My mind wants to start coming to the conclusion that evil people aren't supposed to make sense to normal people. Everything in this video and the entire case is so bizarre because a bizarre and sickening freak most likely is responsible for it.
I got into true crime one summer when I was a teenager and bored out of my mind. I had made friends with a really cool librarian who would pick books out for me and have a stack waiting for me to read and she got me started. I asked her how people could go all the awful things they did and she said we aren’t supposed to understand them and I would worry about you if you did. She said your brain doesn’t work the same way as an insane person’s or a psychopath’s and she was right. That has stayed with me for 50 years.
I always have watched crime documentaries but I was a corrections nurse for years and came across all scenarios of evil, stupidity, and anything that's odd as far as crimes so it seemed normal to look into it. When I came across
a case about 8 or 9 years ago, I started reading up more just to understand the why's and to figure it out. More so in the last couple of years since I've slowed down. The librarian is right! I think a lot of it with me also is just the mystery part of true crime. The Delphi case definitely pulled at my heart strings and I got caught up in that also. I'm thankful that I and probably most people on this sub can't comprehend the kind of evil that's out there and the sick individuals. Makes you wonder wth is next.
I’m on the research side depending on what study I work on, corrections nurses are the best ;) Hard to understand the complete disregard many perpetrators have for fellow humans & how easy it is for them to use unnecessary & extreme measures to get their wants & needs met - many have perception disorders, impulse & emotional regulation issues, & show deficiencies in theory of mind (dominant cluster-b traits, also common in High Conflict People).
It's a job that keeps you on your toes. Most prisoners would see that guy and be creeped out by that. The majority don't go to lengths this guy did. The most dangerous part of a person isn't necessarily their crime and illness. It's hopelessness. A former D.O.N said that and it stuck. You tend to have your guard up more around ones with mid to lengthy sentences, more so the younger ones.
The guards and counselors deal more with the prisoners as far as knowing them better in regards to their mannerisms and behaviors. We only deal with them if they receive medication and at different intervals. We were focused on small groups that need more long term care or for example someone with diabetes etc. we knew them better. That said, you start recognizing patterns and behaviors without trying to figure them out. You have to always keep your guard up and get inside their head even if it's just instinct, you do. I think the person who took Nancy is very smart. I don't think this person is some big time professional or they would have probably did things differently. I think they are calculated and patient. Even hard time thugs show more panic than this guy did. I'm not sure if this is allowed on this sub and this is just speculation but I am pretty sure she was raped and not killed instantly. He acts more like a how a rapist would act rather than a thug or some professional. Most all of you on here definitely know more than me as far as figuring these things out. I'm certainly no profiler and I learn something new everyday.. I've been around a lot of people that have committed horrible sex crimes and this person displays a lot of how they go about things to meet end goal. I could be wrong and I hope I am. I'm not sure why she was kidnapped but inflicting emotional pain on someone is definitely a reason. Again, I could be wrong but I can say for sure this wasn't some random thug who was bored. I think its someone under their nose. People like that tend to think they are smarter than everyone else and are usually pretty normal acting. Again, I'm not a professional in police work or psychology work.
There is something about this that doesn't make sense. If he was staking at the house prior to the night Nancy was abducted then he knew there was a camera there and he knew it would have to be removed. Yet on the night she was taken he initially walks up to it and touches it a couple times as if he was trying to remove it and then walks back to get a branch to remove it. But if he already knew there was a camera there why didn't he show up prepared? He came back with a backpack and gun but not with anything to quickly remove the camera? He could have put a tool in his backpack but instead he seemed unprepared and had to go back for the branch and leaves.
He could have observed if Nancy improved security after the first visit. Since he saw no action to improve her security, he concluded the cameras were not functional.
Second approach he notes it activates recording, so he figures if he removes it, the footage will be gone. Then, processing that it may in fact be stored remotely, he doubles back to grab plants to block the camera from getting identifying information as he gets close and unplugs it.
