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

[SMK777]

I'm very confused by yesterday's deadline passing, the chilling warning from the "ransom" people described by CNN; and all the headlines about it.

Why did the deadline pass? SG said they would pay. So why did it pass?

Purported deadline passes: Guthrie’s possible abductors demanded $6 million by 5 p.m. yesterday, CNN affiliate KGUN reported, citing a note sent to the station. The note included a threat to Guthrie’s life, KGUN said. The FBI said it was not aware of any communication between the Guthrie family and suspected kidnappers.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/nancy-guthrie-savannah-missing-mom-02-10-26

 

[Sadi]

Doesn't really reveal they have DNA from an unknown source inside the home. Just reveals that NG's hired associates are submitting DNA samples. And likely voluntarily in case they do find unknown DNA in the home and want to distinguish it from known DNA (so that they can rule out or scrutinize it more).

JMO.

I may be reading into this too much, but why not all of the hired help, just some? Unless they have a specific reason…?

 

[missy1974]

I keep thinking about this message posted yesterday from Brian Entin. "New leads" that are bringing an "active presence" to both Guthrie houses.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2021008852385477030

Then we're hearing about DNA testing. Maybe that's related.

MOO

I don't think they did any searching last night though, the media would have been all over that, so not sure why they put that out there and then didn't show up anyway.

 

[dalsglen]

It is encouraging and may suggest they have some samples where they have DNA, or think they have DNA to compare to people in and around her sphere.

You are right to point out that the context of DNA samples matters. For example: Housekeeper DNA from a hair in the carpet is casual. Housekeeper DNA from a semen stain on the bed is not casual, for example.

And you certainly wouldn't expect any dna from the pool guy or landscaper to be in her bedroom for example.

 

[dalsglen]

I'm very confused by yesterday's deadline passing, the chilling warning from the "ransom" people described by CNN; and all the headlines about it.

Why did the deadline pass? SG said they would pay. So why did it pass?

Purported deadline passes: Guthrie’s possible abductors demanded $6 million by 5 p.m. yesterday, CNN affiliate KGUN reported, citing a note sent to the station. The note included a threat to Guthrie’s life, KGUN said. The FBI said it was not aware of any communication between the Guthrie family and suspected kidnappers.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/nancy-guthrie-savannah-missing-mom-02-10-26

They ARE paying. Paying the price of someone's sheer evilness rather than monetary. Or maybe they did pay after all.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

Doubt it's to exclude people as suspects .

Asking for samples tells me it's to match unknown DNA with known samples. DNA collected from carpet not matching family can then be matched with the housekeeper - doesn't mean the housekeeper is excluded as a suspect, just means they know who that sample belongs to.

Thats my personal experience. Others on here who have been in LE may have worked places where things are handled differently

So if LE asks for a sample and someone refuses, will LE get a warrant?

 

[missy1974]

I can follow your logic but there could be other reasons for choosing TMZ in addition to the local stations. TMZ suggested that they were chosen because the sender wanted to know it had been received and the local stations who received it before they did weren’t disclosing it. See the link to the news nation article below.

But also I am not sure that the 2 local stations and TMZ were the only places that it was sent just because they are the only ones that acknowledged they received it. My first thought when it came out was why not send it to NBC or a local NBC affiliate? But maybe they did and maybe NBC chose not to disclose that. How would we know?

And regarding whether sending it to TMZ was from someone under 30…. Well I am considerably over 30 (more than twice that) and well aware that TMZ often talks about things sooner and/or discloses info that news agencies might not.

What we know about the ransom notes in the Nancy Guthrie case

Both TMZ and KOLD representatives said wording in the messages suggests the sender has familiarity with the Tucson area.

www.newsnationnow.com

I have felt like LE received or knew about that note earlier on the Monday morning. But that is JMO

 

[HoveringWombats]

Theory #2- Someone did this purposely for ransom. Statistically unlikely. The only indication of this is the ransom note but the details in it that seem to indicate the perp was at the crime scene were all available online before the note arrived- pictures of her white apple watch, google images of her home with floodlights, which almost everyone has, news reports showing the home with a damaged floodlight before the ransom note arrived, and finally no actual proof of life. The note could have been produced from publicly available information.

