.

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.

Frank December 10, 2012 at 08:38 PM
Isn't castration ideal for this guy? He can decide if the parents or a surgeon get to do the work.
Nicole Kelly December 10, 2012 at 09:08 PM
Why would you choose to publish this article and send it to the township to read, given the charges and the age of the 'named' victim? She is not an anonymous victim, like most minors are in this type of situation.
I Lived Here for 25 Years & Finally Moved Out December 10, 2012 at 09:23 PM
Now that the girl has been found and the man charged with sexual crimes, shouldn't Patch delete all articles that contain the girl's name &/or picture? Just seems the right thing to do considering her age and her future in our community.
I Lived Here for 25 Years & Finally Moved Out December 10, 2012 at 09:25 PM
Fully agree with you Nicole.
Annie Webb December 10, 2012 at 09:46 PM
Totally agree with the above posters, come on Patch. Do the right thing. This girl's privacy usurps the public's "right to know".
Sam Strike (Editor) December 10, 2012 at 09:58 PM
The victim's name and photos have been removed from all article on our site. Thank you for the feedback.
Lou L December 10, 2012 at 10:32 PM
Did you not give this girls life any consideration,Please remove whole article.This will scar her for life
samantha December 11, 2012 at 02:25 AM
Having daughter's of my own...it's unfortunate the damage that this article has now caused. I now know this poor 13 yo girl was robbed of her innocence...My heart goes out to the family who now has their business plastered all over social media...
K.C. December 11, 2012 at 02:27 AM
I agree with the need for privacy for this poor child. We are a community and not everyone needs to know the horrific details of the crime(s) committed against her.
Christopher Merken December 11, 2012 at 02:30 AM
I disagree Lou. This is reporting the news. Would it be safer to NOT report the news? If this story wasn't published, many would complain that the media and the police are hiding the story and trying to make it go away. This is the news, and it must be reported for everyone's safety.
Christopher Merken December 11, 2012 at 02:31 AM
There aren't details in this article. This is the list of charges filed by the Delaware County District Attorney against the suspect. While one can interpret the charges, these charges are public knowledge, and the Patch is fulfilling its responsibility by conveying the details of the proceedings against the defendant in the most respectful and appropriate way possible. Not reporting the news is much worse.
Christopher Merken December 11, 2012 at 02:42 AM
For everyone who is haranguing Sam and the Radnor Patch, consider this. While the alleged crimes are heinous, the public has a right to know what's going on in Radnor. The purpose of the Radnor Patch is to provide the news, the events that are going on in and around Radnor. While the feelings of the victim are important to consider, the purpose of a news organization is just that, to report the news. If Sam and the Patch had dropped the story and it hadn't been reported on, wouldn't that look very suspicious? Something of this magnitude happening in Radnor, and the Radnor Patch NOT reporting on it? Furthermore, the District Attorney called a press conference to announce the charges. Sam and the Patch are reporting the news given to them by the authorities. If you want to live in a society where crime sprees and heinous crimes go unreported, by all means go somewhere else. I fully support Sam and the journalistic integrity she displayed while covering this story.
Joanna Elfering December 11, 2012 at 03:13 AM
I agree with Christopher and Sam has my full support. This is the only way how we can avoid incidents like this to happen in the first place. Without Sam we would look the other way, right? That does not help anybody in this awful situation. Thanks to the Radnor Patch we are informed what is happening around us. Not everything is pretty in life. But it will help parents to be more alert . As Christopher said.... Sam is reporting what happened no furthermore and if she does not do somebody else will. Sam did this in the most respectful way!
Mark December 11, 2012 at 05:20 AM
In most legitimate news organizations, the names and addresses of minor and adult victims of sexual assault are protected. The names of minors charged with crimes also are not published. In this case, the 13-year-old was the subject of an amber alert which, by definition, must focus maximum public attention on a missing child -- including name, age, address and picture-- to increase chances of a favorable outcome. And it worked. Unfortunately, the child in this case -- who was fully identified in the alert-- is now publicly-linked by virtue of that alert with news of the charges against the Virginia man with whom police say she was traveling. His arrest is news and the public's right to know is clear here. That so public a light is shining on the child is a sad, but inevitable by-product of the incident. Patch acted responsibly here. Other outlets did not. In any case, I hope that we all can move beyond the details and our own distress and help her heal as best we can. It could have been any of our children. In different circumstances, it could have been any one of us.
Sam Strike (Editor) December 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM
Thanks, guys. As I wrote on Radnor Patch's Facebook page, this is the unfortunate part of my job, but it must be done. I have an update this morning with many details that did not make it into this article, then I think this story will be going away for quite some time, unless something newsworthy happens. Of course, Radnor Patch has plenty of other, less disturbing news around the site, so please enjoy that.
Annie Webb December 11, 2012 at 01:13 PM
I understand the tough position Patch is in here. It's not an easy choice. I think the article could have been worded differently to not include such graphic words in the charges, yet still alert the public that someone was caught, charged, and that the victim is home safe.. It could have simply said "he's been charged with multiple felonies." Sam made a journalistic choice and thankfully in this country we are allowed to have dissent and discussion about that choice.
Sam Strike (Editor) December 11, 2012 at 02:28 PM
Thanks, yes, this job is about making those choices in these such cases. And I'm always open to readers' opinions. For example, there were details on where these "acts" took place and I left that out. It's not necessary. And I think all the press at that police press conference were upset with what they heard -- at least I was.
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