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

[Napoli]

The thing that makes me think maybe he bought it especially for the crime is the fact that he's dressed exactly the same on both nights he's captured on camera. It seems to be a costume he constructed just for this event.
JMO

If he was there PRIOR then he saw the camera and knew the camera was there. He went ONCE, saw the camera, went back to his car, suited up with his backpack etc and tried to dislodge it. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. jmo

 

[Cats Against Crime]

IMO, on the backpack topic, anyone who bought the backpack at a Walmart will be on camera and will be well documented. And the video quality is quite good as well. The trouble is which backpack is "the" backpack. This could account for part of the "thousands of hours of video" they mention.

Whether it's a backpack or a candy bar, Walmart will know:

Where it was bought (which stores sold one)
When (date and time sold)
Which checkout aisle was used (which leads to which camera to pull video from the relevant time)
The cashier on duty (whether self checkout or not)
Whether cash or card was used to pay
If cash, amount paid and change given
Anything else included in the order

Video would not only show the person buying but also anyone with them, which is potentially significant. You could observe their body size, gait, mannerisms.

That said, there could be hundreds or even thousands of those backpacks sold in a given timeframe and geographic location. So someone from law enforcement has to watch every checkout video to see if someone they are interested in appears in it buying a backpack. If a card is used that gives a name right away, which can then be run down and checked to see if it leads anywhere.

Example: a group is seen. They buy a backpack. Pay with card. Law enforcement runs the name on the card. She's a kindergarten teacher, on video in the store with her husband and son, kid is in middle school. Unlikely to be either the perps or associated with them (and therefore not buying it for them). And you repeat again and again and again and again and again.

No BREAKING NEWS! No updates. No "activity." Just "boring" investigative work.

If cash is used then it's not a dead end. You have the video, first of all. You could always go talk to the cashier who was on duty if you find a potential video of interest. Does that guy come in often? Sometimes cashiers see the same regulars even if they do not interact with them. Maybe it helps, maybe not. Lots of things are crapshoots.

And if someone you already have your eye on as a suspect based on some other tip or evidentiary reason ALSO is seen buying a backpack AND with cash. It proves nothing. You cannot arrest or even likely raid them yet. But now you have a few "ands" that cause you to dig deeper. Literally, you have nothing actionable. You have no suspect in the official sense. But you think you are possibly onto something.

In this scenario the media claims "Investigators say they have no suspect." The case is going COLD!

No. It's just that these things take a lot of time and care, and resources are finite.

Yeah but what if someone bought the backpack for the perp?

Unlikely, and also not a dead end if it happened IMO. Here's why: that would mean someone else was involved to the point where they would go into Walmart and buy the backpack just so the future kidnapper wasn't seen on camera doing so. That is a LOT of care being taken.

Only someone fairly close to the perp would be trusted to do this, making them still potentially useful. If you see someone you have determined as being associated with your person of interest buying the backpack that is also useful. Plus, in the above scenario now you have a "shadow buyer" for a backpack who could talk for a million dollars. Especially if their only "crime" is buying a backpack for a friend/family member for whatever reason they might not even know for sure. Just unlikely, IMO.

One thing I think is certain: IF the kidnapper walked into a Walmart and bought that backpack, he was 100% on camera doing so. The trouble is knowing which purchase is "the" purchase. And casting a wide enough net. What if he went 5 states away to buy it? Or bought it a year ago AND several states away?

IMO we're in this phase, where investigators are working through potential evidence, which takes a long time.

 

[arielilane]

For anyone who maybe interested.

Nancy Guthrie Case: Sheriff Speaks On Cam, Says "Definitely Closer" to Finding Nancy​

 

[arielilane]

@BrianEntin


The Pima County Sheriff did an interview with NBC and says “I think the investigators are definitely closer” to finding Nancy Guthrie suspect.Says new video of car 2.5 miles away has not been identified and they are looking at “hundreds of thousands of other vehicles.”Says backpack may not have been purchased at Walmart. Could have been purchased secondhand.“We have information on this case that we think is going to lead us to solving this case, but it takes time.”
10:49 AM · Mar 3, 2026


Latest happening today in the search for Nancy Guthrie -- there were just some developments at the house -- a group went inside and private searchers outside are using a metal detector.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2028930549197488467

 

[teeandcee]

I am surprised the Walmart angle didn't lead anywhere. They're always patenting new surveillance technologies, and seemingly have crystal clear footage and records of customers from the parking lot to the store. Guess Lantana guy could've made his mom or a girlfriend or someone else buy the items for them, and that'd be harder to pin down. But it's surely still worth looking into, can't be that hard to pull receipts with those items on them.

Really think LE should do some Walmart reconnaissance here if they haven't already. Nanos made it seem like they haven't done much but I have no idea when he's obfuscating or telling the truth.

Perhaps he bought it used at a busy thrift store with cash.

