AZ Nancy Guthrie, 84, (mother of TODAY Show host Savannah Guthrie) missing - last seen in the Catalina foothills area on Jan 31, 2026

[mrjitty]

This is an excellent interview about this case with Mary Ellen O'Toole, one of the pioneers of criminal profiling. Some of the questions aren't developed well by the interviewer (i.e. the pacemaker) but her analysis and profile are pretty compelling. JMO.

Source - WAVY TV10 News

In this interview, O'Toole says the victim was targetted.

But how do we know that? She might be correct, but I believe that is an assumption not currently confirmed by LE.

 

[SlimPickens]

In this interview, O'Toole says the victim was targetted.

But how do we know that? She might be correct, but I believe that is an assumption not currently confirmed by LE.

She's basing her assumption/analysis on the fact that Ms Guthrie is statistically a "low risk victim" meaning that she doesn't affiliate with criminals, lives in a nice neighborhood, etc., and that since she is statistically a low risk victim then the probability of her being randomly targeted is low and the probability of her being specifically targeted is high. In other words, folks that live in nicer areas are less likely to be a victim of violent crime, and since she was a victim of violent crime it was less likely random violence and more likely targeted violence.

Hope that made sense.

JMO.

 

[Duk3]

Who thinks someone in the family is responsible for what happened to Ms Guthrie ?

Hapless Lantana guy (+ possible accomplice) were hired to act like burglars and stage it ?

While I never wanted to believe this, it couldn't be ruled out... and was fueled when LE kept returning to TC/AG's property as well as door to door in their immediate neighbourhood

The whole home invasion gone wrong - taking Ms Guthrie - makes no sense. Although, tbf, nothing's made a shred of sense since day 1.

*edited to add... just putting a theory out, not saying it's what I do think occurred.

The direct family are not experienced in crime of this nature so they are unlikely to have the network to hire someone like Latana guy. Also, without having deep trust with Latana guy it would be so risky for the family (if they were involved) to expose such a crime to a random criminal in order to hire them. I don't think it is any of NG's direct family, but not ruling out someone associated to them.

 

[TheDinks]

The direct family are not experienced in crime of this nature so they are unlikely to have the network to hire someone like Latana guy. Also, without having deep trust with Latana guy it would be so risky for the family (if they were involved) to expose such a crime to a random criminal in order to hire them. I don't think it is any of NG's direct family, but not ruling out someone associated to them.

Every theory has holes, f'sure and nothing seems to make sense. However, something can't be dismissed because it is "unlikely". We have no idea what contacts they have... only takes a friend of a friend.

Take the Adelsons, for example. Well respected family with dental business... okay, sure, some of son Charlie's (CA) exploits were dicey but we only know about these after the fact. Face value - very respectable family. But player CA had a g/f who had connections with Miami gangbangers. Next minute - CA's ex brother-in-law (DM) was shot and killed by unsophisticated (to say the least!) hitmen - and all because CA's sister W (recently divorced from DM) and W & CA's mom had enough of dealing with DM. [short version]

 

[submarine7]

She's basing her assumption/analysis on the fact that Ms Guthrie is statistically a "low risk victim" meaning that she doesn't affiliate with criminals, lives in a nice neighborhood, etc., and that since she is statistically a low risk victim then the probability of her being randomly targeted is low and the probability of her being specifically targeted is high. In other words, folks that live in nicer areas are less likely to be a victim of violent crime, and since she was a victim of violent crime it was less likely random violence and more likely targeted violence.

Hope that made sense.

JMO.

Her daughter elevates her risk of being targeted some what? That's probably the only thing that poses risk
MOO

 

[submarine7]

I realize she's the natural choice for spokesperson, I wasn't even scrutinizing her just wondering why the format and team approach was replaced. I'm sure she's advised before making a video.

JMO - If it were me and every eye blink, hand movement or non movement was scrutinized for something nefarious, I wouldn't want to be on camera either. SG is in her element in front of the camera, albeit not in this capacity, and has professional composure

 

[Bodhi]

How are they interfering with what is going on. There is nothing going on.

