.
News Alert
Flash-Flood Watch in Effect Through Tuesday

Man Who Met Radnor Girl Online Facing Multiple Felony Charges

Ashley Ryan Hareford, 20, will be charged with multiple felonies, including Involuntary Deviant Sexual Intercourse.

Ashley Ryan Hareford, 20, of Grottoes, Virginia, will be charged with multiple felonies including Involuntary Deviant Sexual Intercourse, Statutory Sexual Assault, Indecent Assault, Criminal Use of a Communication Facility, Aggravated Indecent Assault, Indecent Exposure and Corrupting the Morals of a Minor, District Attorney Jack Whelan announced Monday.

Hareford has been extradicted back to Pennsylvania and was in the custody of Radnor Township Police Department Monday.

“This is every parent’s worst nightmare,” Whelan said.

According to police, Hareford and a 13-year-old Garrett Hill resident met online. After Hareford traveled to Radnor and the girl disappeared from her home on Dec. 3, she was found Tuesday Dec. 4 around 7 p.m. as she and Hareford stepped off of a Mega Bus in D.C.

Hareford was facing a Corruption of a Minor charge from Radnor from online information gleaned by police.

On Sunday Dec. 2, Hareford was seen at about 10 p.m. outside close to the girl's home, and a police officer spoke with him, but nothing to lead them to believe any crime was happening.

The girl's father had said he spoke with Hareford on Sunday after finding out that his daughter was charging his cell phone in her house.

"He said he came up looking for work," he said, adding that he didn't believe the man.

Nicole Dressel December 11, 2012 at 04:10 PM
Since when does the public have the right to know the name of the minor involved? When Sandusky's victims came forward, their identities were protected, even though many are in their 30s. Is is a disgrace to publish an article with the name of a 13 year old victim, the charges of the man, her father's name, her neighborhood, etc. By excluding the details of where it happened or more of the details of the incident, is really irrelevent. It is reporting the charges with the victim's name in the article, as a "breaking alert" to really get our attention. My 13 year old sits in class with this young girl. Imagine if this was your daughter? Of course the readers can piece the story together; however, to publish an article with the 13 year old girl's name did nothing to "inform the community", at this point. We are all informed by now. The way the article was written was unprofessional and poor judgement at best.
JBF December 11, 2012 at 05:24 PM
As a network news producer this discussion is close to my heart. It really comes down to this: if you want your information edited, then stop watching hard news or reading Patch. In our country, freedom of speech is one of the most important laws to protect our freedom. In this case it doesn't come in a rainbow of edited versions if we are dealing with facts. Patch simply reported the charges, which are public. If you want your news watered down, don't complain here. Simply end your email feed and find your edited information elsewhere. If not for news agencies who report the full story, we would be living in a very different community- like a "suburb" in China. Sadly this young girl's name was made public in the search to find her. By removing her name from the Patch reports now is respectable, but has no real effect to protect her or her family since her name has been on every media outlet and news website for days. As a parent this is heartbreaking but the system worked. The media publicized her face and name and she was found alive. It's hard to swallow but we can't have it both ways.
Serk December 11, 2012 at 06:18 PM
I agree with Nicole! She's a MINOR!!!
Debbie December 12, 2012 at 07:00 PM
The victim's name being made public with the Amber alert doesn't justify reporting it after the fact when she's long since been found. To report it during her disappearance was justified but to continue publishing her name now that she's home and no longer in any type of perceived danger is wrong. There's really no need whatsoever at this point to continue publishing her name, it's insensitive and unconscionable!
Debbie December 12, 2012 at 11:15 PM
I get the part about the victim's name being made public with the initiation of the Amber alert which is understandable but for any news outlet to continue in using the victim's name given she's a minor is inexcusable and wrong. Once she was found and tge Amber alert lifted or cancelled there's no longer any valid reason for any publication to be using her name. Regardless of how many other news organizations are doing it Radnor Patch especially being the victim's local hometown paper should not be continuing using her name. What good is being accomplished by doing so?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »