Jean Moore UM favorite vol. 6 went missing from a casino.Her fiance was an older man who was a millionaire,he was suspected in her dissapearance.He seemed very nice,and very genuine,my gut feeling was,he wasnt involved.Any news or updates?

I totally agree with you. My gut feeling is that Al Henderson was a sweet old man and had nothing to do with her disappearance. I mean what in the world would his motive had been? He had just proposed to her and therefore didn't have a big life insurance policy on her or anything. Her kids apparently didn't like him but were really grasping at straws trying to convince us of his guilt. He had said some not so nice things to her in the past (as her daughter claims) so that means he's capable of killing her? Plus not to mention he wasn't exactly a spring chicken so would he even have been physically capable of killing her and then disposing of her body which if he's guilty he would have had to do. I really can't imagine what could have happened to her though. The only thing I can possiby think of was maybe someone saw her in the casino and she had a lot of money on her and quietly forced her into their car or perhaps she suffered from something like a stroke and wandered off not remembering who she was but even that doesn't sound too likely its just the only thing that comes to mind about how she could have went missing in a casino in broad daylight.

Just watched this one for the first time. Anyone know of any updates?

I also thought that Al Henderson came off as genuine and I feel he had nothing to do with her disappearance. But I am troubled by the descrepencies (sp) in the casino video that disproves what Al told the police; he nor Jean was spotted at her favorite slot machine, but he continues to claim he played it while waiting for her and so forth. It's also interesting that the missing flyer says "possible amnesia" but we are told nothing about this in the segment. What could that be all about?


Anyone have any ideas of this case?

Henderson did appear to be genuine to me as well. The one thing that got to me was what Jean's son said about Al's capability of being convincing enough to put up a charming facade. Despite any bias, he did personally know Henderson. That, coupled with the lack of evidence of Jean's presence on security cameras still leaves me without the basis to express an opinion one way or the other.

Pretty interesting discussion, previously:

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=259005

I lean a lot more to the guilty side than it seems that others do. The only thing that seems to be going 'for' him is that he "seems like such a nice old man".

The discrepancy with the surveillance video, the existence of her jewelry, the comments made by her family - I feel like if he had come off in his interview like a Jule Caylor or a Paul Pollis, we'd be naming him in the "guiltiest person in the history of UM" thread.

Just watched this one for the first time. Anyone know of any updates?

I also thought that Al Henderson came off as genuine and I feel he had nothing to do with her disappearance. But I am troubled by the descrepencies (sp) in the casino video that disproves what Al told the police; he nor Jean was spotted at her favorite slot machine, but he continues to claim he played it while waiting for her and so forth. It's also interesting that the missing flyer says "possible amnesia" but we are told nothing about this in the segment. What could that be all about?


Anyone have any ideas of this case?

Well I'm probably in the minority but I've always leaned towards Al being innocent. I thought he seemed genuine like you did and I don't know of any motive and he was old so I can't envision killing her and having the strength to dispose of her body where no one would ever find it. He could have been confused about which slot machines she was on (once again his age possibly being a factor). Its tough having a plausible explanation for what happened to her no matter which side you're on. I have thought that since it was a casino she could have been abducted and forced into a car or maybe even suffered a stroke and wandered off.

I believe Al is guilty of murder.

He has two holes in his alibi. One hole I could overlook. But not two.

He could have been confused about which slot machines she was on (once again his age possibly being a factor).

I wonder if he remembered other factors about during the interview. To make sure it wasn;t "selective amnesia"/

I tend to hate it when "old age" because the excuse for a bad alibi.

This case is troubling. I agree with crystaldawn that there doesn't seem to be a motive for Al to kill her. He was already rich. They weren't married yet so spouse life insurance would not factor in. I have always wondered if its possible that the casino security made a mistake as to the area in question on the surveillance tapes. UM never showed Al confirming that the machines shown were indeed where he was referring to. There were no references in the segment to any other tapes being looked at. Although I would hope they would review them all.

I feel that Al is innocent, but there is a lot pointing against him. Very strange indeed.

As useless as this statement is to make, I think that Al did do it.just finished watching the segment and here's why I think it:

1) Only a single person in the Laughlin area actually saw Jean with Al.Given the number of security cameras in and around the casinos in that area, there should be more visual proof that Jean was in Laughlin when Al says she was.

