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

[Mom of 3]

Long time reader, but I had to register to share some theories I haven’t seen much here or anywhere else online.

These deal with two main issues: cameras and the timeline (40+ minutes). IMO major possibilities are being overlooked in both cases. When something doesn’t make sense, that usually means we just haven’t found the right explanation yet. IMO the explanation I will offer below makes a lot of seemingly confusing data points fit perfectly.

This is all just my opinion based on things we have heard.

Topic #1: Cameras

First, cameras: IMO this guy WANTED to be seen. In fact, it was a key part of his strategy. Both times, but especially the first time he showed up. As someone who has these types of cameras as part of my home security system and understands them extremely well, it actually makes perfect sense that he would want to trigger them AND appear in the image.

Think of a camera as an early warning system as much as it is a camera. Some people silence them all night and rely on them to provide retroactive evidence of a crime. Others want the alerts to wake them up so they have early warning of danger. Some do both. That makes all the difference in this crime.

One of the underappreciated aspects of Blink, Nest, Ring, and the like is that in addition to being cameras and microphones, they also act as perimeter annunciators. What I mean by that is that it is practically impossible to disable them without first triggering them, which sends an immediate alert to someone’s phone (sometimes multiple people’s phones, depending on the setup). You can rip the camera off the wall and destroy it but it’s already too late: it has served its purpose and alerted the owner, who is possibly now awake and taking any number of actions. The criminal’s element of surprise is gone and their presence is known. That is, unless the homeowner silences alerts at night and just checks in the morning (as most people do because they don’t want to wake up every time a cat walks across their porch in the middle of the night).

In this scenario, he didn’t care about being filmed per se. He’s well disguised anyway and likely assumes he will be filmed somewhere by a camera he missed. IMO his concern was 100% about whether the alerts would wake Nancy up before he got inside and spoil his plan.

He needed the element of surprise. An 84 year old woman is definitely going to dial 911 if she is awakened by a break- in in progress. Even if he gets her out before police arrive, the police are now aware of a break-in/kidnapping in progress and will be swarming the entire neighborhood. The criminal might even drive past a responding officer, who will afterwards recall seeing the vehicle leaving the neighborhood as they responded. They might even call it in and have another officer stop that vehicle in case it is the perp. Risk goes way, way up if Nancy wakes up at any point before he gets inside and can stop her from calling 911.

Let’s assume this new timeline of photos is correct: he was there beforehand, likely an earlier date. I have thought since the photos first emerged that they must have been taken on different nights. Most people have focused on the shoes, lack of backpack, lack of holster… but the first thing I noticed was the distinct lack of a shadow (his shadow is clearly visible on the night he wore the backpack and holster, but absent in the photo where he is not wearing them).

This suggests a pitch black night in the earlier timeframe photo, perfect for recon. He wears his same gear that he’ll wear later because he is doing a dry run and wants it to feel as much like the real thing as possible, and he also does not want to be identified. He also wants to appear as menacing as possible for the camera as mentioned above.

He has to know what to expect, if anything, when the camera is triggered. And he would understand that triggering it is unavoidable.

Even if the criminal has a wifi jammer most systems will then alert the owner that all the modules are down. So they’re now awake at a minimum and likely to notice sounds outside or even to look out the windows to investigate, because that is suspicious.

These alerts could very well be loud and wake the person up. The person might then turn lights on in the house, go to live view to see what is going on, or dial 911 or text a family member depending on the circumstances. Or grab a firearm that they have for protection. Maybe all of the above. The criminal has no idea what is going on, if anything at all. Almost all of these systems will send an immediate thumbnail before recording so that even if the camera is disabled before the video is uploaded to the cloud you have an image of whatever set it off on your phone.

IMO this guy is almost posing for the camera on the earlier date. He needs to find out: what happens if the camera alerts AND the image in the thumbnail or on the phone is of a terrifying man in a mask and gloves? Notice he stands far enough away that you can see he looks terrifying but can’t make out much in terms of ID. It’s no good if it alerts and the image is some strange blur or nothing at all, because those of us who have these cameras see that stuff all the time. Cats, rabbits, the wind.. All cause triggers. You’re not raising the alarm so to speak, for every single time it notifies you of motion.

He needs the person inside to see a central casting bad guy so that they will react however they are going to react. That reaction will then be taken into account in whatever plans he has for the actual night of the kidnapping. Thus the need for a 2-part plan.

Now imagine you are 84. Your phone alerts and wakes you up in the middle of the night. You see THAT on your screen. You are almost certainly going to react. You likely dial 911. You turn on lights in the house because you are definitely not going to want to sit in the dark until cops come. You text or call family or neighbors for help right after 911. In short, ruckus ensues.

Or maybe your family also gets the alerts. It’s not yet 2AM on a Saturday. It’s not impossible that someone else also gets the alert who is actually still awake, watching TV, playing video games, whatever. They see that nightmare on grandma’s front door, or mom’s front door. Obviously action will be taken of some type.

So he poses to ensure that he has triggered the camera, then quickly retreats down the street into the brush somewhere to hide. Do lights come on? Do police arrive? Does a dog bark? Is there any activity at all?

Hmm, nothing. Nothing happens at all he notices. So he slinks away into the darkness, confident that the cameras are no real threat. The biggest threat of the cameras is that they wake Nancy up before he can get inside, meaning 911 is called.

So he waits a couple weeks and watches off and on. Are more visible security measures taken? Do new cameras appear?

Now, here’s the thing: he is likely feeling better in terms of not alerting anyone inside based on previous recon. But that could be a one-off. Maybe she silenced her phone that night but not this one. So he needs a quick repeat on the night of.