It seems like any other possibility such as buying on eBay or Facebook would lead to someone remembering, but most people aren’t as tuned into crime as me/us.Edited to say I sound patronising in my last sentence, but I’m just musing to myself.

 

[teeandcee]

Best thing to do is to freeze this video at the 35 second mark.
This is the only time on this video where you get a better perspective of viewing his body type. Still,this shot cuts off at the knees so it is not like comparing the Porch guy video where you see full body----down to his shoes.

I see too many similarities to totally write this guy off. JMO.
I hope for his sake he is not the one because this case will be solved IMO.

He looks too chunky to my eye. I initially thought Porch Guy was chunky, but I’ve since decided it’s bulk from his clothing.

 

[shonyakay]

I always say in these cases having to live with the ‘unknown’ is worse than finding your relative deceased.

Whilst I am sure after 4 weeks the family know the chances of finding Nancy alive are minuscule I guess you still cling with that hope until the end - it doesn’t allow you to grieve properly or attempt to rebuild and move on.

I do have fears of this case starting to become cold especially as the media coverage dies down - fingers crossed I am wrong.

It appears in Arizona when prosecutors become involved and a case becomes "quiet" with little public activity or outward investigation - it is in the pre-file investigation stage.
This is when law enforcement has finished their initial work and passed the case to prosecutors to determine if charges should be filed. This phase, known as the pre-charge investigation, is when prosecutors review evidence to decide whether to formally charge a suspect, and it can last for weeks or months.

I don't know if that is what is happening here or not. Even if it were I am not accusing anyone in particular nor suggesting who that might be. Time will tell.

 

[Mistermagoo]

If he was there PRIOR then he saw the camera and knew the camera was there. He went ONCE, saw the camera, went back to his car, suited up with his backpack etc and tried to dislodge it. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. jmo

Pitch black. if for some reason he did not go up to the door, or he did not have a flashlight, he may not have seen it.

 

[lonetraveler]

@BrianEntin


The Pima County Sheriff did an interview with NBC and says “I think the investigators are definitely closer” to finding Nancy Guthrie suspect.Says new video of car 2.5 miles away has not been identified and they are looking at “hundreds of thousands of other vehicles.”Says backpack may not have been purchased at Walmart. Could have been purchased secondhand.“We have information on this case that we think is going to lead us to solving this case, but it takes time.”
10:49 AM · Mar 3, 2026


Latest happening today in the search for Nancy Guthrie -- there were just some developments at the house -- a group went inside and private searchers outside are using a metal detector.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2028930549197488467

Just watched BE's latest video. Why, if 12 cars were seen on the video during that time period, is the sheriff looking at thousands of cars??

 

[factseeking]

Just watched BE's latest video. Why, if 12 cars were seen on the video during that time period, is the sheriff looking at thousands of cars??

My impression was he was talking about more than just that one camera. My impression is also that he was exaggerating. We know LE said they have 5,000 - 10,000 hours of video to look at but we don't know what exactly that consists of.

 

[Cassie P]

If he was there PRIOR then he saw the camera and knew the camera was there. He went ONCE, saw the camera, went back to his car, suited up with his backpack etc and tried to dislodge it. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. jmo

If he had been there prior he knew he had to put on a disguise to disable the camera the night of the crime. Which is the first thing he does. A Walmart crime scene bad guy costume.

 

[Trino]

IMO, on the backpack topic, anyone who bought the backpack at a Walmart will be on camera and will be well documented. And the video quality is quite good as well. The trouble is which backpack is "the" backpack. This could account for part of the "thousands of hours of video" they mention.

Whether it's a backpack or a candy bar, Walmart will know:

Where it was bought (which stores sold one)
When (date and time sold)
Which checkout aisle was used (which leads to which camera to pull video from the relevant time)
The cashier on duty (whether self checkout or not)
Whether cash or card was used to pay
If cash, amount paid and change given
Anything else included in the order

Video would not only show the person buying but also anyone with them, which is potentially significant. You could observe their body size, gait, mannerisms.

That said, there could be hundreds or even thousands of those backpacks sold in a given timeframe and geographic location. So someone from law enforcement has to watch every checkout video to see if someone they are interested in appears in it buying a backpack. If a card is used that gives a name right away, which can then be run down and checked to see if it leads anywhere.

Example: a group is seen. They buy a backpack. Pay with card. Law enforcement runs the name on the card. She's a kindergarten teacher, on video in the store with her husband and son, kid is in middle school. Unlikely to be either the perps or associated with them (and therefore not buying it for them). And you repeat again and again and again and again and again.

No BREAKING NEWS! No updates. No "activity." Just "boring" investigative work.

If cash is used then it's not a dead end. You have the video, first of all. You could always go talk to the cashier who was on duty if you find a potential video of interest. Does that guy come in often? Sometimes cashiers see the same regulars even if they do not interact with them. Maybe it helps, maybe not. Lots of things are crapshoots.

