• #39,701
"A caller claimed that a woman was hanging out of a window and screaming a few miles away from the Guthrie residence. However, Wednesday night Sheriff Chris Nanos told News 4 Tucson that the lead was investigated and determined to be unrelated to Guthrie’s disappearance."

(This is related to the blue Chevy Malibu story that seemed interesting.)

 
  • #39,702
Yes. He even questioned whether she went to the front door. I don't see that happening but let's just say she got an alert on her phone via the door nest camera app and then got up to go make sure her front door was locked.
-An older woman would probably open the door at night for someone she knew.
-Or perhaps for a younger woman pretending to be in distress or in need of help. Maybe made to look pregnant.
 
  • #39,703
  • #39,704
I see a possible 3-person kidnap for ransom.
  1. Porch guy (described as a stoner by one retired FBI profiler) was added only to remove NG so they (2 or 3 bad guys) could initiate the kidnap.
  2. A second accomplice had a key to the back door and was possibly assigned to help with the planning and prepping poor NG for removal.
  3. A third accomplice -- aka 'Ring Leader' - was responsible for the ransom notes and was a key player in devising the scheme with the understanding that he would get at least half whatever ransom money was forthcoming.
Note: Her unexpected and subsequent death, was never part of the plan. Otherwise, both – or all three - would face a capital murder charge.
Do you think all the ransom notes were legit? I thought it was financially motivated but as time has dragged on, I'm not so sure. Judging off what we know it doesn't feel like a real effort was made to secure ransom. At the same time, I feel that way about both sides.

I have no problem thinking a local cooked this up and recruited a few acquaintances to help, but if that's the case then it's a matter of time before one of them caves. It's two too many.
JMO
 
  • #39,705
Note: Her unexpected and subsequent death, was never part of the plan. Otherwise, both – or all three - would face a capital murder charge.
I think in AZ it would be felony murder which is First Degree Murder? So I believe the DP is on the table for the perp(s) in this case if indeed NG died unexpectedly during the commission of a robbery, SA, kidnapping.

First Degree murder for causing a death during the commission of crimes like kidnapping, robbery, burglary, arson, or sexual assault, even if the death was unintentional.

Arizona Revised Statute §13-1105
 
  • #39,706
One person we don't see is the sheriff.
If he shows up, people say he shouldn't be in the spotlight so much. If he doesn't, people criticize him for not being there. He can't win.
 
  • #39,707
  • #39,708
IMHO, I believe the motive or WHY is anger and revenge. An ex of SG, ex-boyfriend or ex-BFF (male or female), ex-hubby, someone with a grudge that they have been carrying around for a long, long time.

I also believe the perp targeted SG's mom because they knew she was close to her mom and wanted to hurt her but couldn't do it directly to her without being identified or found out. (indirectly hurting her)

I believe it is a stalker but not in the sense of a stranger, someone who knows SG and knows NG. Perhaps an old friend from grammar school or high school. Someone who knows the layout of the house, because they have been there before, but not in a long, long time. (think of the comfort the perp had as he approached the front door, as if he had been there before)

In the case of an ex-boyfriend, I think the term that is used is femicide. "With femicide, the main risk factors relate to the aggressor, type of relationship and motive."

As the article below states "the aggressor is typically a known person, mostly a partner or ex-partner with whom the victim shared an abusive relationship characterized by continuous physical and/or psychological aggressions and death threats. The motive is usually represented by extreme jealousy due to an imaginary or real assumption that the victim is dating some other man, which frequently leads to so-called “honor” killing, or by a sense of ownership leading the aggressor to refuse the advocated end of the relationship. In this scenario, as explained by Garcia-Vergara et al. [9], the lethal act is justified by the distorted conceptions of the aggressor about authority, possessiveness, and the subordinate position of women, which result in the perception of a loss of control of the partner through separation or divorce."

"A related risk factor for femicide, thoroughly analyzed by McFarlane et al. [15] and to which separated/divorced women are mostly exposed, is stalking behavior, described as the act of the perpetrator following or spying on the victim or trying to keep in touch with her against her will."
I'm guessing everyone has had a least one bad relationship/bad breakup in their past.

So, who in SG's past FITS this description?

THIS ATTACHED ARTICLE IS VERY GRAPHIC *****GRAPHIC WARNING*****

If it's someone from Savannah's past, they would likely be in their 50s.
 