This is where the timeline comes in.

Topic #2: Timeline on the Night of the Kidnapping

I do not believe at all that he was inside the house for 40+ minutes as we keep hearing almost everywhere. That makes zero sense for a kidnapping, where every moment spent at the scene in contact with the victim= increased risk.

In this scenario I have described he returns a couple of weeks later, fairly confident that the cameras pose no real threat. He likely now assumes Nancy has her phone on silent so that every time a cat or other animal walks by at night she doesn’t wake up.

However, he has to make sure, just in case she woke up the next morning (from the earlier recon) and saw that image and NOW takes more security steps, such as having her alerts on loud enough to wake her up. Maybe a neighbor or someone else is also now getting them as a backup. He doesn’t know, so he goes up to the porch, knowing the camera will activate. Of course he ducks his head just in case (why over expose himself to being filmed?).

This is a test… What will happen?

The lantana also serves a purpose: it looks even more scary/wrong. If anyone is seeing someone do that they are raising the alarm 100% for sure. It escalates from a simple prowler on the porch to likely intent to cause harm.

But nothing happens. He slinks to the shadows again and waits. No lights come on. No cops show up. This could account for a solid 15-20 minutes of that 40 minute timeline we keep hearing about. Again, there is no real rush here. If he is detected he will escape into the pitch black and brush unseen. If he is not detected then it’s like he just arrived. It’s likely he has a getaway driver close by but not so close that if police suddenly come flying down the street his car isn’t sitting there parked suspiciously. It’s not like he can hop into a car and take off 2 houses down at 2:30 AM or so when the police are responding to a suspicious man trying to break into a house.

We have also heard about a second motion detection after 2, about 15 minutes or so before Nancy’s pacemaker disconnected from her watch. This could be the kidnapper(s) proceeding to gain entry into the house, meaning they would have only been inside for 10 minutes or less in total, which makes a lot more sense. One restrains her while the other goes and gets the car OR signals the getaway driver that it’s time, which obviously would not be in the driveway to begin with in case their camera test resulted in their presence being detected. So that takes a few minutes, as does getting her into the car, situated, and leaving.

If you take all that into account, we could be talking 5-10 minutes or even less in the house in total. If they were there for 40 minutes they would have cleaned up all the blood drops. Instead, IMO, they got in as quietly as possible after making sure the cameras didn’t wake anyone up, and got her out as quickly as possible, because who knows what little hidden cameras or security items they could miss. Kidnappers act fast. They don’t stick around the scene any longer than needed once the crime is in motion.

Just my theory, but I think it explains this person’s actions. Far from being a bumbling amateur, this was IMO a clever test to see what alerts, if any, would result from the camera before proceeding into the house.

I think this is probably spot on. I had been having the same thoughts but hadn't had the time to articulate them in this way.

It still doesn't answer the WHY or the question of what they hoped to gain from kidnapping NG, but I think it is a very well thought out plan and process of what happened.

 

[joe jones]

Does anybody know exactly how many doors on NG house, I have seen front door, garage internal door, door by the overhang where the garden furniture is and one other door with square pane glass windows on the top, I have yet to see a photo of sliding glass/patio doors that has been mentioned

 

[LakeRat55]

Long time reader, but I had to register to share some theories I haven’t seen much here or anywhere else online.

These deal with two main issues: cameras and the timeline (40+ minutes). IMO major possibilities are being overlooked in both cases. When something doesn’t make sense, that usually means we just haven’t found the right explanation yet. IMO the explanation I will offer below makes a lot of seemingly confusing data points fit perfectly.

This is all just my opinion based on things we have heard.

Topic #1: Cameras

First, cameras: IMO this guy WANTED to be seen. In fact, it was a key part of his strategy. Both times, but especially the first time he showed up. As someone who has these types of cameras as part of my home security system and understands them extremely well, it actually makes perfect sense that he would want to trigger them AND appear in the image.

Think of a camera as an early warning system as much as it is a camera. Some people silence them all night and rely on them to provide retroactive evidence of a crime. Others want the alerts to wake them up so they have early warning of danger. Some do both. That makes all the difference in this crime.

One of the underappreciated aspects of Blink, Nest, Ring, and the like is that in addition to being cameras and microphones, they also act as perimeter annunciators. What I mean by that is that it is practically impossible to disable them without first triggering them, which sends an immediate alert to someone’s phone (sometimes multiple people’s phones, depending on the setup). You can rip the camera off the wall and destroy it but it’s already too late: it has served its purpose and alerted the owner, who is possibly now awake and taking any number of actions. The criminal’s element of surprise is gone and their presence is known. That is, unless the homeowner silences alerts at night and just checks in the morning (as most people do because they don’t want to wake up every time a cat walks across their porch in the middle of the night).

In this scenario, he didn’t care about being filmed per se. He’s well disguised anyway and likely assumes he will be filmed somewhere by a camera he missed. IMO his concern was 100% about whether the alerts would wake Nancy up before he got inside and spoil his plan.

He needed the element of surprise. An 84 year old woman is definitely going to dial 911 if she is awakened by a break- in in progress. Even if he gets her out before police arrive, the police are now aware of a break-in/kidnapping in progress and will be swarming the entire neighborhood. The criminal might even drive past a responding officer, who will afterwards recall seeing the vehicle leaving the neighborhood as they responded. They might even call it in and have another officer stop that vehicle in case it is the perp. Risk goes way, way up if Nancy wakes up at any point before he gets inside and can stop her from calling 911.

