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

[unresolvedmystery]

Yes, I really don't think specifying USD means anything at all.

Totally agree with that, specifying USD is really just something you would do to pretend you aren't local.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Good evening to all. I have been following the thread since it started and find many interesting points being made. As an older person (who lives with husband and youngest son) we are very safety conscious, and this story is very alarming, but not just because the victim is the mother of a celebrity.

I would just like to offer some thoughts I've been mulling over in the time I've been reading the thread:

1) No one can guarantee 100% that Ms. Guthrie, regardless of her high-profile career, has the ability to disburse the sort of money being demanded as ransom. The family has probably been advised to NOT pay too quickly, but time has become of the essence.
2) Reading too much into body language from any of the siblings is a tricky proposition. Not only are they under duress, but they also are probably dealing with the confusing feelings that stem from thorough searches of one of their homes.
3) It seems that local law enforcement (and I believe it is their jurisdiction and the FBI wouldn't take over the investigation completely, only in an advisory capacity...please feel free to correct me on this point) is far from experienced in this sort of scenario.
4) Perhaps there are several sources demanding ransom money, or claiming to have information. I don't think that a Mexican drug cartel would involve itself in this sort of operation within the US so I would, personally, discount that theory.
5) If there is a family member (or several) involved in perpetrating this crime, the likelihood that there is a much more delicate touch in terms of moving the process forward (for fear of what more could happen to other family members, perhaps?) is called for.
6) While "civilian journalists" (is that what one would call the people who conduct YouTube investigative incursions?) might move the needle forward, and while Ms. Banfield and Ms. Kelly, etc. might discuss the matter based on "sources" they have gathered in their meanderings, all that should be considered speculation and, it would seem to me, disruptive to the process. Go to LE first and THEN publish, is what I would say makes more sense, but I'm just a grandma who reads and observes through the sensibilities of my generation, not this new one.

I apologize if I come across as a terrible fuddy-duddy, but I think a lot of the speculative information is causing more harm than good at this moment. That it's done for "clicks", "ratings", "views" -to me, at least- feels like monetizing the distress these poor people are experiencing.

These are all my personal opinions, and I have absolutely no knowledge of any details. I am sorry if I have said anything silly or worthy of mockery. I'm new here...not in the world, but here...

Welcome to Websleuths!

All thoughts and opinions are welcome!

 

[TheDinks]

Good evening to all. I have been following the thread since it started and find many interesting points being made. As an older person (who lives with husband and youngest son) we are very safety conscious, and this story is very alarming, but not just because the victim is the mother of a celebrity.

I would just like to offer some thoughts I've been mulling over in the time I've been reading the thread:

1) No one can guarantee 100% that Ms. Guthrie, regardless of her high-profile career, has the ability to disburse the sort of money being demanded as ransom. The family has probably been advised to NOT pay too quickly, but time has become of the essence.
2) Reading too much into body language from any of the siblings is a tricky proposition. Not only are they under duress, but they also are probably dealing with the confusing feelings that stem from thorough searches of one of their homes.
3) It seems that local law enforcement (and I believe it is their jurisdiction and the FBI wouldn't take over the investigation completely, only in an advisory capacity...please feel free to correct me on this point) is far from experienced in this sort of scenario.
4) Perhaps there are several sources demanding ransom money, or claiming to have information. I don't think that a Mexican drug cartel would involve itself in this sort of operation within the US so I would, personally, discount that theory.
5) If there is a family member (or several) involved in perpetrating this crime, the likelihood that there is a much more delicate touch in terms of moving the process forward (for fear of what more could happen to other family members, perhaps?) is called for.
6) While "civilian journalists" (is that what one would call the people who conduct YouTube investigative incursions?) might move the needle forward, and while Ms. Banfield and Ms. Kelly, etc. might discuss the matter based on "sources" they have gathered in their meanderings, all that should be considered speculation and, it would seem to me, disruptive to the process. Go to LE first and THEN publish, is what I would say makes more sense, but I'm just a grandma who reads and observes through the sensibilities of my generation, not this new one.

I apologize if I come across as a terrible fuddy-duddy, but I think a lot of the speculative information is causing more harm than good at this moment. That it's done for "clicks", "ratings", "views" -to me, at least- feels like monetizing the distress these poor people are experiencing.

These are all my personal opinions, and I have absolutely no knowledge of any details. I am sorry if I have said anything silly or worthy of mockery. I'm new here...not in the world, but here...

BBM

On the contrary... everything you say makes perfect sense and you write beautifully

 

[MCB1151]

There does not have to be a body to collect.

Doesn't have to be a body, but you have to convince a court that the person is more than likely deceased & have them declared dead.

 

[wyome]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2020622606194643157

View attachment 642762

Oh yeah okay wink wink

 

[TheDinks]

Hmmm, so would

i think the difference is between an abduction and a kidnapping.

Imo, the sheriff calling this a kidnapping from the get go, created the ransom letters. I know that they contained info that supposedly would only be known to certain people, but still, the sheriff calling it such and the time lapse of receipt leads me to this conclusion.

IMO, NG was abducted and not kidnapped.

Either way, I hope the family has resolution soon.

In my comments I've always used 'kidnap for ransom' because whilst kidnapping is used to typically describe a ransom situation, it's not exclusively so.

 

[unresolvedmystery]

I too wonder why WS is allowing this ... he has not been named a POI and is close family therefore a 'victim'. If he is guilty ... so many people will be right in their suspicions but if he is innocent ... so much damage to someone suffering from the loss of a loved one. MOO

Probably allowing it due to the overwhelming possibility that SIL did it and will be arrested for it soon enough?