Snipped by me, BBM

I think those whole post is well thought-out and reasonable. I just want to say that maybe I am being too trusting (not my usual stance, but here we are), but I am not yet willing to conclusively say that the only details in the ransom note(s) were items that had already been revealed publicly. I agree that per the descriptions we have heard in the media (often second- and even third-hand from people who have not actually seen the letters) could be explained away by things that were known. But without actually seeing the letters, or at least hearing detailed and not intentionally obfuscated descriptions of the details therein, I don't know if we can totally dismiss this.

What I keep going back to is, if this is as blindingly obvious as it seems to us, would the FBI not have quickly realized the same thing and discredited the letters? Maybe they did and they just haven't told us, but there has been no indication of it yet. If the people who have seen the letters and seen the condition in the house believe at least that aspect of them is credible, who am I to disagree based on much more limited information?

JMO

 

[Jade]

Thank you. I am older and new here. Still learning to navigate and appreciate all the help anyone can kindly give me.

Here's a direct link to the media thread for Mrs. Guthrie just click on this and it will take you to the first page of that thread:

Nancy Guthrie, 84, missing - last seen in the Catalina foothills area on Jan 31, 2026 - MEDIA, MAPS, TIMELINE thread *NO DISCUSSION*


imo

 

[Cipher Vale]

Thanks. This is helpful.

Just to clarify my question, I wasn't really wondering about excluding or eliminating people as suspects. It's more about, does this mean that they definitively HAVE found unknown DNA already, and now need to match it to someone? Or could be more that they have now built up what they believe is a fairly complete list of people who worked in the house, and they are now going down that list to collect DNA (and maybe other info from them), so that if and when they find unknown DNA, they have a "library" so to speak of samples to try to match it against.

Basically, I'm just questioning the premise that the DNA testing proves they have already found something in the house, as the expert said. I hope it does, because I want them to figure it out. And if you, and other experienced people here, tell me that's what it means, I will believe you. Just as a lay-person, absent further confirmation, it didn't sway me. It seemed reasonable to proactively gather DNA samples from anyone who may be around, so they don't have to scramble to track people down and do it if they do find something to check it against.

I would assume they have definitely found DNA. Someone living alone could have DNA from the mailman, neighbors, the HVAC guy. It should go without question they've collected unknown DNA.

So, yes, they now have a "library" of DNA to connect to people. From there they can look for oddities. As someone mentioned above: the housekeeper DNA in a bedroom may be explained- the roofer DNA in a bedroom is suspicious. Hair DNA from the housekeeper is normal. Blood DNA from the housekeeper is not.

AND that same library would be used if a body is found and fingernail scraping matches a known sample.

 

[SlimPickens]

Not a political post. Please don't reply with 'yeah but Trump is unreliable...", because he is/was being briefed by the highest levels at DOJ and the FBI, and the President saying something matters, whether friend or foe. He does (and did) know more than most by the nature of his position, his relationship and purported conversation with SG, and, good or bad, his often inserting himself and his office into the relevant public affairs of the day. Pretty sad that my disclaimer is longer than my post, but here goes:

I keep returning to a word that DJT used on the plane when he was asked whether resources were being deployed for a search, He specifically said 'not a search, a solution', or something to that effect. Granted, he said that a solution could very well happen soon, perhaps even 'within hours', but he did parse and emphasize that word. I wonder what he meant by that, and why he specifically scoffed at or shot down 'search' so quickly?

JMO.

 

[ZZZZZZZZZZ]

I'm struggling with the SIL in this, too. Even if a family member were to have done this, why do it in a way where they'd know it would be a nationwide spectacle? They can't get the money even if it was paid without blowing their cover.

And awful as this is, if a family member just wanted to get rid of her she is 84 with severe mobility issues and health problems. It would be a lot easier to make it look like an accidental fall than to risk the scrutiny of an abduction.

Perhaps an argument ensued at AG's house and NG was accidentally killed. Whoever was asking for ransom to be paid could be anyone anywhere in the world who may be totally unrelated to the case.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Extortion gone wrong? Maybe someone had been borrowing money, asking for a little here and there and NG grew weary of it. Then it got ugly, they conked her on the head, panicked, nabbed her.

Or maybe they found evidence of SA. The perp realized he left DNA everywhere, panicked and nabbed her to get out of there.

Too many unknowns to make a better guess.