Let’s assume this new timeline of photos is correct: he was there beforehand, likely an earlier date. I have thought since the photos first emerged that they must have been taken on different nights. Most people have focused on the shoes, lack of backpack, lack of holster… but the first thing I noticed was the distinct lack of a shadow (his shadow is clearly visible on the night he wore the backpack and holster, but absent in the photo where he is not wearing them).

This suggests a pitch black night in the earlier timeframe photo, perfect for recon. He wears his same gear that he’ll wear later because he is doing a dry run and wants it to feel as much like the real thing as possible, and he also does not want to be identified. He also wants to appear as menacing as possible for the camera as mentioned above.

He has to know what to expect, if anything, when the camera is triggered. And he would understand that triggering it is unavoidable.

Even if the criminal has a wifi jammer most systems will then alert the owner that all the modules are down. So they’re now awake at a minimum and likely to notice sounds outside or even to look out the windows to investigate, because that is suspicious.

These alerts could very well be loud and wake the person up. The person might then turn lights on in the house, go to live view to see what is going on, or dial 911 or text a family member depending on the circumstances. Or grab a firearm that they have for protection. Maybe all of the above. The criminal has no idea what is going on, if anything at all. Almost all of these systems will send an immediate thumbnail before recording so that even if the camera is disabled before the video is uploaded to the cloud you have an image of whatever set it off on your phone.

IMO this guy is almost posing for the camera on the earlier date. He needs to find out: what happens if the camera alerts AND the image in the thumbnail or on the phone is of a terrifying man in a mask and gloves? Notice he stands far enough away that you can see he looks terrifying but can’t make out much in terms of ID. It’s no good if it alerts and the image is some strange blur or nothing at all, because those of us who have these cameras see that stuff all the time. Cats, rabbits, the wind.. All cause triggers. You’re not raising the alarm so to speak, for every single time it notifies you of motion.

He needs the person inside to see a central casting bad guy so that they will react however they are going to react. That reaction will then be taken into account in whatever plans he has for the actual night of the kidnapping. Thus the need for a 2-part plan.

Now imagine you are 84. Your phone alerts and wakes you up in the middle of the night. You see THAT on your screen. You are almost certainly going to react. You likely dial 911. You turn on lights in the house because you are definitely not going to want to sit in the dark until cops come. You text or call family or neighbors for help right after 911. In short, ruckus ensues.

Or maybe your family also gets the alerts. It’s not yet 2AM on a Saturday. It’s not impossible that someone else also gets the alert who is actually still awake, watching TV, playing video games, whatever. They see that nightmare on grandma’s front door, or mom’s front door. Obviously action will be taken of some type.

So he poses to ensure that he has triggered the camera, then quickly retreats down the street into the brush somewhere to hide. Do lights come on? Do police arrive? Does a dog bark? Is there any activity at all?

Hmm, nothing. Nothing happens at all he notices. So he slinks away into the darkness, confident that the cameras are no real threat. The biggest threat of the cameras is that they wake Nancy up before he can get inside, meaning 911 is called.

So he waits a couple weeks and watches off and on. Are more visible security measures taken? Do new cameras appear?

Now, here’s the thing: he is likely feeling better in terms of not alerting anyone inside based on previous recon. But that could be a one-off. Maybe she silenced her phone that night but not this one. So he needs a quick repeat on the night of.

This is where the timeline comes in.

Topic #2: Timeline on the Night of the Kidnapping

I do not believe at all that he was inside the house for 40+ minutes as we keep hearing almost everywhere. That makes zero sense for a kidnapping, where every moment spent at the scene in contact with the victim= increased risk.

In this scenario I have described he returns a couple of weeks later, fairly confident that the cameras pose no real threat. He likely now assumes Nancy has her phone on silent so that every time a cat or other animal walks by at night she doesn’t wake up.

However, he has to make sure, just in case she woke up the next morning (from the earlier recon) and saw that image and NOW takes more security steps, such as having her alerts on loud enough to wake her up. Maybe a neighbor or someone else is also now getting them as a backup. He doesn’t know, so he goes up to the porch, knowing the camera will activate. Of course he ducks his head just in case (why over expose himself to being filmed?).

This is a test… What will happen?

The lantana also serves a purpose: it looks even more scary/wrong. If anyone is seeing someone do that they are raising the alarm 100% for sure. It escalates from a simple prowler on the porch to likely intent to cause harm.

But nothing happens. He slinks to the shadows again and waits. No lights come on. No cops show up. This could account for a solid 15-20 minutes of that 40 minute timeline we keep hearing about. Again, there is no real rush here. If he is detected he will escape into the pitch black and brush unseen. If he is not detected then it’s like he just arrived. It’s likely he has a getaway driver close by but not so close that if police suddenly come flying down the street his car isn’t sitting there parked suspiciously. It’s not like he can hop into a car and take off 2 houses down at 2:30 AM or so when the police are responding to a suspicious man trying to break into a house.

We have also heard about a second motion detection after 2, about 15 minutes or so before Nancy’s pacemaker disconnected from her watch. This could be the kidnapper(s) proceeding to gain entry into the house, meaning they would have only been inside for 10 minutes or less in total, which makes a lot more sense. One restrains her while the other goes and gets the car OR signals the getaway driver that it’s time, which obviously would not be in the driveway to begin with in case their camera test resulted in their presence being detected. So that takes a few minutes, as does getting her into the car, situated, and leaving.

If you take all that into account, we could be talking 5-10 minutes or even less in the house in total. If they were there for 40 minutes they would have cleaned up all the blood drops. Instead, IMO, they got in as quietly as possible after making sure the cameras didn’t wake anyone up, and got her out as quickly as possible, because who knows what little hidden cameras or security items they could miss. Kidnappers act fast. They don’t stick around the scene any longer than needed once the crime is in motion.