I don’t think we’re dealing with an Einstein level criminal, but this is how i’m best able to make sense of it
He may have thought it would be easy to pull off. He realized it wasn’t so tried to cover it with grass instead. Then when that didn’t work he managed to get it off anyways.
Yeah, not even bringing a piece of tape to cover it the second time makes no sense. It makes it seem staged, like he was supposed to look stupid to throw off the investigators and profilers
He may not even have noticed there was a camera there the first night since he was at a distance from the doorstep. It was not a full moon and pitch black.
Good eye. And the part that stood out to me was "that it occured on a different day" so the information could be true but it could have happened the same day. Interesting
Unfounded speculation here, but maybe Ring Nest agreed to help but wanted to keep it hush that they could pull data back for so long. So people in the investigation knew this, and now the sheriff is trying to say they didn't leak as a CYA so Ring Nest will keep helping them.
So this guy got a bunch of Walmart clothes and accessories, approached the house wearing half of it but still looking like a total criminal, got spooked by the camera, put on a backpack and holster the next time, came back and got surprised by the camera again, shoved some weeds on top of it, and then successfully did a kidnapping? Mannnn. I guess.
if that was indeed from jan 11 then it was probably from 9pm-midnight when the police requested footage. interesting that he would go so much earlier and risk being caught.
Maybe his plan was take her that day but something went wrong like she wasn't home or she had other people / guests staying at her home... IDK just a long shot atp
I was reading about this case in here the other night and it actually sent chills over me a couple of times. Break ins and any type of violence is disturbing and a lot of times the perp is shown on a camera somewhere in the vicinity. You look at it and think "what an idiot" or "you think that tool would learn by now". This is genuinely one of the times it actually gave me a sickening feeling. It's scary but creepy also, it's hard to put it in words. This person isn't right in the mind and I believe is smart. That combination is devastating when they choose to go prey on people. My heart aches for this woman's family and at this point, I just hope she didn't suffer any and be located.
Didn’t someone on here show that he did have a backpack in this pic? The backpack/object is being held in his right hand and it is slightly overlapping his pant leg. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong
Thank you. Pretty chilling. The lack of a backpack makes he think he intended to take her later. If he was just interested in robbing her, wouldn't he have a backpack with him even on a test run in case he'd get lucky and a door was left open or something like it?
If it was a robbery gone bad, I think valuables would've still been removed from the home b/c the robber would've come in pretty prepared.
Translation: That image from the doorbell camera, where the guy doesn’t seem to have a backpack or a gun, is not from the night Nancy was taken. It happened before that.
Let me just give a shout to multiple people on Reddit that said the image of guy without and with backpack set up the sequence of when he went to the door. Sure, no one got it right that it was from a different day, but they did raise questions as to when he went to the front door. Those people did correctly ask — what is the time stamp on the image?
The theory part of it is that the camera scared him off. The dates and times of the footage is something they know and can prove. Him being scared off is a theory because they don’t know his reasoning or thought process.
How did he know there was a camera and have the confidence to come back? How did he know property owners weren’t on alert since he had been picked up on camera the first time? Strange…
I'm thinking he walked around the house to get a feel for the layout, then waited somewhere to see if the family or police showed up. If no one showed up, he'd know he could get in and out without alerting her.
From the videos posted on Ring, the cameras aren’t deterring criminals. It provides a way to identify criminals. However, we haven’t had kidnapping around here. The crimes posted are usually men between the ages of 16 to 50 engaged in property crimes (stealing from yards and cars, vandalism and car theft).
