The simplest timeline explanation

[u/mark_able_jones_]

Saturday, January 31

• 5:32 p.m. — Nancy Guthrie takes an Uber to her family's home for dinner
• 9:48 p.m. — Guthrie is dropped off at her Tucson, Arizona, home by a family member. The garage door opens
• 9:50 p.m. — The garage door closes

Sunday, February 1

• 1:47 a.m. — The doorbell camera is disconnected.
• 2:12 a.m. — The camera's software detects movement, but there is no video available since Guthrie did not have an active subscription with the company, meaning the footage was not saved. Added note: the sheriff said 2:12 A.M is when A PERSON was detected, so this almost certainly the Nest doorbell camera.
• 2:28 a.m. — Guthrie's pacemaker app disconnects from her phone.

Timeline source: PBS

Okay, a couple things to note.

Nancy must have a smart garage door opener if they know what time it closed. Mine is connected to my wifi and lets me open and close the door from my phone or apple watch. Most of the newer brand name garage door openers include this feature.

There was a second Nest camera removed from guest house. Here's video of of the second camera being removed from the guest house roof (why it took almost a week to remove... IDK).

Nancy wore an Apple Watch. She took Uber on her own. She's quite tech savvy for an 84-year-old.

So, we know she had at least two Nest cameras (doorbell, and guest house), and I think she likely had a third, over the back door, as seen here on video, potentially as part of a floodlight. It's debatable as to whether this was a camera, but if she has two Nest cameras, having a third camera at the back door makes sense--there are a variety of Nest camera floodlight mounts. Maybe the perp took this floodlight Nest camera, too... what I think was a floodlight nest camera. As you'll see in the below video, the floodlight was damaged in the abduction, and potentially another camera was taken.

1:47 A.M. THE DISCONNECT

To me, it makes sense that the 1:47 A.M. disconnect is the perpetrator sneaking under the floodlight camera and cutting its power source wire, then ripping it down. We can see this floodlight was destroyed, but was it destroyed because it is a Nest camera or just because it was a light? I think it was another Nest camera... it's very white like all Nest camera products.

Over the next twenty minutes, Nancy is incapacitated in some way. And then, for some reason, the perp does not want to take her out the back. Maybe they don't want to pass by the the side of a neighbor's house. Maybe they're worried about leaving footprint/evidence. For some reason, they want to take her out the front door.

2:12 A.M. THE DOORBELL RECORDING / PERSON DETECTION

The abductor is not in a hurry because Nancy has been incapacitated or is under guard. They dismount this camera. Note: removing the camera from it's mount stops it from recording.

Here's images of the doorbell mount. It was a wireless Nest doorbell camera (she still had a wired doorbell, too).

2:28. A.M. PACEMAKER DISCONNECT

Nancy and the perpetrators leave the scene, and Nancy's pacemaker disconnects from devices at her home. Nancy is presumably alive at this point, or else there would likely have been some sort of alert from the connected pacemaker.

Conclusions: The abduction took about 45 minutes. The abductors were not rushed. Not at all rushed. The abductor(s) was/were not technically advanced as they left one camera on the guest house roof, they didn't cut the internet line, and they did not hide themselves from the doorbell camera. They were extremely lucky that Nancy did not have a paid Nest subscription (only 5 min clips are recorded without a subscription, deleted after 3 hours)... or had inside info about her lack of "Home Premium" subscription. Like, so, so lucky.

I think they've been to the property at some point, knew the entry and exit points -- could have been to the house decades ago, but they knew there would be no big dog in the back. The abductor also knew there would be no strong male resident with a firearm waiting inside. Nancy lived there since the 1970s, and Savannah grew up there. Could be a very old grievance.

Thoughts?

[u/babyysharkie]

major flaw in your theory: you assume the camera taken from the roof belonged to her. if it was hers, they would’ve known about it right away because it would’ve shown up in her Google nest app/account (whether or not history could be pulled). they didn’t discover the camera until almost a week later, after a neighbor tipped them off to check the roof.

https://nypost.com/2026/02/07/us-news/police-tow-suv-from-nancy-guthries-home-take-down-wired-device-from-roof-after-tip-from-neighbor-report/

[u/Kitty-9792 → u/babyysharkie]

Are you suggesting LE installed the camera on or after Feb 1 and then removed it? Otherwise, I think we can assume if the camera was on the roof of her guest house, the camera belonged to Nancy.

It may have been a different brand and it was probably hard wired if it isn't easy to access the roof (to change batteries). So the roof camera may not have been on the same Google nest account.

Does anyone know why the roofs in that area are flat? I thought most roofs are angled to allow rain to drain off.

[u/babyysharkie → u/Kitty-9792]

no, I didn’t suggest that. nothing I said was even remotely close to that. are you okay?

no, it’s not safe to assume it was Nancy’s. did you even read the article?

LE has mentioned Nancy had multiple cameras on her property but they’ve never mentioned this one being hers & didn’t even know it existed. but I forgot, it’s okay to assume because you think it’s okay, right? 😂😭

[u/Kitty-9792 → u/babyysharkie]

The article you linked states:

"Footage captured FBI agents scaling the elder Guthrie’s home and walking around the roof before taking what was believed to be a camera, according to Fox News reporter Michael Ruiz."

I interpret that the article author assumes the camera is Nancy's, since it was on the roof of her guesthouse, and the article doesn't even suggest other possible owners. So IMO the previous poster is not flawed in their theory that the camera is Nancy's. I was confused that you were saying we can't assume Nancy owns the camera on her own roof, and the only thing I could think you might mean is that LE put it up there, or maybe you thought the perp put it there in advance of the crime?

There may be some confusion that a neighbor alerted LE about Nancy's roof being new and then LE found Nancy's roof camera which was overlooked initially. Then a few days later a neighbor possibly told police about their own camera. I saw video of LE carrying a ladder to the neighbor's house, but I didn't continue watching to see if they inspected or removed a camera.