There are many possibilities in this very disturbing case. I think the most likely is that she unexpectedly passed and that wasn't part of the original plan. As such, they had the added concern of a murder or manslaughter charge. On the other hand, she could have been deceased as they were removing her from her home. There was enough blood at the scene (at least what was shown to the public to speculate she might have died right there.

At present, they may have been attempting to get money for remains, but may have abandoned the plot altogether. So hard to say. This may be younger perps who don't know what to do if NG has passed.

Truly a heartbreaking situation and a nightmare. I so pray they find these Perps.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[Cipher Vale]

So if LE asks for a sample and someone refuses, will LE get a warrant?

That's a great question. In my experience, unless there is evidence to compel the magistrate (or judge) to sign a warrant - no.

Now, if LE found a plumbers tool under the bed and the plumber refuses - then yes.

 

[Sadi]

You are right to question me on this. I believed “A” vehicle was removed from AG home. I will report my post if I cannot find a credible link. Thank you. IMO

I’m not questioning you directly, just responding to your comment and asking as a general question to everyone. Sorry if it seemed that way. I thought her car was towed, but have not heard anything more and not a picture anywhere.

 

[Curiousobserver]

Snipped by my, BBM

I think those whole post is well thought-out and reasonable. I just want to say that maybe I am being too trusting (not my usual stance, but here we are), but I am not yet willing to conclusively say that the only details in the ransom note(s) were items that had already been revealed publicly. I agree that per the descriptions we have heard in the media (often second- and even third-hand from people who have not actually seen the letters) could be explained away by things that were known. But without actually seeing the letters, or at least hearing detailed and not intentionally obfuscated descriptions of the details therein, I don't know if we can totally dismiss this.

What I keep going back to is, if this is as blindingly obvious as it seems to us, would the FBI not have quickly realized the same thing and discredited the letters? Maybe they did and they just haven't told us, but there has been no indication of it yet. If the people who have seen the letters and seen the condition in the house believe at least that aspect of them is credible, who am I to disagree based on much more limited information?

JMO

Agreed-

I am feeling like in the second communication sent to the news station, the kidnapers could have used a nickname, or relayed a memory only she would have known as proof of life. Apparently they did not do anything like this. This would have assured a payday, but they didn't do it. My feeling it is because they couldn't.

 

[Eli9]

Thank you. I am older and new here. Still learning to navigate and appreciate all the help anyone can kindly give me.

This will take you to the media thread. It's just for links, maps, articles, etc. No discussion on that thread.

Thread 'Nancy Guthrie, 84, missing - last seen in the Catalina foothills area on Jan 31, 2026 - MEDIA, MAPS, TIMELINE thread *NO DISCUSSION*'

Friday at 8:37 PM

MEDIA LINKS AND TIMELINES ONLY. NO DISCUSSION

SHERIFF IS CONFIDENT NANCY GUTHRIE WILL BE FOUND
CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST
ANOTHER RANSOM NOTE
CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO

An 84-year-old woman who was reported missing in Arizona has been identified by officials as the mother of "Today" show host Savannah Guthrie.

The Pima County Sheriff’s Department announced during a news conference on Sunday that Nancy Guthrie was last seen in the Catalina Foothills area on Saturday night at approximately 9:45 p.m.

Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said a...

• Ghostwheel
• Replies: 21
• Forum: Crimes In The News- Time Line - Media-Reference Fo

• 

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2021219367531520486

 

[cady]

They ARE paying. Paying the price of someone's sheer evilness rather than monetary. Or maybe they did pay after all.

That's how I see it too. SG didn't say what she would "pay" or who. We will pay, has several different meanings. Maybe "we will pay you back for this", we ARE paying in pain, or we will pay you what you want. JMO

 

[BrittMontero]

I'm struggling with the SIL in this, too. Even if a family member were to have done this, why do it in a way where they'd know it would be a nationwide spectacle? They can't get the money even if it was paid without blowing their cover.

And awful as this is, if a family member just wanted to get rid of her she is 84 with severe mobility issues and health problems. It would be a lot easier to make it look like an accidental fall than to risk the scrutiny of an abduction.

Agree. Not to be crass, but an ‘accidental’ fall into the pool would be nearly foolproof. “I was inside cooking/on phone/in bathroom and didn’t hear her fall in!”

No need for a huge charade.