Just my theory, but I think it explains this person’s actions. Far from being a bumbling amateur, this was IMO a clever test to see what alerts, if any, would result from the camera before proceeding into the house.

I like this line of thinking regarding the cameras. The guy seemed pretty confident that nothing was going to happen while he was on the porch. This confidence could very well have been from being there at least once, maybe even more times, before. One thing I don't have a good answer for yet is that he/they must have also been fairly confident that the house did not have an active perimeter alarm on the doors and windows nor a motion alarm inside of the home. How would the perp/s have known that an alarm was not active? Been inside some time in the past??? I don't know anything about homes specifically in Tucson, but higher end homes in most larger metro areas would have built in alarm systems, many of which are professionally monitored (like ADT, for example). Maybe hers did, maybe it did not, but an alarm was not tripped that night, resulting in police or at least family response. My 90 year old mom always made sure her alarm was set before turning in, as I think most elderly women living alone would do. Has there been any credible info released regarding if the home had an alarm or not?

 

[SaraSmile]

In this thread are articles and pictures of the searches that started the day they found out NG was missing and have been posted repeatedly.

The neighbor's quote tells of drones up the first day.

There are pictures of a helicopter with a guy hanging out searching.

Is there some link that says they didn’t search and the pictures, videos and statements in msm on this thread describing searches are what; not true?


For example:
…
Sheriff’s officials said 100 personnel are working to find and bring Nancy Guthrie back home.

Law enforcement, including U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, with K-9s, were seen outside the Catalina Hills house just after 4 p.m.…

Searchers used drones and search dogs and were supported by volunteers, U.S. Border Patrol and the homicide team, according to the sheriff.

Family of missing Nancy Guthrie releases video statement as search intensifies


all imo

They searched a lot right at NG’s house and very nearby neighborhood. Very thorough, I believe.
Flyover and drones for other areas further out.

I really think they need ground searches, dogs, volunteers to look along country or dirt roads, washes, remote trail parking areas. I would think local hikers, bikers would know about lots of spots to explore. Maybe look at Strava for Tucson area, trail maps for ideas.

Just an idea

 

[LRinCA]

Bbm. Yes, I'm actually looking at a spreadsheet with 57,308 records from the Tucson PD. The report is available on their page and references the calls from the last 45 days. It's a little tricky to navigate as it's broken down by neighborhood. I'm not from the area so I tried searching the spreadsheet on NG's street name but I'm not having any luck. It's a very large file but you can filter it in lots of different ways.

Is there a record for 3:01 a.m.?

(I hope this isn't against the rules to ask this)

Adding JMO/MOO for the usual reasons.

 

[EJB123456]

Evidence collected can be kept for years, and there have been plenty cases solved with that data, especially when technology is improved over time.

Great analysis, but the Nest camera was not hooked up to any service, though the FBI was able to get some pix and/or video from it anyway...Elderly often have hearing issues, and some wear hearing aids, but remove them to sleep. What if he broke in(however??) and spent some time downstairs, perhaps not even knowing Nancy was home, or assuming she'd be asleep.? She may have awakened and surprised him.? Just MOO

It's a one story house, no downstairs.

 

[Catride]

Grief trauma is real takes time affects everyone different
Praying for Savannah and family

 

[Kapua]

I really, really hope this isn't going Cold Case. Having said that, I think it is. Which makes it more likely that this WAS a hackneyed robbery where a perp panicked and killled/disposed of her. I really did not think this was the case but the longer it goes on the more I gravitate to this side.

A cold case is one that is not being actively worked. This case is being actively worked. There are thousands of leads, hundreds of investigators, and a million-dollar reward. Also, I think it's GREAT that we aren't hearing the details of what the investigators are working on. The perps need to be surprised when they are arrested. MOO

 

[Katrinepa]

It's a one story house, no downstairs.

Thank you. I had forgotten that important information. A large house, and I have no idea if her bedroom was near the front door. Whew.

 

[VeronicaVaughn]

Is there a record for 3:01 a.m.?

(I hope this isn't against the rules to ask this)

Adding JMO/MOO for the usual reasons.

I'm realizing that these records may not be useful. Would a call from NG have been responded to by Tucson PD or PCSD? I don't see her neighborhood on the breakdown of Tucson PD's service area, probably because it falls under PCSD jurisdiction?

 

[cathathorse]

Long time reader, but I had to register to share some theories I haven’t seen much here or anywhere else online.

These deal with two main issues: cameras and the timeline (40+ minutes). IMO major possibilities are being overlooked in both cases. When something doesn’t make sense, that usually means we just haven’t found the right explanation yet. IMO the explanation I will offer below makes a lot of seemingly confusing data points fit perfectly.

This is all just my opinion based on things we have heard.

Topic #1: Cameras

First, cameras: IMO this guy WANTED to be seen. In fact, it was a key part of his strategy. Both times, but especially the first time he showed up. As someone who has these types of cameras as part of my home security system and understands them extremely well, it actually makes perfect sense that he would want to trigger them AND appear in the image.

Think of a camera as an early warning system as much as it is a camera. Some people silence them all night and rely on them to provide retroactive evidence of a crime. Others want the alerts to wake them up so they have early warning of danger. Some do both. That makes all the difference in this crime.