  • #39,709
This is the interview by BE of Carlos' attorney. One thing I found interesting is that when BE is trying to get at why LE might have targeted Carlos, the attorney says more than once that he's not sure if Carlos has ever even been on that street, or similar verbiage. That's sort of stunning to me. Wouldn't you find out definitively if he's ever had any deliveries on that street or otherwise been there? Surely, you could at least say "he's never been on the street, or at least hasn't had any deliveries there in the last few months. He can't ever recollect having been there in his life." Etc.

(Apparently, LE didn't tell Carlos why he was targeted and the affidavit which served as the basis for the search warrant is sealed.)

Because he's being honest? Carlos does deliveries. He probably doesn't remember if he's ever been on that street for sure. If he says "I've never been on that street" and then evidence arises that proves otherwise, his credibility is destroyed. He has a legit reason for not being sure.
 
  • #39,710
Yes. He even questioned whether she went to the front door. I don't see that happening but let's just say she got an alert on her phone via the door nest camera app and then got up to go make sure her front door was locked.

Poor Nancy. Whatever happened she must have been terrified. We are creeped out by the Lantana man footage. Can you imagine it being pitched black outside, you have limited mobility, you're in a big house all by yourself and Lantana man is at your front door? Nightmare fuel.
I thought LE said she was taken from her bed?
 
  • #39,711
I believe it is a stalker but not in the sense of a stranger, someone who knows SG and knows NG. Perhaps an old friend from grammar school or high school. Someone who knows the layout of the house, because they have been there before, but not in a long, long time. (think of the comfort the perp had as he approached the front door, as if he had been there before)
Yes, this wouldn’t surprise me at all. Nor would it surprise me if this person is thought of as highly capable, and beyond suspicion. It’s far from the only possibility (obviously), but I do think it’s a strong one. A perpetrator holding a grudge or resentment that his victims are barely aware of.
 
  • #39,712
I wonder if it were a burglary gone wrong and unintentionally she passed , would they then think “ oh good opportunity to hold her body “ then take 48 hours figuring how to send a message
Surely otherwise they could have left a note there
In a burglary gone wrong, surely you'd never ever take the body?! It just wouldn't be part of the plan. Ever.
If a death happened to the home owner, you'd leave the body there, and run.

If they took her, then I think they went in her home intending to take her.

MOO.
 
  • #39,713
Because he's being honest? Carlos does deliveries. He probably doesn't remember if he's ever been on that street for sure. If he says "I've never been on that street" and then evidence arises that proves otherwise, his credibility is destroyed. He has a legit reason for not being sure.

Carlos may not remember the names ofr addresses of everywhere he delivered parcels too. His answer is reasonable .
 
  • #39,714
 
  • #39,715
Just catching up on the updates of this case.

Given that we now know the perpetrator(s) seem to have specifically targeted Nancy. Do we think it’s most likely due to her being Savannah’s mother or more so that Nancy was an elderly woman living alone in an expensive home ie an easy target?
My theory is Epstein interviews , this is a warning
 
  • #39,716
  • #39,717
My theory is Epstein interviews , this is a warning
? please elaborate--i am quite doubtful that he and his ilk have anything to do with this
 
  • #39,718
This is the interview by BE of Carlos' attorney. One thing I found interesting is that when BE is trying to get at why LE might have targeted Carlos, the attorney says more than once that he's not sure if Carlos has ever even been on that street, or similar verbiage. That's sort of stunning to me. Wouldn't you find out definitively if he's ever had any deliveries on that street or otherwise been there? Surely, you could at least say "he's never been on the street, or at least hasn't had any deliveries there in the last few months. He can't ever recollect having been there in his life." Etc.

(Apparently, LE didn't tell Carlos why he was targeted and the affidavit which served as the basis for the search warrant is sealed.)

He can't recall being near there is a legit answer for a delivery person. Why should he have to prove his innocence? Continuing to cast suspicion on him (ala SIL and DE) causes innocent people irreparable harm--the pitchforks and torches crowd are out there trying to harm DE now, so much so that his child can't come home.

 
  • #39,719
? please elaborate--i am quite doubtful that he and his ilk have anything to do with this
I think @RubbleDog was referring to the interviews that SH conducted with Epstein’s victims.
 
  • #39,720
He can't recall being near there is a legit answer for a delivery person. Why should he have to prove his innocence? Continuing to cast suspicion on him (ala SIL and DE) causes innocent people irreparable harm--the pitchforks and torches crowd are out there trying to harm DE now, so much so that his child can't come home.

what a shame-- i maintain that social media is toxic and all these "sleuths"-- bored and stupid spreading false information- sick
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
1,840
Total visitors
2,017

Forum statistics

Threads
643,744
Messages
18,804,573
Members
245,228
Latest member
moebu
Top