 

[Sadi]

Good evening to all. I have been following the thread since it started and find many interesting points being made. As an older person (who lives with husband and youngest son) we are very safety conscious, and this story is very alarming, but not just because the victim is the mother of a celebrity.

I would just like to offer some thoughts I've been mulling over in the time I've been reading the thread:

1) No one can guarantee 100% that Ms. Guthrie, regardless of her high-profile career, has the ability to disburse the sort of money being demanded as ransom. The family has probably been advised to NOT pay too quickly, but time has become of the essence.
2) Reading too much into body language from any of the siblings is a tricky proposition. Not only are they under duress, but they also are probably dealing with the confusing feelings that stem from thorough searches of one of their homes.
3) It seems that local law enforcement (and I believe it is their jurisdiction and the FBI wouldn't take over the investigation completely, only in an advisory capacity...please feel free to correct me on this point) is far from experienced in this sort of scenario.
4) Perhaps there are several sources demanding ransom money, or claiming to have information. I don't think that a Mexican drug cartel would involve itself in this sort of operation within the US so I would, personally, discount that theory.
5) If there is a family member (or several) involved in perpetrating this crime, the likelihood that there is a much more delicate touch in terms of moving the process forward (for fear of what more could happen to other family members, perhaps?) is called for.
6) While "civilian journalists" (is that what one would call the people who conduct YouTube investigative incursions?) might move the needle forward, and while Ms. Banfield and Ms. Kelly, etc. might discuss the matter based on "sources" they have gathered in their meanderings, all that should be considered speculation and, it would seem to me, disruptive to the process. Go to LE first and THEN publish, is what I would say makes more sense, but I'm just a grandma who reads and observes through the sensibilities of my generation, not this new one.

I apologize if I come across as a terrible fuddy-duddy, but I think a lot of the speculative information is causing more harm than good at this moment. That it's done for "clicks", "ratings", "views" -to me, at least- feels like monetizing the distress these poor people are experiencing.

These are all my personal opinions, and I have absolutely no knowledge of any details. I am sorry if I have said anything silly or worthy of mockery. I'm new here...not in the world, but here...

Welcome! You’re views are appreciated.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

Doesn't have to be a body, but you have to convince a court that the person is more than likely deceased & have them declared dead.

Which takes time

 

[nightowl2728]

Out of curiosity, I asked AI what its most plausible theory was (without any input from me- just asked about the "Nancy Guthrie case"), and this is what it said:

"An attempted financially motivated crime against a perceived vulnerable individual, carried out by a small‑scale perpetrator with limited planning, that escalated into violence and forced removal."

Of course we cannot take AI theories to be true! Just wanted to see what would happen based on all of the pulled input it takes online.

 

[KBlackRabbit]

The Sherriff has other things on his mind. Like basketball.

The sheriff is allowed time off and can do whatever he wants when he’s not working. He’s not the only employee at the station, they have deputies that have work delegated to them. He’s not a machine that can work 24/7. If something major develops during his free time I’m sure they’ll call him to come in.

 

[unresolvedmystery]

Which takes time

Time doesn't matter if you aim to prevent a changing of inheritance or a trust by the missing?

 

[submarine7]

She hasnt surfaced. They have received ransom notes. There would be no point in murdering her or holding her without getting money in return. The ransom notes are real. What if she suddenly turned up before the money was paid? She hasnt. The ransom notes are a direct result and authored by the kidnapper or his collaborators. jmo

But who?

 

[Beans]

Not when it comes to crypto - it's pretty common to specify that you want X amount in Y currency because part of the "beauty" of crypto is its borderless and you can convert it wherever, whenever basically.

Agreed. This case has been worse than most for attracting the completely inexpert views of self-titled 'experts'. Basically a bunch of people who like to pick up some media time around cases like this and say whatever they think will get them some additional engagement, with little thought for the actual detail or known facts of the case. These people always annoy me. They're almost never right.

 

[shonyakay]

This first notification is so important and we have nothing verified. It really would be a stupid lie to tell, because it is easily verified through phone records (or really just looking at the caller's phone). So there's a reason it came off the timeline.

It would be dumb for them to lie about something that could be so easily verified as false so I wonder why they would.
Couldn't they have just stated they decided to go visit her for lunch?

 

[wyome]

The Sherriff has other things on his mind. Like basketball.

I get where you're coming from completely, but I'm glad the Sheriff took the night off to unwind. I was personally a little pissed that this was covered so extensively. I wouldn't trust my Dr. or surgeon to deal with me if they are working 7 days a week without some time away - although residents do it all the time

 

[Luna20]

just google [senator mark kelly savannah guthrie] you'll find bunches of articles

Links as per Tricia

 

[Napoli]

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2026/02/06/az-sen-mark-kelly-supports-pima-county-sheriffs-department-nancy-guthrie-case/88552328007/

Oh God..why did he need to report that? So cringy political..I would guess she didn't expect that to be a headline. What did he do or could he do? Doesnt look like anything....... On another note, someone on Fox was complaining that people go missing every day..and they dont get this kind of media attention. This case is about to slip off the radar, imo. They also just mentioned on Fox it could be a cartel kidnapping.

 

[stmichael]

She hasnt surfaced. They have received ransom notes. There would be no point in murdering her or holding her without getting money in return. The ransom notes are real. What if she suddenly turned up before the money was paid? She hasnt. The ransom notes are a direct result and authored by the kidnapper or his collaborators. jmo

How u know?

 

[CrimeDawg123]

Time doesn't matter if you aim to prevent a changing of inheritance or a trust by the missing?

Oh, I see your point - as in the perp being written out of the will/trust