One of the underappreciated aspects of Blink, Nest, Ring, and the like is that in addition to being cameras and microphones, they also act as perimeter annunciators. What I mean by that is that it is practically impossible to disable them without first triggering them, which sends an immediate alert to someone’s phone (sometimes multiple people’s phones, depending on the setup). You can rip the camera off the wall and destroy it but it’s already too late: it has served its purpose and alerted the owner, who is possibly now awake and taking any number of actions. The criminal’s element of surprise is gone and their presence is known. That is, unless the homeowner silences alerts at night and just checks in the morning (as most people do because they don’t want to wake up every time a cat walks across their porch in the middle of the night).

In this scenario, he didn’t care about being filmed per se. He’s well disguised anyway and likely assumes he will be filmed somewhere by a camera he missed. IMO his concern was 100% about whether the alerts would wake Nancy up before he got inside and spoil his plan.

He needed the element of surprise. An 84 year old woman is definitely going to dial 911 if she is awakened by a break- in in progress. Even if he gets her out before police arrive, the police are now aware of a break-in/kidnapping in progress and will be swarming the entire neighborhood. The criminal might even drive past a responding officer, who will afterwards recall seeing the vehicle leaving the neighborhood as they responded. They might even call it in and have another officer stop that vehicle in case it is the perp. Risk goes way, way up if Nancy wakes up at any point before he gets inside and can stop her from calling 911.

Let’s assume this new timeline of photos is correct: he was there beforehand, likely an earlier date. I have thought since the photos first emerged that they must have been taken on different nights. Most people have focused on the shoes, lack of backpack, lack of holster… but the first thing I noticed was the distinct lack of a shadow (his shadow is clearly visible on the night he wore the backpack and holster, but absent in the photo where he is not wearing them).

This suggests a pitch black night in the earlier timeframe photo, perfect for recon. He wears his same gear that he’ll wear later because he is doing a dry run and wants it to feel as much like the real thing as possible, and he also does not want to be identified. He also wants to appear as menacing as possible for the camera as mentioned above.

He has to know what to expect, if anything, when the camera is triggered. And he would understand that triggering it is unavoidable.

Even if the criminal has a wifi jammer most systems will then alert the owner that all the modules are down. So they’re now awake at a minimum and likely to notice sounds outside or even to look out the windows to investigate, because that is suspicious.

These alerts could very well be loud and wake the person up. The person might then turn lights on in the house, go to live view to see what is going on, or dial 911 or text a family member depending on the circumstances. Or grab a firearm that they have for protection. Maybe all of the above. The criminal has no idea what is going on, if anything at all. Almost all of these systems will send an immediate thumbnail before recording so that even if the camera is disabled before the video is uploaded to the cloud you have an image of whatever set it off on your phone.

IMO this guy is almost posing for the camera on the earlier date. He needs to find out: what happens if the camera alerts AND the image in the thumbnail or on the phone is of a terrifying man in a mask and gloves? Notice he stands far enough away that you can see he looks terrifying but can’t make out much in terms of ID. It’s no good if it alerts and the image is some strange blur or nothing at all, because those of us who have these cameras see that stuff all the time. Cats, rabbits, the wind.. All cause triggers. You’re not raising the alarm so to speak, for every single time it notifies you of motion.

He needs the person inside to see a central casting bad guy so that they will react however they are going to react. That reaction will then be taken into account in whatever plans he has for the actual night of the kidnapping. Thus the need for a 2-part plan.

Now imagine you are 84. Your phone alerts and wakes you up in the middle of the night. You see THAT on your screen. You are almost certainly going to react. You likely dial 911. You turn on lights in the house because you are definitely not going to want to sit in the dark until cops come. You text or call family or neighbors for help right after 911. In short, ruckus ensues.

Or maybe your family also gets the alerts. It’s not yet 2AM on a Saturday. It’s not impossible that someone else also gets the alert who is actually still awake, watching TV, playing video games, whatever. They see that nightmare on grandma’s front door, or mom’s front door. Obviously action will be taken of some type.

So he poses to ensure that he has triggered the camera, then quickly retreats down the street into the brush somewhere to hide. Do lights come on? Do police arrive? Does a dog bark? Is there any activity at all?

Hmm, nothing. Nothing happens at all he notices. So he slinks away into the darkness, confident that the cameras are no real threat. The biggest threat of the cameras is that they wake Nancy up before he can get inside, meaning 911 is called.

So he waits a couple weeks and watches off and on. Are more visible security measures taken? Do new cameras appear?

Now, here’s the thing: he is likely feeling better in terms of not alerting anyone inside based on previous recon. But that could be a one-off. Maybe she silenced her phone that night but not this one. So he needs a quick repeat on the night of.

This is where the timeline comes in.

Topic #2: Timeline on the Night of the Kidnapping

I do not believe at all that he was inside the house for 40+ minutes as we keep hearing almost everywhere. That makes zero sense for a kidnapping, where every moment spent at the scene in contact with the victim= increased risk.

In this scenario I have described he returns a couple of weeks later, fairly confident that the cameras pose no real threat. He likely now assumes Nancy has her phone on silent so that every time a cat or other animal walks by at night she doesn’t wake up.

However, he has to make sure, just in case she woke up the next morning (from the earlier recon) and saw that image and NOW takes more security steps, such as having her alerts on loud enough to wake her up. Maybe a neighbor or someone else is also now getting them as a backup. He doesn’t know, so he goes up to the porch, knowing the camera will activate. Of course he ducks his head just in case (why over expose himself to being filmed?).

This is a test… What will happen?

The lantana also serves a purpose: it looks even more scary/wrong. If anyone is seeing someone do that they are raising the alarm 100% for sure. It escalates from a simple prowler on the porch to likely intent to cause harm.

