AJ Breaux

[TheCars1986]

The gallon of milk and his car keys were never found. Which is the strangest thing about this case. That pretty much disproves the theory that he went on a bender and killed himself or lost his memory, because why would he take the gallon of milk with him but not his check book or wallet?! Definitely think he was abducted shortly after buying the gallon of milk that night. But why would his abductors keep him alive for the next day and drive him around from place to place, potentially exposing their identities?

[MegtheEgg86]

I noticed in that article, the story about the men forcing another man into a car in Jim Bowie Park is different than the one relayed on the UM segment. Here the car is red; in the segment, it was white. RS may have even included that in his narration. I'll have to watch it again.

[MegtheEgg86]

From an article from about ten years ago posted here:

http://projectjason.org/forums/topic...ux-la-8281991/

The women say they think their father, who would never hesitate to lend a hand to someone in need, made the mistake of helping the wrong person that night.

"I feel like he did not choose to disappear," Tardo said. "I think he went with someone he knew at least vaguely. Then he was set up."

"He could have barely known somebody and he would've gone with them," Guidry added.

Because so little is known about what happened, the possibility that Breaux chose to disappear cannot be completely eliminated. His daughters, however, say that Breaux was too close to his family to walk away without some type of goodbye.

"I can't imagine him wanting to disappear,' Tardo said. 'I truly believe he was so attached, especially to my daughter. He would've had a get-together to see her one last time."

[siamesemeg]

An article from earlier this year: http://www.wwltv.com/news/lafourche-...243347011.html

Sounds like they just still don't know.

"We don't have any answers. We don't want people to think the case is closed or anything like that. We want to try and find out what happened. This will keep it fresh in people's mind and hopefully it'll trigue someone's memory," [his daughter Tania] Guidry said.

[justins5256]

Just caught this.

I didn't read the whole thread, so I apologize if someone already addressed this, but what do we know about A.J.'s business? The business he owned? Is it possible he could have been involved in something shady?

His disappearance seems like an abduction to me. I base this on the nature of his car being abandoned, the missing milk (which makes his disappearance seem all the more abrupt), and the eyewitness sightings of A.J. with a group of three unidentified men. Normally, I discount eyewitness sightings, but the witnesses in both instances knew A.J. personally, and one witness even spoke to him briefly. That being said, I don't believe the lady who said A.J. tried to sell her fish. I believe the story itself, but I don't think the man was A.J.

I sort of get an Angelo Desideri vibe about this one. My gut feeling is A.J. was involved in something shady that resulted in his abduction and probable murder. What he was involved in, I can't even begin to speculate. However, I am at a loss to explain why someone, let alone three men, would abduct a male of A.J.'s age, and he would seemingly never return.

That being said, I suppose it is possible that A.J. decided to abandon his life (go figure) and take off for parts unknown. That doesn't explain the eyewitness sightings though, and it didn't seem that he had much motive, and the disappearance is too abrupt as I noted earlier.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by justins5256

Just caught this.

I didn't read the whole thread, so I apologize if someone already addressed this, but what do we know about A.J.'s business? The business he owned? Is it possible he could have been involved in something shady?

A.J. didn't own a business; he was a salesman at Earl Williams Clothing in downtown Houma, where I think he'd worked since high school.

Originally Posted by justins5256

His disappearance seems like an abduction to me. I base this on the nature of his car being abandoned, the missing milk (which makes his disappearance seem all the more abrupt), and the eyewitness sightings of A.J. with a group of three unidentified men. Normally, I discount eyewitness sightings, but the witnesses in both instances knew A.J. personally, and one witness even spoke to him briefly. That being said, I don't believe the lady who said A.J. tried to sell her fish. I believe the story itself, but I don't think the man was A.J.

+1

Originally Posted by justins5256

I sort of get an Angelo Desideri vibe about this one. My gut feeling is A.J. was involved in something shady that resulted in his abduction and probable murder. What he was involved in, I can't even begin to speculate. However, I am at a loss to explain why someone, let alone three men, would abduct a male of A.J.'s age, and he would seemingly never return.

That being said, I suppose it is possible that A.J. decided to abandon his life (go figure) and take off for parts unknown. That doesn't explain the eyewitness sightings though, and it didn't seem that he had much motive, and the disappearance is too abrupt as I noted earlier.

I want to say A.J.'s daughters have speculated before that their father may have encountered an unsavory character in AA. Why someone like that would feel the need to abduct A.J. is beyond me, however.

