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

[mickey2942]

Too noisy in the middle of the night, IMO.

I am sorry that you don't keep up with the most recent trends in EV, electric UTV.

https://www.polaris.com/en-us/off-road/electric-vehicles/

 

[submarine7]

She moderated a town hall.

Savannah Guthrie Called Controversial Trump Town Hall 1 of the ‘Most High-Pressure Situations You Can Find Yourself In’

Does she lean more Democrat or Republican?

www.yahoo.com

She presents as politically neutral.

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

From comments on here and my own personal opinions, sounds like two very flawed LE entities at odds with each other. Terrible for the Guthrie family.

 

[Cassie P]

I have a habit of taking my gloves off and putting them in my lap when driving. I get out of the car without thinking and end up losing at least one of them.

Oh you just solved the mystery of one pair of gloves I saw in a parking lot. A matched pair together on the ground, in a parking spot. I wondered how they landed so neatly together.

 

[SRWCF]

I am sorry that you don't keep up with the most recent trends in EV, electric UTV.

https://www.polaris.com/en-us/off-road/electric-vehicles/

So his getaway vehicle was an electric UTV and he had NG hop on the back? Alrighty then!

 

[RainbowBoogie]

I don't think anybody here is going to have conclusive info, but a few points to keep in mind:

1. NG was on the Today show with SG in November, so millions of people saw her and learned about her there. It's not surprising if some wanted to learn more.
2. There is an author with the same name who probably gets some search traffic.
3. Geolocating the person doing a search query is inexact at the best times, and can be totally off if they are using a VPN or other privacy-protection measures.
4. As I mentioned earlier, Google Trends is not accurate for exact counts of searches, or for information about low-volume searches. Its intended purpose is for showing trends in popularity of relatively common/popular search terms. I would be cautious about drawing conclusions from data about uncommon searches (especially things like "there were no searches before date X, and suddenly people are searching it!")

JMO, YMMV, MOO, IMHO, all the things

That makes sense, thank you for the answer!

 

[Alxx108]

Does anyone have any info on why Nancy’s name would have been searched so many times before the incident - from places outside of her state? I am not seeing a lot of info about this and … idk it seems kind of important? Would love to hear your thoughts!

I have the same question! This also came up in the Tepe case, and I recall reading people say you couldn't trust the Google analytics numbers for searches. I didn't quite understand why or what would cause spikes if not for actual searches happening. Does anyone understand whether or not the numbers are to be trusted?

 

[TKG]

Does anyone have any info on why Nancy’s name would have been searched so many times before the incident - from places outside of her state? I am not seeing a lot of info about this and … idk it seems kind of important? Would love to hear your thoughts!

Do you mind me asking where you read or heard this happened?

 

[MrsEmmaPeel]

Woefully behind, but I did have a comment. I feel very differently about the FBI and its abilities now than I did in the not so distant past. Perhaps, there was actual reasons behind these decisions, and perhaps, all the negative “leaks” about the Sheriff are being promoted by an overly self-promoting and not so trustworthy current FBI

I hear you @MassGuy.

 

[SaraSmile]

IMO in a quiet neighborhood like Nancy’s that would be the last thing you would use to be stealthy.

Quiet car as getaway car. Actually the desert is packed dirt mostly, crushed rock, and it’s sandy, of course, but very drivable, lots of long dirt roads out in the middle of nowhere.

When you see tumbleweed, shrubs, cacti, “living plants”, that means it’s got a good, mostly dirt base. ( I know it must look incredibly barren if you are from the East Coast).

There are all sand dune areas, and with those, yes, you need a 4x4, and can still get stuck.

JMO

 

[nightowl2728]

Dang ok there are now FOUR separate US Army helicopters on the tracker, all took off from Pinal Airpark recently, going in different directions out from Pinal and CIRCLING over mountainous clusters/canyons/bodies of water (the topography of AZ is so crazy to me as an East coaster) and former mines, it appears.

I'm trying to not get too excited about this as it COULD be unrelated but seems very coincidental in terms of what LE should be doing to search. Interesting though it is past dark in Arizona right now, I believe.

EDIT: I lost the fourth, I wonder if it's just out of range/service or it landed.

For example, GOON93 is now circling this area which appears to be fairly remote - no Google street view, no homes or businesses, etc.

 

[Cassie P]

Genetic genealogy is a very slow process. Can take months. Or longer.