But nothing happens. He slinks to the shadows again and waits. No lights come on. No cops show up. This could account for a solid 15-20 minutes of that 40 minute timeline we keep hearing about. Again, there is no real rush here. If he is detected he will escape into the pitch black and brush unseen. If he is not detected then it’s like he just arrived. It’s likely he has a getaway driver close by but not so close that if police suddenly come flying down the street his car isn’t sitting there parked suspiciously. It’s not like he can hop into a car and take off 2 houses down at 2:30 AM or so when the police are responding to a suspicious man trying to break into a house.

We have also heard about a second motion detection after 2, about 15 minutes or so before Nancy’s pacemaker disconnected from her watch. This could be the kidnapper(s) proceeding to gain entry into the house, meaning they would have only been inside for 10 minutes or less in total, which makes a lot more sense. One restrains her while the other goes and gets the car OR signals the getaway driver that it’s time, which obviously would not be in the driveway to begin with in case their camera test resulted in their presence being detected. So that takes a few minutes, as does getting her into the car, situated, and leaving.

If you take all that into account, we could be talking 5-10 minutes or even less in the house in total. If they were there for 40 minutes they would have cleaned up all the blood drops. Instead, IMO, they got in as quietly as possible after making sure the cameras didn’t wake anyone up, and got her out as quickly as possible, because who knows what little hidden cameras or security items they could miss. Kidnappers act fast. They don’t stick around the scene any longer than needed once the crime is in motion.

Just my theory, but I think it explains this person’s actions. Far from being a bumbling amateur, this was IMO a clever test to see what alerts, if any, would result from the camera before proceeding into the house.

I actually tested my Nest doorbell camera last night-- with my porch light off and approaching from the side of the house, I couldn't see the pinpoint green light that indicates a camera is there until I was within 2 feet of the camera, which is also when the doorbell light indicator that is much bigger than the pinpoint light comes on. It still registered "person seen" and sent me a notification of myself, but I couldn't tell there was a camera there. I don't think he saw the camera the first time.

Also if her old doorbell is still connected to the 40v that powers doorbells, it may light up at night, so he may have seen that and thought 'no doorbell camera.'

 

[SlimPickens]

Long time reader, but I had to register to share some theories I haven’t seen much here or anywhere else online.

These deal with two main issues: cameras and the timeline (40+ minutes). IMO major possibilities are being overlooked in both cases. When something doesn’t make sense, that usually means we just haven’t found the right explanation yet. IMO the explanation I will offer below makes a lot of seemingly confusing data points fit perfectly.

This is all just my opinion based on things we have heard.

Topic #1: Cameras

First, cameras: IMO this guy WANTED to be seen. In fact, it was a key part of his strategy. Both times, but especially the first time he showed up. As someone who has these types of cameras as part of my home security system and understands them extremely well, it actually makes perfect sense that he would want to trigger them AND appear in the image.

Think of a camera as an early warning system as much as it is a camera. Some people silence them all night and rely on them to provide retroactive evidence of a crime. Others want the alerts to wake them up so they have early warning of danger. Some do both. That makes all the difference in this crime.

One of the underappreciated aspects of Blink, Nest, Ring, and the like is that in addition to being cameras and microphones, they also act as perimeter annunciators. What I mean by that is that it is practically impossible to disable them without first triggering them, which sends an immediate alert to someone’s phone (sometimes multiple people’s phones, depending on the setup). You can rip the camera off the wall and destroy it but it’s already too late: it has served its purpose and alerted the owner, who is possibly now awake and taking any number of actions. The criminal’s element of surprise is gone and their presence is known. That is, unless the homeowner silences alerts at night and just checks in the morning (as most people do because they don’t want to wake up every time a cat walks across their porch in the middle of the night).

In this scenario, he didn’t care about being filmed per se. He’s well disguised anyway and likely assumes he will be filmed somewhere by a camera he missed. IMO his concern was 100% about whether the alerts would wake Nancy up before he got inside and spoil his plan.

He needed the element of surprise. An 84 year old woman is definitely going to dial 911 if she is awakened by a break- in in progress. Even if he gets her out before police arrive, the police are now aware of a break-in/kidnapping in progress and will be swarming the entire neighborhood. The criminal might even drive past a responding officer, who will afterwards recall seeing the vehicle leaving the neighborhood as they responded. They might even call it in and have another officer stop that vehicle in case it is the perp. Risk goes way, way up if Nancy wakes up at any point before he gets inside and can stop her from calling 911.

Let’s assume this new timeline of photos is correct: he was there beforehand, likely an earlier date. I have thought since the photos first emerged that they must have been taken on different nights. Most people have focused on the shoes, lack of backpack, lack of holster… but the first thing I noticed was the distinct lack of a shadow (his shadow is clearly visible on the night he wore the backpack and holster, but absent in the photo where he is not wearing them).

This suggests a pitch black night in the earlier timeframe photo, perfect for recon. He wears his same gear that he’ll wear later because he is doing a dry run and wants it to feel as much like the real thing as possible, and he also does not want to be identified. He also wants to appear as menacing as possible for the camera as mentioned above.

He has to know what to expect, if anything, when the camera is triggered. And he would understand that triggering it is unavoidable.

Even if the criminal has a wifi jammer most systems will then alert the owner that all the modules are down. So they’re now awake at a minimum and likely to notice sounds outside or even to look out the windows to investigate, because that is suspicious.

These alerts could very well be loud and wake the person up. The person might then turn lights on in the house, go to live view to see what is going on, or dial 911 or text a family member depending on the circumstances. Or grab a firearm that they have for protection. Maybe all of the above. The criminal has no idea what is going on, if anything at all. Almost all of these systems will send an immediate thumbnail before recording so that even if the camera is disabled before the video is uploaded to the cloud you have an image of whatever set it off on your phone.