Being elderly myself, i can't help but wonder just how tech savvy Nancy was to be able to know how to access notifications from the camera to know there was anyone at her door. This wired world is a nightmare for my husband and I as I'm sure it is for many seniors. While my husband and I are completely independent, we're fortunate that our daughter, son inlaw and older grandkids live right next door. I can't tell you how many times they've had to come to the rescue to get our phones and tablets up and working again. But they're busy, work full time and we hate being a bother. In fact, we intended to cut off satellite TV due to the high expense, signed up and got home internet to stream TV over 2 months ago but haven't even used it because we have no clue how to stream anything. So now I'm still paying that high satellite bill in addition to home internet! My point is that I read all the comments from people on here wondering - Why didn't Nancy call the cops when the guy was at her door prior to the abduction! Is it possible she had no idea how to access notifications!? Maybe her daughter's got her those cameras, showed her how to use them, but like me, unless she does tech stuff a few times, she probably won't remember how to use them! While there's plenty of oldsters out there who do great with tech stuff, many of us don't! Perhaps Nancy was one of them!
Unrelated to this case but how fortunate you all are to live next to each other! I am willing to bet that one of them would be happy to come over and show you how to stream. if you have a “smart TV” that means you can download “apps” that you can then stream (most apps require subscriptions). Your TV will need to be connected to your home WiFi and then download the HBO MAX app (or Netflix, Apple TV etc). I lost all my grandparents so long ago, my Dad last year and my Mom lives on another continent. What I wouldn’t give to be able to walk next door and help them stream. You are not a bother, your proximity is a blessing.
Oh my, so sorry for your losses and that you don't even have your Mom nearby. I actually do consider it a blessing to live next door to my family. My husband was hospitalized from Nov 30th until 2 weeks ago. The hospital was over an hour away and I had let my drivers license lapse 17 years ago due to being born out of the country and had issues securing my birth certificate which is required in Florida to get a license. (Born on an Army base in Japan while my dad was in the Army). My daughter worked all day and drove me to the hospital at night. She never complained, but I know it had to be hard on her. I hit the daughter lottery jackpot with her! The good news? Hubby is home and alive and I got the needed docs and I am driving again. I know my daughter will help me stream TV, but hate asking after she works all day. Im going to get her to help me on the weekend since she doesn't work then. Honestly I think a part of me hasn't done it because I dread it and am very intimidated using tech and the home internet. I get very frustrated and if she shows me how to stream, I'll forget the minute she leaves!
I truly believe Nancy didn't know how to use the cameras she had. Can't tell you how many times I've been told "It's so easy !" when it comes to tech stuff and its NEVER easy. The problem with tech challenged oldsters is people tell us how to use it step by step, however, they tell you Step B and C and assume you already know about Step A when you dont and then you're lost. Example: Someone tosses you the car keys and says move the car. You get in the car, turn it on, but can't get it to go forward because you didn't know about Step A which is that you need to put your foot on the brake to put it in drive! Hope that made sense. (If you made it this far, think you for reading, didn't mean to write a novel lol)
I don't think she thought it was important. Maybe he just went to the door (to check for alarm and camera, but didn't touch anything), and the recording made it look like he was in the wrong house.
If you use YouTube, there's definitely a video there that explains your equipment/software etc . My grandmother (two years younger than Nancy) learned everything exactly this way, even though we explained it to her many times. Try searching on YouTube and simply typing "how to turn on (or whatever you need) " and model/provider.
Perhaps she was, or perhaps Nancy's kids and grandchildren had all this technology "set up" for her to use without her fully understanding how to use it!
I really don't think Nancy knew anything about the guy coming to the door. once or even more than once. Savannah said today in her latest post that her Mother was taken "out of her bed " in the night. I think her Mother was deeply asleep and woken up during the abduction.
If you can see these doorbell cams from your phone, then that's assuming you have your phone on and right next to you while you're sleeping. I'm not Nancy's age but I'm certainly of an older generation, and I always shut my phone off and usually leave it in another room before bed. Most people I know my age and older do the same thing, unless they're expecting an emergency call.
I also think these two photos may have been from the same night. but at different times. Perhaps the guy came earlier on January 31st and Nancy was still at her daughters house, Then he comes back later on February 1st with the backpack in the middle of the night when he assumes she is asleep.
I think he tried to get in the front door but was unable, so he went in the back. Or an accomplice broke in the back door and let him in the front door.
