this reason,
as well as based upon previous discussions between counsel, rulings on the motions are no longer
necessary. Thus, the defense moves to withdraw his previously filed motions.

5. Defense counsel has discussed this motion with counsel for the Government. The
Government does not object to this motion.
Wherefore, Defendant moves for the entry of an order in accordance with this motion.
Respectfully submitted,
WESLEY PAUL HADSELL
By: /s/
Of counsel

****Count 1 is:
COUNT 1
(Felon in possession of ammunition)
From on or about December 23, 2013, to on or about December 31, 2013, in the citiesof
Norfolk and Chesapeake, Virginia, in the Eastern District of Virginia, the defendant, WESLEY
PAUL HADSELL, having been previously convicted in a court ofa crime punishable by
imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, did knowingly and unlawfully possess in and
affecting interstate and foreign commerce ammunition, that is Winchester .40 S&W caliber
ammunition and Geco 9mm Luger ammunition, said ammunition having been shipped and
transported in interstate and foreign commerce.
(In violation ofTitle 18, United States Code, Sections 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) and 924(e).

I bolded the part in red.
Could this mean they are dropping the request to see the affidavit for the search warrant for his hotel room?

 

[hey-Debbie]

From the Affidavit to search the hotel room: *the affidavit submitted to get the search warrant for the cell phone is what was sealed by NPD, and we the public have not been privy to that) No gun is noted in any of the documents that I have seen as being found/seized only the ammo seized from hotel room on March 21 warrants. JMHO

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
II. PROBABLE CAUSE
on page 2/3

7. On August 24,2015, NPD conducted forensic analysis of HADSELL's cell phone
pursuant to a search warrant. On HADSELL's phone is a video of A.H. shooting what
appears to be a Glock handgun at the Norfolk County Rifle Range in Chesapeake, VA.
The associated metadata showed this video was taken on 12/31/2013 at approximately
noon. On August 25, 2015,1 spoke with a manager at the Norfolk County Rifle Range.
He provided me with a portion ot he sign in log book from 12/31/2013 at that rifle range,
and my inspection of that document shows a "Wes Hadsell" entry, along with an A.H.
entry, on that date.

They didn't actually do an analysis of his phone until August 24, 2015! Wow it that what that means? I guess that would mean that his cell phone wasn't part of the original search warrant which the defense attorney would have already know that so the original affidavit must be sealed for something else. Maybe there is questionable evidence they were looking for with comments to another person and that's why they aren't releasing for public knowledge because they suspect someone else involved?

 

[JadeSLeuth]

I bolded the part in red.
Could this mean they are dropping the request to see the affidavit for the search warrant for his hotel room?

Hey-Debbie, that's my (uneducated) take on it ...

 

[Pisces22]

On Thurs. 10/29 at 6pm WTKR is running an exclusive story in which LE is apparently speaking public about WH's connection and what led them to the Southhampton Co. house where AJ was found. It also mentions that LE were brought back to the site for something too. So it sounds like LE may be finally speaking...some...

Stay tuned...

The preview video for it is here:

http://wtkr.com/2015/10/28/the-mystery-behind-the-discovery-of-aj-hadsells-body/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

 

[arkansasmimi]

I bolded the part in red.
Could this mean they are dropping the request to see the affidavit for the search warrant for his hotel room?

The Motions that are being referenced, had not been decided upon by the Judge so that why the Motion to Withdraw was filed. Housekeeping I guess, since Plea was met, although not had hearing before Judge yet. (from what I understanding and my be incorrect in my thought on that).

BUT, it the Def in this Federal case HAD copies of the Affidavit for Search Warrant for the Hotel Room, and the Actual Search Warrants. Per the Def in this Federal case, the AFFIDAVIT FOR SEARCH WARRANT FOR THE iPHONE IS WHAT WAS SEALED, they had been provided the ACTUAL SEARCH WARRANT FOR iPHONE.

From the Def Motion Filed 10/7/2015
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
PRE-TRIAL MOTIONS PERTAINING TO THE DEFENDANT’S CELL-PHONE

3. The Government has provided the defense with discovery but has stated that it will not
provide a copy of the affidavit for the search warrant for Mr. Hadsell’s iPhone to defense counsel.
The Government has represented that the affidavit (along with the related search warrant and a
search warrant and related affidavit for a hotel room 1) is sealed pursuant to sealing orders in the
Norfolk Circuit Court. Because defense counsel has not seen the affidavit, the defense has been
deprived of the opportunity to assess whether the defense has any constitutional challenges to the
search warrant. Defense counsel and counsel for the Government may be able to reach an agreement
on this particular issue. However, no agreement has been reached by the parties at this time.
Therefore, the defense is requesting an extension of the motion cut-off date in order to receive
additional information and/or allow the parties an opportunity to reach an agreement on this
particular issue.
____
1The defense has received a copy of the search warrant for the iPhone as well as the search warrant
and affidavit for Mr. Hadsell’s alleged hotel room from the Government.

Fast forward to Fed PROS filing 10/21/2015. The Fed Pros, evidently (jmho) gave Fed Def, what they wanted, but also filed for the FED Court to seal those Exhibits, because they were sealed by the NPD. So, JMHO, the Def was satisfied and also now WH knows what the Affidavit says. Thus his Plea on the charge that they were able to go to the gun range and have solid proof to back up the Charge 1.