IMO this guy is almost posing for the camera on the earlier date. He needs to find out: what happens if the camera alerts AND the image in the thumbnail or on the phone is of a terrifying man in a mask and gloves? Notice he stands far enough away that you can see he looks terrifying but can’t make out much in terms of ID. It’s no good if it alerts and the image is some strange blur or nothing at all, because those of us who have these cameras see that stuff all the time. Cats, rabbits, the wind.. All cause triggers. You’re not raising the alarm so to speak, for every single time it notifies you of motion.

He needs the person inside to see a central casting bad guy so that they will react however they are going to react. That reaction will then be taken into account in whatever plans he has for the actual night of the kidnapping. Thus the need for a 2-part plan.

Now imagine you are 84. Your phone alerts and wakes you up in the middle of the night. You see THAT on your screen. You are almost certainly going to react. You likely dial 911. You turn on lights in the house because you are definitely not going to want to sit in the dark until cops come. You text or call family or neighbors for help right after 911. In short, ruckus ensues.

Or maybe your family also gets the alerts. It’s not yet 2AM on a Saturday. It’s not impossible that someone else also gets the alert who is actually still awake, watching TV, playing video games, whatever. They see that nightmare on grandma’s front door, or mom’s front door. Obviously action will be taken of some type.

So he poses to ensure that he has triggered the camera, then quickly retreats down the street into the brush somewhere to hide. Do lights come on? Do police arrive? Does a dog bark? Is there any activity at all?

Hmm, nothing. Nothing happens at all he notices. So he slinks away into the darkness, confident that the cameras are no real threat. The biggest threat of the cameras is that they wake Nancy up before he can get inside, meaning 911 is called.

So he waits a couple weeks and watches off and on. Are more visible security measures taken? Do new cameras appear?

Now, here’s the thing: he is likely feeling better in terms of not alerting anyone inside based on previous recon. But that could be a one-off. Maybe she silenced her phone that night but not this one. So he needs a quick repeat on the night of.

This is where the timeline comes in.

Topic #2: Timeline on the Night of the Kidnapping

I do not believe at all that he was inside the house for 40+ minutes as we keep hearing almost everywhere. That makes zero sense for a kidnapping, where every moment spent at the scene in contact with the victim= increased risk.

In this scenario I have described he returns a couple of weeks later, fairly confident that the cameras pose no real threat. He likely now assumes Nancy has her phone on silent so that every time a cat or other animal walks by at night she doesn’t wake up.

However, he has to make sure, just in case she woke up the next morning (from the earlier recon) and saw that image and NOW takes more security steps, such as having her alerts on loud enough to wake her up. Maybe a neighbor or someone else is also now getting them as a backup. He doesn’t know, so he goes up to the porch, knowing the camera will activate. Of course he ducks his head just in case (why over expose himself to being filmed?).

This is a test… What will happen?

The lantana also serves a purpose: it looks even more scary/wrong. If anyone is seeing someone do that they are raising the alarm 100% for sure. It escalates from a simple prowler on the porch to likely intent to cause harm.

But nothing happens. He slinks to the shadows again and waits. No lights come on. No cops show up. This could account for a solid 15-20 minutes of that 40 minute timeline we keep hearing about. Again, there is no real rush here. If he is detected he will escape into the pitch black and brush unseen. If he is not detected then it’s like he just arrived. It’s likely he has a getaway driver close by but not so close that if police suddenly come flying down the street his car isn’t sitting there parked suspiciously. It’s not like he can hop into a car and take off 2 houses down at 2:30 AM or so when the police are responding to a suspicious man trying to break into a house.

We have also heard about a second motion detection after 2, about 15 minutes or so before Nancy’s pacemaker disconnected from her watch. This could be the kidnapper(s) proceeding to gain entry into the house, meaning they would have only been inside for 10 minutes or less in total, which makes a lot more sense. One restrains her while the other goes and gets the car OR signals the getaway driver that it’s time, which obviously would not be in the driveway to begin with in case their camera test resulted in their presence being detected. So that takes a few minutes, as does getting her into the car, situated, and leaving.

If you take all that into account, we could be talking 5-10 minutes or even less in the house in total. If they were there for 40 minutes they would have cleaned up all the blood drops. Instead, IMO, they got in as quietly as possible after making sure the cameras didn’t wake anyone up, and got her out as quickly as possible, because who knows what little hidden cameras or security items they could miss. Kidnappers act fast. They don’t stick around the scene any longer than needed once the crime is in motion.

Just my theory, but I think it explains this person’s actions. Far from being a bumbling amateur, this was IMO a clever test to see what alerts, if any, would result from the camera before proceeding into the house.

Great post. One of the first things I posited after seeing the video and stills is that he didn't react nervously to the camera indicative of the paradoxical calm that a psychopath experiences when normies are rattled.

Another thing I posited is that the lantana was intentional, almost a taunting "gift" for her or others to see. And in many faiths and cultures flowers left in a doorway can mean both good and bad things.

JMO.

 

[EJB123456]

Does anybody know exactly how many doors on NG house, I have seen front door, garage internal door, door by the overhang where the garden furniture is and one other door with square pane glass windows on the top, I have yet to see a photo of sliding glass/patio doors that has been mentioned

Good question. Here's the only sliding glass door I've seen thus far (besides the guest house). Left side of pic. Possibly off the master?