2) Al gave precise times for where he was and and exact details what he was allegedly doing.usually the only people that do that are guilty ones as they have to account for all of the details of their day.

3) According to the segment, Jeane Moore had no known enemies,and no reason to disappear on her own.since the last person to see her, was Al he's the most likely person to know what happened to her.

4) When you when you watch Al on the segment, you can see that he's attempting to be precise in what he's saying. However he slips near the end, when he describes his net worth as dropping, apparently trying to link that drop to Jeane Moore's disappearance.

If or when you watch that portion of the segment again, take note of his noticeable lack of affect when he makes this statement.

5) Neither the segment nor any later accounts show Al making any serious efforts ( hiring an investigator, placing ads in the newspaper, etc.) towards locating Jeane Moore. It seems that if you were truly concerned about missing loved one that you would spare no expense in trying to find them. Unless for some reason you didn't believe them to be missing or knew the reason why they were.

There are many more reasons why I believe Al is the guilty party, but the above are the primary reasons.

I don't think there had to be any motive. Supposing that her children's interpretation of their relationship was accurate, and he did treat her rather badly. It's not too far of a stretch to think that it may have been abusive, and one time he simply went too far. Then it was a crime of passion.

IMHO an innocent persons alibi would be checked out and that person would be cleared immediately. Henderson should have been cleared if he were seen on the cameras where he said he playing slots, but he wasn't. While there is a possibility that he was mistaken, didn't he also say he checked or played near where Jean's favorite machine was? Again the tapes do not show Henderson. I think he definitely knows more than he's letting on, and I think it's a strong possibility that he had hired someone to kill Jean.

Unless it was a in the heat of the moment thing, I still don't think here is motive. They were not married yet. Hiring someone to kill her would be premeditated. However, they had been together for years before he proposed. I wonder if he was concerned about common law marriage being an issue if he did plan to leave her.

I have mixed feelings on this case. On one hand, the evidence just doesn't add up. On the other hand, I believe what Al is saying. If he is lying, and is smart enough to have so far gotten away with it, why say he last saw her at the casino? He strikes me as smart enough to know that every square inch of a casino is under surveillance. Why not pick a place with little or no surveillance?

I almost feel that all parties are telling the truth as they see it, but there is some missing element here that would explain the whole thing and tie all these inconsistencies together.

Al might well be guilty. If he is, he is both dumb, and one hell of a liar.

As far as him mentioning the net worth thing, I wonder what the question was that was posed to him by the interviewer. It is easy to forget how interviews for shows like UM are done when viewing them. They have an interviewer asking questions, but as the viewer we don't here those questions. The questions are worded so that theanswers are given in a way that seems the person being interviewed is just talking directly to the person watching the show. When edited for a show, these are occasionally seen out of context and can seem strange if one doesn't realize the person is answering a direct question given to them. I can't imagine Al just decided to bring up his financial status without provocation. I think that comment is seen out of context.

Does anyone know if there have been ANY developments in this case? Even if Jean is no longer with us, which seems very probable, if her body or anything else was found, it could blow the whole thing wide open.

Unless it was a in the heat of the moment thing, I still don't think here is motive. They were not married yet. Hiring someone to kill her would be premeditated. However, they had been together for years before he proposed. I wonder if he was concerned about common law marriage being an issue if he did plan to leave her.

I have mixed feelings on this case. On one hand, the evidence just doesn't add up. On the other hand, I believe what Al is saying. If he is lying, and is smart enough to have so far gotten away with it, why say he last saw her at the casino? He strikes me as smart enough to know that every square inch of a casino is under surveillance. Why not pick a place with little or no surveillance?

I almost feel that all parties are telling the truth as they see it, but there is some missing element here that would explain the whole thing and tie all these inconsistencies together.

Al might well be guilty. If he is, he is both dumb, and one hell of a liar.

As far as him mentioning the net worth thing, I wonder what the question was that was posed to him by the interviewer. It is easy to forget how interviews for shows like UM are done when viewing them. They have an interviewer asking questions, but as the viewer we don't here those questions. The questions are worded so that theanswers are given in a way that seems the person being interviewed is just talking directly to the person watching the show. When edited for a show, these are occasionally seen out of context and can seem strange if one doesn't realize the person is answering a direct question given to them. I can't imagine Al just decided to bring up his financial status without provocation. I think that comment is seen out of context.