[justins5256]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

A.J. didn't own a business; he was a salesman at Earl Williams Clothing in downtown Houma, where I think he'd worked since high school.

Ahhh, thanks for the correction. I misheard that detail in the segment.

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

I want to say A.J.'s daughters have speculated before that their father may have encountered an unsavory character in AA. Why someone like that would feel the need to abduct A.J. is beyond me, however.

I read the thread after posting. One thing bothers me about this trajectory. I've been to AA. The meetings are open to the public and anyone can come in and listen or actively participate in discussion. Such openness is key to getting people to join the group and discuss their problems freely without being judged. That all being said, if something damning was disclosed at an AA meeting, A.J. wouldn't be the only one to hear it.

The only other possibility I can see is if A.J. was counseling someone privately and the disclosure came from that. Otherwise, it is hard to imagine something so damaging being disclosed in the group discussion setting that is standard practice for AA.

Something else that bothered me from the segment was the daughter's insistence that the police check the trunk for A.J.'s body immediately upon discovery of the car. Another poster earlier in the thread mentioned this too. That little detail just struck me as odd. I mean, if a loved one disappeared and their car was found, absent of obvious evidence of a violent altercation, would you immediately assume they were dead in the trunk?

My gut feeling still is that A.J. was involved in something he perhaps shouldn't have been and got in over his head. His disappearance just doesn't "fit" or make sense otherwise. I also think it's difficult to accept because A.J. seemed to be such a "nice guy." He probably was, but in a situation like this, we have to consider all options.

[DALLASTEXAN!!]

Originally Posted by justins5256

Ahhh, thanks for the correction. I misheard that detail in the segment.



I read the thread after posting. One thing bothers me about this trajectory. I've been to AA. The meetings are open to the public and anyone can come in and listen or actively participate in discussion. Such openness is key to getting people to join the group and discuss their problems freely without being judged. That all being said, if something damning was disclosed at an AA meeting, A.J. wouldn't be the only one to hear it.

The only other possibility I can see is if A.J. was counseling someone privately and the disclosure came from that. Otherwise, it is hard to imagine something so damaging being disclosed in the group discussion setting that is standard practice for AA.

Something else that bothered me from the segment was the daughter's insistence that the police check the trunk for A.J.'s body immediately upon discovery of the car. Another poster earlier in the thread mentioned this too. That little detail just struck me as odd. I mean, if a loved one disappeared and their car was found, absent of obvious evidence of a violent altercation, would you immediately assume they were dead in the trunk?

My gut feeling still is that A.J. was involved in something he perhaps shouldn't have been and got in over his head. His disappearance just doesn't "fit" or make sense otherwise. I also think it's difficult to accept because A.J. seemed to be such a "nice guy." He probably was, but in a situation like this, we have to consider all options.

I agree totally. Tragically if his disappearance has nothing to do with his past we may never know. And it wouldn't be the first case where what we thought may have happened was completely wrong.

[TheCars1986]

FWIW, AA has been getting criticized as of late for their having ex-cons attend meetings with the "general public". Didn't the segment state that AJ was a high up at the AA meetings? Definitely could see him counseling someone on the "side" who said too much, and they needed to get AJ out of the picture.

The weirdest part of the story is why would these abductors drive around town highlighting the fact that they had abducted AJ? It doesn't make sense.

[justins5256]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

FWIW, AA has been getting criticized as of late for their having ex-cons attend meetings with the "general public". Didn't the segment state that AJ was a high up at the AA meetings? Definitely could see him counseling someone on the "side" who said too much, and they needed to get AJ out of the picture.

The weirdest part of the story is why would these abductors drive around town highlighting the fact that they had abducted AJ? It doesn't make sense.

Yes, but he was only seen with these guys twice (possibly three times if you can't the park sighting). They could have been on their way out of town.

The phone call bugs me. Assuming it really was A.J., who was he calling? To my knowledge, no one mentioned receiving a phone call from A.J. following his disappearance.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by justins5256

Yes, but he was only seen with these guys twice (possibly three times if you can't the park sighting). They could have been on their way out of town.

The phone call bugs me. Assuming it really was A.J., who was he calling? To my knowledge, no one mentioned receiving a phone call from A.J. following his disappearance.

If he was calling the person responsible for his abduction, that would be why they didn't come forward.