And if someone you already have your eye on as a suspect based on some other tip or evidentiary reason ALSO is seen buying a backpack AND with cash. It proves nothing. You cannot arrest or even likely raid them yet. But now you have a few "ands" that cause you to dig deeper. Literally, you have nothing actionable. You have no suspect in the official sense. But you think you are possibly onto something.

In this scenario the media claims "Investigators say they have no suspect." The case is going COLD!

No. It's just that these things take a lot of time and care, and resources are finite.

Yeah but what if someone bought the backpack for the perp?

Unlikely, and also not a dead end if it happened IMO. Here's why: that would mean someone else was involved to the point where they would go into Walmart and buy the backpack just so the future kidnapper wasn't seen on camera doing so. That is a LOT of care being taken.

Only someone fairly close to the perp would be trusted to do this, making them still potentially useful. If you see someone you have determined as being associated with your person of interest buying the backpack that is also useful. Plus, in the above scenario now you have a "shadow buyer" for a backpack who could talk for a million dollars. Especially if their only "crime" is buying a backpack for a friend/family member for whatever reason they might not even know for sure. Just unlikely, IMO.

One thing I think is certain: IF the kidnapper walked into a Walmart and bought that backpack, he was 100% on camera doing so. The trouble is knowing which purchase is "the" purchase. And casting a wide enough net. What if he went 5 states away to buy it? Or bought it a year ago AND several states away?

IMO we're in this phase, where investigators are working through potential evidence, which takes a long time.

What if he got the backpack at a second hand store or stole it or bought it out of state? Or bought it in Mexico?

 

[aamillaa]

It appears in Arizona when prosecutors become involved and a case becomes "quiet" with little public activity or outward investigation - it is in the pre-file investigation stage.
This is when law enforcement has finished their initial work and passed the case to prosecutors to determine if charges should be filed. This phase, known as the pre-charge investigation, is when prosecutors review evidence to decide whether to formally charge a suspect, and it can last for weeks or months.

I don't know if that is what is happening here or not. Even if it were I am not accusing anyone in particular nor suggesting who that might be. Time will tell.

That makes sense to me. When they were at NG’s, it didn’t seem like they were just “reviewing the scene” to me. They were walking with too much purpose. It felt like they were walking through LE’s theory of that night.

Also, and this may be a nothing burger, their shoes suck out to me. If they were reviewing the scene, I’d imagine they wouldn’t be sure exactly how long they’d be there, maybe expect to wander a bit, etc. and plan accordingly (like maybe flats or a smaller heel, the finish on the guy’s shoes seemed very susceptible to scratches). When they were walking up the hill, one of the women tripped on a branch. That’s what made me think about it.


MOO

 

[Cassie P]

Pitch black. if for some reason he did not go up to the door, or he did not have a flashlight, he may not have seen it.

The point of going ahead of time is to scout the potential crime scene and identify entrance and exit to the home, potential problems and liabilities, etc. If he didn't look at the front door and cameras, it was a poor scouting job.

Unless the plan had been all action was to take place in the back of the house and something changed that plan at the last minute?

 

[Bluewing3102]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2028995803235402051

 

[Cassie P]

Perhaps he bought it used at a busy thrift store with cash.

It seems like any other possibility such as buying on eBay or Facebook would lead to someone remembering, but most people aren’t as tuned into crime as me/us.Edited to say I sound patronising in my last sentence, but I’m just musing to myself.

Amateurs who are smart, clever, careful planners often make mistakes. They are not tuned into every nuance of the crime as you point out. They get better over time.

 

[Sakura2Sophia4Lucia]

The thing that makes me think maybe he bought it especially for the crime is the fact that he's dressed exactly the same on both nights he's captured on camera. It seems to be a costume he constructed just for this event.
JMO

Agree

 

[Napoli]

If he had been there prior he knew he had to put on a disguise to disable the camera the night of the crime. Which is the first thing he does. A Walmart crime scene bad guy costume.

But the one attributed to prior visit, he was wearing the getup minus the back pack. Wasnt that what they said? jmo

 

[Sakura2Sophia4Lucia]

Amateurs who are smart, clever, careful planners often make mistakes. They are not tuned into every nuance of the crime as you point out. They get better over time.

This perpetrator(s) may well have committed an act of violence previously with another victim. MOO

 

[cathathorse]

Pitch black. if for some reason he did not go up to the door, or he did not have a flashlight, he may not have seen it.

this is out there but if the person was red-green colorblind he may not have noticed the camera because when my Nest is recording at night it shows red infrared lights arranged as lines in a clock-like fashion-- these lines are about 1/2 inch each. And then there is a pinpoint green light that also comes on... my understanding with colorblindness is that these people often see red as dark brown or even black in some cases... well if the lines appeared black they wouldn't have been visible at all... and the green pinpoint light would have been perceived as beige.. but that light is so small, literally the size of a needlepoint pin. So maybe this person is colorblind. Just a theory!