Does anyone know if there have been ANY developments in this case? Even if Jean is no longer with us, which seems very probable, if her body or anything else was found, it could blow the whole thing wide open.

I don't think that Al hired anyone to kill her. He may have lost his temper and struck her or even accidentally run over her with his car. Maybe he even panicked and made up the story that he did.

Al may have been a bad guy, but he also struck me as a tired old man.Perhaps the thought of spending his remaining years behind bars for murder was too much for him to bear and he came up with this story. not a particularly brave thing to do nor honorable one, but he was at the end of his life, and who knows what that might cause some people to do?

I am surprised they have been unable to find Jeane's body but perhaps I shouldn't be as I have first-hand knowledge about the level of competence of the Laughlin Police Department. If you have out-of-state tags, you'll get stopped. If you commit a murder, you'll probably get away with it in Laughlin.

I think Al mentioned his net worth to either show that he wouldn't have a motive to kill or harm Jean since he didn't need the money, or to show that what he initially had and how much it dropped because of his efforts to find Jean. If he truly was spending thousands of dollars trying to locate Jean then that would certainly make me lean towards him being innocent. There's obviously something missing from the UM segment. From what the children say about Al "verbally abusing" her certainly doesn't seem like a motive for murder. Maybe he had a gambling addiction and she confronted him about it and threatened to leave him and that made him snap. Who knows?

If he had anything to do with it, it would almost have to be accidental.

As far as verbal abuse could mean anything as it is all open to interpretation. He might just be brutally honest; "does this make me look fat?" "why yes it does Jean. Maybe you should think about a diet". That could be called verbal abuse, bit is nowhere near "you are a dumb bitch". Without knowing the things he said to her I don't think that can be taken without a grain of salt.

If the local police are that incompetent, it also means that an innocent man could be easily accused of something like this. So long as his car tabs were not expired, the killer could get off Scott free.

Based on evidence presented in the segment, Al looks guilty. Based on Al's interview in the segment, he seems innocent. I would love to see his entire united interview. I think I could decide for sure then.

If he had anything to do with it, it would almost have to be accidental.

As far as verbal abuse could mean anything as it is all open to interpretation. He might just be brutally honest; "does this make me look fat?" "why yes it does Jean. Maybe you should think about a diet". That could be called verbal abuse, bit is nowhere near "you are a dumb bitch". Without knowing the things he said to her I don't think that can be taken without a grain of salt.

If the local police are that incompetent, it also means that an innocent man could be easily accused of something like this. So long as his car tabs were not expired, the killer could get off Scott free.

Based on evidence presented in the segment, Al looks guilty. Based on Al's interview in the segment, he seems innocent. I would love to see his entire united interview. I think I could decide for sure then.

That's true, poster. Her children described him as being verbally abusive to Jean but as you stated that could mean many different things. They may in fact not even like Al (which is understandable in light of their mother's disappearance), which means their view of him is always going to be prejudiced by that fact.

And let me modify my earlier statement: the Laughlin Police Department almost certainly has some very professional officers that are doing a very difficult but necessary job.The difficulties that seem to have occurred in solving this particular case may have come from a lack of experience, rather than any type of incompetence.

It's been a number of years since this occurred and Al wasn't a young man even then. Does anybody know if he is even still alive?

That's true, poster. Her children described him as being verbally abusive to Jean but as you stated that could mean many different things. They may in fact not even like Al (which is understandable in light of their mother's disappearance), which means their view of him is always going to be prejudiced by that fact.

And let me modify my earlier statement: the Laughlin Police Department almost certainly has some very professional officers that are doing a very difficult but necessary job.The difficulties that seem to have occurred in solving this particular case may have come from a lack of experience, rather than any type of incompetence.

It's been a number of years since this occurred and Al wasn't a young man even then. Does anybody know if he is even still alive?

I believe in a previous post someone has said Al had died sometime in the 90's.

I believe in a previous post someone has said Al had died sometime in the 90's.

Well, if that's the case, then this will always be an unsolved mystery.

I really just feel that anyone would be smarter than to do something like this and have a false alibi be doing something that should be on film and isn't. Everyone knows that casinos are covered from floor to ceiling with cameras. You can almost not go to the bathroom without being on tape in a casino.