Getty Images

Getty Images. Find high resolution royalty-free images, editorial stock photos, vector art, video footage clips and stock music licensing at the richest image search photo library online.

www.gettyimages.com

And then here's a mediocre pic of the back patio, I've seen a better one, I'll keep looking.

 

[No it's not]

Nanos' office allegedly failed to deploy its fixed-wing Cessna aircraft, known as Survey 1, during the initial phase after Nancy was reported missing. This is the most important search NOT done.

The Survey1 by the way is equipped with the Wescam MX-10, a Multi-Spectral imaging system for surveillance missions from light aircraft. Top notch for surveillance, 2 cams, one for the day, one for night.

Pima County Sheriff’s instagram page showing the plane (they have 2 by the way) and the tech:

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Here is what it can do.. video by Airborne Technologies showing the MX-10 in action:

Cheers,
Nin

 

[Data Sleuth]

View attachment 648049
Ok. I am just going to say it. Why does he wear his gun like it's his male appendage in a sack? That's just not any kind of gun carrying mode I have ever seen. What's he hiding or flaunting? JMO

Good question…however found a list of reasons gun owners (including no good doers) carry their pistol in front of them, known as the 12 o’clock or appendix position:


“A pistol holster worn directly under the belly button, known as the 12 o'clock or appendix position, is a popular concealed carry method for quick access, comfort while sitting, and superior concealment, particularly with smaller firearms. This position is often used with a belly band for versatility when not wearing a traditional belt.
Buckeye Firearms Association +4

• Quick Draw Access: The 12 o'clock position (centerline) allows for a fast, direct, and natural draw stroke, often making it faster than hip carry.
• Comfort While Seated: For people who spend long periods driving or sitting, keeping the gun at the front prevents it from digging into the side or hip.
• Optimal Concealment: This position keeps the firearm flush against the body, minimizing printing (gun shape showing through clothing), especially when wearing tight or lightweight clothes.
• Versatility with Attire: Using a belly band or a specific appendix holster allows for carrying without a sturdy belt or with clothing that lacks belt loops, such as gym shorts, scrubs, or sweatpants.
• Accessibility for Different Body Types: It is often chosen by those who find side-carry uncomfortable due to physical conditions or those who have trouble bending, providing a more accessible option.
  Buckeye Firearms Association +6

Note: While popular for comfort and access, this carry method requires strict attention to safety during re-holstering to avoid pointing the muzzle at the body.

 

[NLM1234]

I like this line of thinking regarding the cameras. The guy seemed pretty confident that nothing was going to happen while he was on the porch. This confidence could very well have been from being there at least once, maybe even more times, before. One thing I don't have a good answer for yet is that he/they must have also been fairly confident that the house did not have an active perimeter alarm on the doors and windows nor a motion alarm inside of the home. How would the perp/s have known that an alarm was not active? Been inside some time in the past??? I don't know anything about homes specifically in Tucson, but higher end homes in most larger metro areas would have built in alarm systems, many of which are professionally monitored (like ADT, for example). Maybe hers did, maybe it did not, but an alarm was not tripped that night, resulting in police or at least family response. My 90 year old mom always made sure her alarm was set before turning in, as I think most elderly women living alone would do. Has there been any credible info released regarding if the home had an alarm or not?

I have not heard or read anything about whether the home had an alarm system.

I do know that homes with alarm systems often have a control panel, where you set/arm the system or disarm the system, near the door that leads into the garage. There is often another control panel somewhere in the house. Depending on the location of the control panel, a person outside of the house could determine whether the alarm system was armed/on (red light) or off (green light) simply by looking in a window or glass door. Therefore, a person standing outside of a house equipped with an alarm system could possibly see the status of the alarm system.

 

[LRinCA]

I'm realizing that these records may not be useful. Would a call from NG have been responded to by Tucson PD or PCSD? I don't see her neighborhood on the breakdown of Tucson PD's service area, probably because it falls under PCSD jurisdiction?

Not from her house.

A call about an incident at or around 3:01 a.m. about a mile and a half from her home.

I'll add JMO/MOO on this.

 

[SaraSmile]

I had the exact same thought about a pre-abduction camera test. Does she wake up upon detection? Does she check her alerts every morning?

But I wonder how the suspect would be so sure that Nancy wasn’t discussing with others a masked man she saw on her Nest cam. Was she active in community discussion groups like Nextdoor?

Or maybe it just didn’t matter. Confidence that the doorbell doesn’t wake Nancy up was good enough for their purposes: a fairly rapid extraction.

Agree about camera test, good idea.

You are right about elders being hearing impaired, at night no hearing aids in.

I think in this case, NG had not paid her subscription, so maybe no alerts? Maybe she hadn’t thought of the cameras for a while, don’t know how long ago the acct lapsed.

Maybe no alerts for Jan 11, Jan 31, or Feb 1, dates when LE found pics( not sure about Jan 11)

FBI was able to revive some pics, video stored in the Cloud.

JMO

 

[Scooby-Doo]

​

Savannah Guthrie Offers $1 Million Reward for Mother’s Return​

The television news anchor Savannah Guthrie said on Tuesday that her family is offering up to $1 million for information that leads to finding her mother, Nancy, who was abducted from her home more than three weeks ago.

Ms. Guthrie, a “Today” show host, made the new offer in a four-minute video posted on Instagram in which she acknowledged that her 84-year-old mother may already be dead, but said the family was holding out hope for a miracle. If Nancy Guthrie has died, she said, the family still needs to know where she is.

Nancy Guthrie Updates: Savannah Guthrie Offers $1 Million Reward for Mother’s Return

www.nytimes.com

 

[LRinCA]

DBM (duplicate info)