I'm just amazed that they took him out around public places and put him on display for the townsfolk to see him. What if a police officer stopped by and AJ screamed for help?

[LilMissKryssy]

I never believed that sighting of AJ making a phone call with those strange men. I read somewhere on here that the person who supposedly witnessed this was a notorious liar (I think his nephew said that on here.) Either the witness was mistaken about the identity, about the time (before he went missing), or hes just a liar. I just don't think that ever happened.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by LilMissKryssy

I never believed that sighting of AJ making a phone call with those strange men. I read somewhere on here that the person who supposedly witnessed this was a notorious liar (I think his nephew said that on here.) Either the witness was mistaken about the identity, about the time (before he went missing), or hes just a liar. I just don't think that ever happened.

I just can't get by the fact that two other people claimed to have seen AJ in a similar looking car with 3 unknown men to write off the phone call sighting.

[DarkDante]

So I've been trying to flesh this one out a bit and here is what I came up with:

1) Witnesses: The sightings of AJ Breaux both placing a phone call while being watched by three men in a red sedan and later being seen with those three men in a red sedan to me are credible. The fact that we have two witnesses corroborating each others account of seeing Breaux in the company of three men in a red sedan to me speaks of one of two things

a) either AJ Breaux has a double
b) the man they saw in the company of those men and that vehicle was AJ Breaux

I tend to believe the latter as it's something that to me is far more plausible than AJ Breaux having a double convincing enough to fool two of his friends. The only question remains is whether or not the witnesses saw AJ Breaux on the date in question and that obviously is open to all types of speculation.

2) The phone call: If we assume that it was AJ Breaux sighted making that phone call, the obvious questions becomes whom he was talking to while being watched by the men in the red car and what was the nature of the conversation. To me, it's fairly obvious that the person whom AJ Breaux was speaking to on the phone was somehow involved in his disappearance and likely his death. If AJ Breaux was abducted it seems highly unlikely that his captors would allow him to make contact with anyone "on the outside" who might've been able to help restore him. Also if Breaux did make contact via telephone with someone not involved in his abduction, why haven't they come forward and identified themselves and the nature of their conversation with Breaux? The reason is that the person whom Breaux was seen speaking to on the phone by the witness is somehow involved in the abduction/disappearance/death of AJ Breaux.

3) Motive: For me the motive behind the abduction of AJ Breaux somehow revolves around money. Either AJ Breaux owed someone a significant amount of money himself and was abducted and eventually killed as a result or he somehow got himself in the middle between a debtor and a loan shark. Others have made mention that AJ Breaux may have encountered some unsavory characters through his work with AA. I take a slightly different spin on this and my feeling is AJ Breaux being known as a man who would go out of his way to help those in need, may have been trying to help someone who had a gambling problem and might have himself gotten a little too close to the flame (think Micki Jo West).

The reason I feel that money has to be a mitigating factor in the Breaux case is the fact that Breaux's abductors allowed him to live for a period of time after the abduction. Breaux was likely abducted on his way home from the convenience store, had his car abandoned likely that night at the park but was himself allowed to live to see at least the following day. My guess is AJ Breaux's abductors wanted to use him for some purpose prior to doing away with him and again it probably had to do with money. Either they wanted to get the money that AJ Breaux owed them or wanted to use AJ Breaux as a means of obtaining the money owed them. It's possible that the phone call Breaux was seen making was a means of AJ Breaux trying to obtain money from a source only he knew about. Another possibility is perhaps Breaux was being used as bait in order to lure whomever he was calling on the phone out into the open?

Whatever the scenario was, I believe that it didn't pan out the way the abductors planned and so they either decided (or it was their plan all along) to just do away with AJ Breaux.

[RobinW]

I also believe the sightings of A.J. with the men in the red car are credible, but one curious detail I've always wondered about is how he was seen wearing a lumberjack-style flannel shirt, baggy pants and running shoes which didn't seem to belong to him. The witness said it was uncharacteristic for A.J. to be dressed like that in public and I believe A.J. was wearing a tie, dress shirt and slacks when he was last seen buying the milk at the convenience store. If he was abducted, the only reason I see for the kidnappers to give him new clothing is he somehow got blood on his regular clothes. Like the bottle of milk, I wonder whatever became of A.J.'s tie, dress shirt and slacks.

I don't know, I always find it unnerving in cases like this (Keith Warren and Debbie Wolfe are two other examples) where the victim is found or last seen wearing clothing that doesn't belong to them.