I would say that if the casino tapes are in fact 100% postively showing the machines, places, and times/dates in question that Al in fact says he was at, with no mistakes, I would concede that he is guilty.

But as I said, given the fact that he had to know that the casino was covered with cameras, it makes me wonder if there wasn't a mistake on the casino security staff's part. Or for some reason, switching or otherwise tampering with the tapes.

Suppose that there was some unknown illegal activity going on in the casino that the owners/management didnt want the police to see. They might then tamper with the tapes to save their necks at the cost of throwing an innocent man under the bus. Just a thought. Nothing to back that up at all.

Let's face it, if the casino tapes were not a factor in this, I think a lot more people would be on Al's side, or at least give him the benefit of the doubt. I am curious if the police are still looking into this case at all. With it still being a missing persons case, its difficult to say how much time they would give it.

I am suprised that here we don't see the pattern of the other multiple missing person case on UM. Let's see, "they vanished under suspicious circumstances not leaving a trace, taking no money or belongings with them and people around them are acting suspicious and their stories don't match up and they have never contacted their families... Clearly this must just be a case of them walking off to start a new life somewhere." Yeah, Bull@#$%.

I want to believe him, but the tape doesn't lie. But I wonder where he killed her? Somewhere along the way to the casino?

I want to believe him, but the tape doesn't lie. But I wonder where he killed her? Somewhere along the way to the casino?

If Al is guilty, he could have killed her the night before their alleged trip to the casino the next day. He had plenty of time to kill her and get rid of her body, and then invent the story for the next day.

Everyone knows that casinos are covered from floor to ceiling with cameras. You can almost not go to the bathroom without being on tape in a casino.

That's mythology. You're talking about tiny Laughlin, Nevada more than 20 years ago. I've been to Laughlin dozens of times. The only reason I kept driving there from Las Vegas was that Laughlin was laughably unsophisticated. It's one stretch of casinos along the Colorado River. Maybe one mile total. In those days there were considerably fewer casinos than today, and not many on the side of the road that didn't border the river.

I don't have much of an opinion on this case, or Al Henderson's guilt or innocence. But one aspect that was common to this forum years ago, and obviously has not changed, is the improper assumption that all Nevada gambling towns are identical to Las Vegas in terms of caliber of employees or caliber of security or caliber of surveillance, etc. It couldn't be further from the truth. People who can't get hired in Las Vegas try the smaller cities. Notice that the card counting crews and other scammers practice their skills at the minor casinos across the country before gaining confidence to move to the big money sites. Las Vegas has new fancy structures. The buildings in Laughln are basically unchanged from September 1984, when I first visited. Same with Carson City and other sites with Unsolved Mysteries casino-related cases.

In the early '90s, when this disappearance occurred, I was still making the 90 mile drive to Laughlin occasionally. It's not the proudest portion of my life but I might as well mention it, because it supports my theme that Laughlin was primitive by casino standards. I certainly would not take everything at face value in terms of missing tapes or who is on those tapes or whether they were erased or even focused on the correct area. Laughlin was notoriously pathetic in terms of surveillance and security. Guys who were booted from one Las Vegas casino after another would take a bus to Laughlin and know they would never be bothered. I would hear stuff like that in sportsbooks all the time. Sportsbooks were and are the gathering areas for the shady characters. People who have had success gambling in Nevada find out quickly that there are short cuts, that it's not as difficult as outsiders want to believe. You aren't limited to table game true odds or giving 11/10 on sporting events. Casinos make mistakes and have vulnerabilities. Tons of them. The specifics change but the weaknesses are always there. Different guys make different choices, which lead some to trouble and others to exploding bankrolls.

From '90 to '93 I often played overpaying poker machines. I wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary. I was merely playing machines that were nicely generous. These were quarter machines, almost without exception. Some dropped the coins automatically while others had a credit button that had to be pushed for the payout. Video poker was exploding in that era. There were dozens if not hundreds of those machines in every casino. All you had to do was go machine to machine and check the payout. In the vast majority of cases, the payout would be correct. Move on. But maybe 1 or 2% of the time you'd find a friendly machine. And he might be your friend for hours or weeks, depending on the casino and the caliber of the slot staff and mechanics. I was never kicked out of any joint but they eventually were wise to me at Circus Circus and Riviera. If they saw me playing a machine they knew something was up. I remember emptying the hopper at the Riviera and the slot supervisor who filled the machine for me on the previous shift came sprinting toward the machine like Renaldo Nehemiah, hurdling tables. "I just filled that machine for him!" He checked it and found what he expected. "Here's your fill, sir. This machine is now out of order. " He tossed the 18 quarters onto the floor.