ETA: If you go to the Court docs in the index, and look for the one a 22 pages ... GOVERNMENT=S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS the exhibits are alluded to there. This is the one saying about WH being under surveillance and so forth

 

[arkansasmimi]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Norfolk Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) CRIMINAL NO. 2:15cr116
)
WESLELY PAUL HADSELL )
MOTION TO SEAL EXHIBITS A AND B TO
GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
The United States of America, by and through its attorneys, Dana J. Boente, United
States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, and Benjamin L. Hatch, Assistant United
States Attorney, pursuant to Local Criminal Rule 49(E) moves to seal Government Exhibits A
and B that are referenced in and attached to the Government’s Response to Defendant’s Motion
to Suppress. In support of this motion, the government states the following:

I. ITEMS TO BE SEALED AND NECESSITY FOR SEALING
1. Exhibit A is a state search warrant and Exhibit B is the affidavit in support of the
search warrant. The search warrant and affidavit have both been ordered sealed pursuant to an
ordered entered March 25, 2015 by the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk. Out of comity and
respect for the Circuit Court sealing order, the United States asks this Court to place them under
seal. Both the search warrant and the supporting affidavit relate to an ongoing investigation by
the Norfolk Police Department, and premature public disclosure of its contents could cause the
intimidation of potential witnesses or otherwise jeopardize that ongoing investigation.

2. The defendant has no objection to the sealing of the exhibits.

****then goes on to give case law... then.....

III. PERIOD OF TIME GOVERNMENT SEEKS TO HAVE MATTER REMAIN
UNDER SEAL
4. The materials to be filed under seal would need to remain sealed until the United
States moves to unseal the materials. If the Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk orders the
search warrant and affidavit to be unsealed, the government will bring a motion before this Court
to unseal Exhibits A and B.

WHEREFORE, the United States respectfully requests that an order be entered sealing
Government Exhibits A and B which are referenced in and attached to the Government’s
Response to Defendant’s Motion to Suppress until further Order of this Court.

 

[arkansasmimi]

[/B][/COLOR]

They didn't actually do an analysis of his phone until August 24, 2015! Wow it that what that means? I guess that would mean that his cell phone wasn't part of the original search warrant which the defense attorney would have already know that so the original affidavit must be sealed for something else. Maybe there is questionable evidence they were looking for with comments to another person and that's why they aren't releasing for public knowledge because they suspect someone else involved?

Looks that way to me (didnt do analysis)... Didnt WH say something in his JF Interview about a video on his phone? Perhaps that's the NPD had to get a Search Warrant for the iPhone to get the records from the Gun Range?


From Document used in the Fed case filed Aug 26, 2015

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
I, Special Agent Tracy E. O'Neal, being duly sworn, depose and state as follows

7. On August 24,2015, NPD conducted forensic analysis of HADSELL's cell phone
pursuant to a search warrant. On HADSELL's phone is a video of A.H. shooting what
appears to be a Glock handgun at the Norfolk County Rifle Range in Chesapeake, VA.
The associated metadata showed this video was taken on 12/31/2013 at approximately
noon. On August 25, 2015,1 spoke with a manager at the Norfolk County Rifle Range.
He provided me with a portion ofthe sign in log book from 12/31/2013 at that rifle range,
and my inspection of that document shows a "Wes Hadsell" entry, along with an A.H.
entry, on that date.

8. On August 20, 2015, Special Agent Darrell Logwood, an ATF Interstate Nexus Expert,
examined the ammunition seized during the March 20,2015, search warrant described
above. SA Logwood determined that the above described ammunition was not
manufactured in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and therefore had traveled in interstate
or foreign commerce.

 

[arkansasmimi]

On Thurs. 10/29 at 6pm WTKR is running an exclusive story in which LE is apparently speaking public about WH's connection and what led them to the Southhampton Co. house where AJ was found. It also mentions that LE were brought back to the site for something too. So it sounds like LE may be finally speaking...some...

Stay tuned...

The preview video for it is here:

http://wtkr.com/2015/10/28/the-mystery-behind-the-discovery-of-aj-hadsells-body/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

from your post... If you go back and re read the letter from WH to his Mother, re the house, he says that it was the anniversary of the date he and JH met 4/9/10, and the "that house and the last name also Mom I feel someone is setting me up for a big one"

But now, for the first time, law-enforcement sources are giving NewsChannel 3 those key details and how the spot is connected to Wesley Hadsell, AJ's adoptive father.

Stay tuned is right hmm

 

[hey-Debbie]

I'm slow. I'm sorry. So it the the search warrant for the phone that's sealed or the search warrant for his phone? The phone right? So I guess that is why they did take a plea deal offered. It's interesting about the comments about agreeing to seal that warrant for "premature public disclosure of its contents could cause the intimidation of potential witnesses or otherwise jeopardize that ongoing investigation."

So that pretty much tells us what we were thinking. Someone else knows more info and I guess they are keeping that info in case maybe "that" person wants to make a plea deal as well in case they are an accomplice.

 

[charminglane]

Hello Zach.
Hope you are taking care of yourself.

 

[zapped]

Surely LE and/or a judge would not make any deal that the benefit gained was WH's testimony to anything for anyone. His words and actions have not exactly provided anything in regards to credibility. If he was testifying against someone else a defense attorney would rip whatever he had to say apart on credibility alone.

Shortened and bolded by me for brevity and relevance.

UNLESS LE has had the opportunity to verify and substantiate WH's claims.

If they have, that would be a whole 'nother ball game.

 

[zapped]

Hello Zach.
Hope you are taking care of yourself.

I agree Wholeheartedly.

Hang in there Zach and please accept my Apology for the Appalling Behavior displayed by some in this thread.

They dont Speak for all of us.....Not by a Long shot.......Even though They seem To think otherwise.