I think she is spot on. Bloggers, podcasters, and the yellow journalists motivated by clicks and looking to make a name for themselves with scoops that are premature or unfounded. They're not professional journalists who report facts without inserting themselves into the story. Overall, the sensationalist outlets and individuals covering this are hampering progress of the investigation in my opinion. They've played fast and loose with the facts and wild speculation. They posted online about the two major LE operations in advance and while they were underway, tipping off potential targets and possibly endangering the victim's life. They've doxed people who they incorrectly believe to be targets, individuals questioned and released, acquaintances of family members with no indication they're involved. They've harrassed and spread baseless rumors about family members, repeating misinformation about gambling debts and the like so often it is seen as fact. The circus atmosphere created by the media frenzy has repercussions for real people, like the car dealer whose business w an adjacent property. Getting the word out was critical, and mainstream media provide excellent, balanced coverage. The online and tabloid journalists, the unscrupulous self-promoters, are not value-added here.

 

[pulchra73]

How are they interfering with what is going on. There is nothing going on.

Think she should mind her own business. The main channels are doing exactly the same as podcasters etc. All of them sitting at swat locations trying to get the scoop.

 

[pulchra73]

I think she is spot on. Bloggers, podcasters, and the yellow journalists motivated by clicks and looking to make a name for themselves with scoops that are premature or unfounded. They're not professional journalists who report facts without inserting themselves into the story. Overall, the sensationalist outlets and individuals covering this are hampering progress of the investigation in my opinion. They've played fast and loose with the facts and wild speculation. They posted online about the two major LE operations in advance and while they were underway, tipping off potential targets and possibly endangering the victim's life. They've doxed people who they incorrectly believe to be targets, individuals questioned and released, acquaintances of family members with no indication they're involved. They've harrassed and spread baseless rumors about family members, repeating misinformation about gambling debts and the like so often it is seen as fact. The circus atmosphere created by the media frenzy has repercussions for real people, like the car dealer whose business w an adjacent property. Getting the word out was critical, and mainstream media provide excellent, balanced coverage. The online and tabloid journalists, the unscrupulous self-promoters, are not value-added here.

And the Daily mail reporters aren't? They are doing the same thing. NBC, Brian, JLR. The tips regarding Swat movements are coming from the main channel reporters first!
You obviously arent watching it live as you can see they are all following each other!

 

[mrjitty]

She's basing her assumption/analysis on the fact that Ms Guthrie is statistically a "low risk victim" meaning that she doesn't affiliate with criminals, lives in a nice neighborhood, etc., and that since she is statistically a low risk victim then the probability of her being randomly targeted is low and the probability of her being specifically targeted is high. In other words, folks that live in nicer areas are less likely to be a victim of violent crime, and since she was a victim of violent crime it was less likely random violence and more likely targeted violence.

Hope that made sense.

JMO.

I understand that part as far as it goes.

But i still believe that there is an assumption built into the framework i.e the purpose was to do a violent crime. What if it was the house targeted and not a person?

Personally I don't think we have anywhere near enough information to decide which of various unlikely scenarios is more probable, on a purely statistical basis.

But I do agree that if a crime against the person (abduction, assault etc) was the idea, then its likely selective. FWIW

 

[submarine7]

Why are they leaking stories today? How did we move from Nanos' statement that it "could take years" and helicopter searches in the desert to a sudden, overwhelming belief that Nancy is alive and well? Also, she's been kept well for 15 days by the guy on the video who physically harmed Nancy within the first hour of their encounter?

This is crazy. There must be something going on and this is meant to keep us chattering while they negotiate with the kidnapper. There is honestly no scenario I can come up with where Nancy was the intended target of a robbery but in the criminals panic he chose to take her with him. For the past two weeks he's fed her, given her a place to eat, and escorted to the bathroom every time while also keeping her from screaming out or doing anything else to jeopardize his freedom. When do thieves take people? That sounds absurd. It's like your in a deep dark hole and you're digging deeper. There has to be a better explanation than this.

If somebody took her two weeks ago because they panicked, then they clearly have no impulse control or reasoning skills. They may be incapable of caring for themselves. MOO