Some employees were like that. They took it personally when they discovered the payout was generous, and realized why you had been there for the past week. I was hardly the only one doing this. I wondered how my friend John could be broke one day and making a $550 wager the next day. He tipped me toward the machines, even giving me some of his leftovers so I could get the hang of it.

I mention this partially because Laughlin was the home of the most inept slot personnel and mechanics I ever saw during that stretch. I'd wake up in Las Vegas and yawn, deciding whether I had the energy to drive to Laughlin and fill my wallet with 3 or 4 fills. The fills on a quarter machine could be $100 or $200, depending on the casino. Obviously you prioritized the spots with $200 fills. There was one graveyard shift change booth lady at the Edgewater who noticed that I was having an unusual stretch of luck. "Oh, so you won big again?" she asked, as I handed her another full bucket of quarters to be redeemed. I knew to watch out for her. Sure enough, she sicked a slot mechanic on me. He sat behind my machine for a full half hour. So what. I played it normally, without cashing out. Then I moved to a nearby machine. He lost interest in me completely, and ignored what the slot booth lady reported. That was Laughlin caliber in those days. Completely different level than Las Vegas. It's probably similar today. I first saw how out of touch they were in spring 1985, when the Edgewater sportsbook was literally 30 points off on both totals for the Final Four. They were booking 131 on Villanova vs. Memphis while Las Vegas was using 102. I had a party on that one. They were moving it 1 point at a time when I bet the limit. If they had moved it 5 points at a time I still would have kept going.

That's the Laughlin I know. Too many people watch the Oceans movies and fall for the propaganda, that the casinos see everything and know everything. Meanwhile, they are life and death to have the employees show up on time and not scheme to rip them off. I know undercover security guys at a couple of casinos who still laugh at those Oceans movies, every time they are sent on the latest goose chase thanks to the eye in the sky.

As I posted many years ago, the Laughlin area is quite desolate and seemingly the perfect area to dispose of a body. It's a steep descent out of the mountains to the one strip of casino land in Laughlin. Also, the biggest dirt bags who frequent Las Vegas are known to head to Laughlin for a quickie robbery or worse. That could have been Jean Moore's fate.

As I posted many years ago, the Laughlin area is quite desolate and seemingly the perfect area to dispose of a body. It's a steep descent out of the mountains to the one strip of casino land in Laughlin. Also, the biggest dirt bags who frequent Las Vegas are known to head to Laughlin for a quickie robbery or worse. That could have been Jean Moore's fate.

Thank you for the insight into the types that frequented the Laughlin area. Jean Moore very well could have been the victim of a robbery gone wrong.

Robberies outside casinos are incredibly common, but robberies that turn into murders are not. I think the likelihood of an older woman being killed by perfect strangers and never found again in the immediate vicinity of a casino is far less great than that of her husband (a man she knew for decades, and who was allegedly abusive) murdering her. It's possible, but I've always felt Al probably did it.

That's mythology. You're talking about tiny Laughlin, Nevada more than 20 years ago. I've been to Laughlin dozens of times. The only reason I kept driving there from Las Vegas was that Laughlin was laughably unsophisticated. It's one stretch of casinos along the Colorado River. Maybe one mile total. In those days there were considerably fewer casinos than today, and not many on the side of the road that didn't border the river.

I don't have much of an opinion on this case, or Al Henderson's guilt or innocence. But one aspect that was common to this forum years ago, and obviously has not changed, is the improper assumption that all Nevada gambling towns are identical to Las Vegas in terms of caliber of employees or caliber of security or caliber of surveillance, etc. It couldn't be further from the truth. People who can't get hired in Las Vegas try the smaller cities. Notice that the card counting crews and other scammers practice their skills at the minor casinos across the country before gaining confidence to move to the big money sites. Las Vegas has new fancy structures. The buildings in Laughln are basically unchanged from September 1984, when I first visited. Same with Carson City and other sites with Unsolved Mysteries casino-related cases.