No, it depends. I used to do adoption searches using genetic genealogy. It can be quite quick depending upon what kind of matches you get. Close matches means you could do it in a hour or so! If you cannot get close matches it may take longer. But you can narrow it down to certain locations, family surnames, and ethnic groups fairly quickly.

 

[PCHS]

From comments on here and my own personal opinions, sounds like two very flawed LE entities at odds with each other. Terrible for the Guthrie family.

This is exactly where I am sitting right now.

 

[mickey2942]

The only good thing right now for the searchers, is the weather. At least they don't have searing summer heat now.

 

[RainbowBoogie]

I have the same question! This also came up in the Tepe case, and I recall reading people say you couldn't trust the Google analytics numbers for searches. I didn't quite understand why or what would cause spikes if not for actual searches happening. Does anyone understand whether or not the numbers are to be trusted?

Right!? I thought Google analytics were supposed to be accurate/well done. Plenty of large companies even use this info for decision making.

 

[Sakura2Sophia4Lucia]

Too noisy in the middle of the night, IMO.

Good point. They wouldn't likely have used a ATV in the middle of the night. I see them all of the time on the outskirts of Tucson during the day. It would be highly suspect to see a person in the middle of the night on a ATV.

JMO

 

[SMK777]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2022153363048292398

So is Brian Entin basically saying that the FBI did not know that a glove had been found in the house and sent for testing by the Sheriff, whenever that occurred? And that there may be other incidents as well?

[ I confess I didn't have time to read the initial article you posted, only the headline, and skimmed some, so may have missed something. Multitasking here ]

 

[SaraSmile]

I don't think anybody here is going to have conclusive info, but a few points to keep in mind:

1. NG was on the Today show with SG in November, so millions of people saw her and learned about her there. It's not surprising if some wanted to learn more.
2. There is an author with the same name who probably gets some search traffic.
3. Geolocating the person doing a search query is inexact at the best times, and can be totally off if they are using a VPN or other privacy-protection measures.
4. As I mentioned earlier, Google Trends is not accurate for exact counts of searches, or for information about low-volume searches. Its intended purpose is for showing trends in popularity of relatively common/popular search terms. I would be cautious about drawing conclusions from data about uncommon searches (especially things like "there were no searches before date X, and suddenly people are searching it!")

JMO, YMMV, MOO, IMHO, all the things

Savannah did a whole show ( or series?) about her mother and her life growing up in Tucson.
It was in Nov 2025, so only a couple of months ago. Just an idea why people would research her.

JMO

 

[thefragile7393]

She presents as politically neutral.

not to some on one side unfortunately. All anyone would have to do is google the presidential debate and see the critcism she got. Not my opinion-it is fact she was really lambasted (even though I agree with you that she did well and was neutral), however I'm not linking what can be found easily, so I will say IMO

 

[HoveringWombats]

I have the same question! This also came up in the Tepe case, and I recall reading people say you couldn't trust the Google analytics numbers for searches. I didn't quite understand why or what would cause spikes if not for actual searches happening. Does anyone understand whether or not the numbers are to be trusted?

Google Trends and Google Analytics are not the same thing. Google Analytics is not relevant here (it can't be used for this). People are using Google Trends, which is designed to show how the popularity of common search terms varies over time. To my knowledge (MOO, possibly out of date information disclaimers apply), it operates on a sample of search traffic rather than all traffic. For example (completely making up the number here), they might decide that they only need to look at 1% of search traffic to generate trends, because any sufficiently popular search term will still be in those millions of searches, in the right proportions compared to other popular search terms. But if you have an uncommon search term, it's possible or even likely that it won't show up at all in that 1% slice. And maybe it does show in the next 1% slice and it looks like suddenly there's a spike in traffic, when it was roughly the same.

I would not expect the problem to be that it shows searches that didn't happen. I expect that it will miss searches that did happen, but potentially inconsistently, which can show up as spikes and valleys that don't actually exist.

It's also possible that some search term normalization happens (things like spell correction, clustering of similar search terms, etc.) which might cause searches to show up in a trend when you might not expect them to.

Finally, the geolocation stuff is really iffy at small numbers. If all of the searches in that "spike" come from one user who happens to be using a VPN, it's going to be way wrong. This effect generally will cancel out on a common search term with millions of searches.

Bottom line really, without needing to know any technical details of how this works, is that it's not what Google Trends was designed for. Just like any other time we're using something in a way other than what it was designed for, the results might not be what we hope.

JMO, based on a combination of experience, knowledge, and educated guesses. There may be mistakes here. Trust at your own risk.