In the early '90s, when this disappearance occurred, I was still making the 90 mile drive to Laughlin occasionally. It's not the proudest portion of my life but I might as well mention it, because it supports my theme that Laughlin was primitive by casino standards. I certainly would not take everything at face value in terms of missing tapes or who is on those tapes or whether they were erased or even focused on the correct area. Laughlin was notoriously pathetic in terms of surveillance and security. Guys who were booted from one Las Vegas casino after another would take a bus to Laughlin and know they would never be bothered. I would hear stuff like that in sportsbooks all the time. Sportsbooks were and are the gathering areas for the shady characters. People who have had success gambling in Nevada find out quickly that there are short cuts, that it's not as difficult as outsiders want to believe. You aren't limited to table game true odds or giving 11/10 on sporting events. Casinos make mistakes and have vulnerabilities. Tons of them. The specifics change but the weaknesses are always there. Different guys make different choices, which lead some to trouble and others to exploding bankrolls.

From '90 to '93 I often played overpaying poker machines. I wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary. I was merely playing machines that were nicely generous. These were quarter machines, almost without exception. Some dropped the coins automatically while others had a credit button that had to be pushed for the payout. Video poker was exploding in that era. There were dozens if not hundreds of those machines in every casino. All you had to do was go machine to machine and check the payout. In the vast majority of cases, the payout would be correct. Move on. But maybe 1 or 2% of the time you'd find a friendly machine. And he might be your friend for hours or weeks, depending on the casino and the caliber of the slot staff and mechanics. I was never kicked out of any joint but they eventually were wise to me at Circus Circus and Riviera. If they saw me playing a machine they knew something was up. I remember emptying the hopper at the Riviera and the slot supervisor who filled the machine for me on the previous shift came sprinting toward the machine like Renaldo Nehemiah, hurdling tables. "I just filled that machine for him!" He checked it and found what he expected. "Here's your fill, sir. This machine is now out of order. " He tossed the 18 quarters onto the floor.

Some employees were like that. They took it personally when they discovered the payout was generous, and realized why you had been there for the past week. I was hardly the only one doing this. I wondered how my friend John could be broke one day and making a $550 wager the next day. He tipped me toward the machines, even giving me some of his leftovers so I could get the hang of it.

I mention this partially because Laughlin was the home of the most inept slot personnel and mechanics I ever saw during that stretch. I'd wake up in Las Vegas and yawn, deciding whether I had the energy to drive to Laughlin and fill my wallet with 3 or 4 fills. The fills on a quarter machine could be $100 or $200, depending on the casino. Obviously you prioritized the spots with $200 fills. There was one graveyard shift change booth lady at the Edgewater who noticed that I was having an unusual stretch of luck. "Oh, so you won big again?" she asked, as I handed her another full bucket of quarters to be redeemed. I knew to watch out for her. Sure enough, she sicked a slot mechanic on me. He sat behind my machine for a full half hour. So what. I played it normally, without cashing out. Then I moved to a nearby machine. He lost interest in me completely, and ignored what the slot booth lady reported. That was Laughlin caliber in those days. Completely different level than Las Vegas. It's probably similar today. I first saw how out of touch they were in spring 1985, when the Edgewater sportsbook was literally 30 points off on both totals for the Final Four. They were booking 131 on Villanova vs. Memphis while Las Vegas was using 102. I had a party on that one. They were moving it 1 point at a time when I bet the limit. If they had moved it 5 points at a time I still would have kept going.

That's the Laughlin I know. Too many people watch the Oceans movies and fall for the propaganda, that the casinos see everything and know everything. Meanwhile, they are life and death to have the employees show up on time and not scheme to rip them off. I know undercover security guys at a couple of casinos who still laugh at those Oceans movies, every time they are sent on the latest goose chase thanks to the eye in the sky.

As I posted many years ago, the Laughlin area is quite desolate and seemingly the perfect area to dispose of a body. It's a steep descent out of the mountains to the one strip of casino land in Laughlin. Also, the biggest dirt bags who frequent Las Vegas are known to head to Laughlin for a quickie robbery or worse. That could have been Jean Moore's fate.