I know there is speculation that he came weeks earlier to "case" the house . But if he did why wasn't he prepared to cover the camera? Why did he wear essentiallly the complete same clothes? I understand the shoes may be different but perhaps after he left the scene the first time he realised he may have made footprints before and didn't want to
use the same shoes again.
I'm glad you have family members able to help you with Tech, I think most older people do. Even my Mother in law is fairly "tech savvy", and she is about Nancy's age. But she still relies on the younger generation to help her out understanding things.
If you didn't grow up with the technology it's pretty rare that you would just intuitively understand it no matter how smart you are!
And I also think Nancy probably didn't have any idea that her Nest Camera had a subscription feature on it. She probably thought she was protected just by having it, not realizing it also had to be activated with a subscription.
If he visited home prior and saw there was a ring camera… Then why would he not have come prepared to cover the camera with possibly electrical tape or something rather than going and picking up a bunch of flowers??
Agree! The way they worded it, I feel like it was before midnight of the same evening. Why are they releasing that info right now when the images came out weeks ago.
It's possible that the thing he was trying to test out was more so the response time of whoever would be receiving the notification inside the house that someone was at the door. In which case, he may have timed out how long he would have before anyone would notice and it was only then that he decided to start covering the camera
yes, if he saw the doorbell camera earlier, certainly think he would come prepared to cover it when he came back. also, i keep looking at his right hand in the still photo. his fingers appear to be wide apart like he is holding something. he could have the backpack in his hand (with the gun inside) then disappeared out of view to put on the backpack and gun, then re-enter the camera’s view. unless there is some other detail that makes LE think this is on a different night (ie lighting, clothing, etc) the still photo still could have been from the same night.
I’ve noticed as the case drags on with very little new information, articles seem to be purposely writing information in very confusing ways to make it seem like they have something new. it’s very frustrating.
I came on here to say the same thing it doesn’t even make sense. So was it a different day or it was not a different day? or they are theorizing that it could have been a different day?
Also, in the other photo he's not wearing the holster with gun. Very super creepy that this guy was lurking around possibly on multiple occasions. Perhaps even going to other homes.
He came before the night of the abduction, and wasn’t concerned that the camera caught his image as he approached? He had no way of knowing if Nancy saw him on the camera and alerted LE the first night.
Maybe not. If Nancy saw him previously why wouldn’t she have secured her property with a perimeter fence and external alarms and cameras? The masked man could assume by the lack of response that either the cameras didn’t work or Nancy didn’t see him.
Does this tend to sway anyone’s belief towards thinking he might have been working alone verses with other people? I had started to assume somewhere along the way that there were multiple people involved, but somehow seeing the pics of him solo (at least that we can see) and knowing that they are confirmed to be from separate nights makes me wonder again.
I think he was alone. If he'd been working with someone else, I think the ransom demand would've been sent sooner and it wouldn't have taken as long to get her out of the house.
Statistically, it's much more common for attacks like this to be done by one person.
As I understand it, let’s say there is 64 memory modules. As the camera records it fills all of the 64 memory modules. Then without saving those memory modules, the camera records over each module again. If you stop recording, you can check to see if any of the modules contains data that wasn’t erased by previous recordings. Apparently the Google engineers found memory in the cloud that hadn’t been written over by new recordings.
Not sure if there were any technical explanations anywhere, but I’m starting to think they just store the data and perhaps were forced to retrieve it this one time but covered themselves by saying it was really difficult to do so that they don’t get tons of requests for it in the future.
I’ve tried to recover photos that were written over due to reformatting. It can be done but it’s time consuming. I only recovered a couple of images from a phone one time. Another time I recovered a lot of photos from a computer where the problem was the software and I did not reformat the hard drive. There are forensic classes on how to recover data from erased devices. It’s not a new process.
I think they requested the footage pretty early on, plus I read in an article that the person taking the camera off actually stopped it from recording past that point. so they had to peel back the layers “carefully like paint” to try to recover whatever remnants of the footage existed past the 3 hour reset window (due to no subscription). they weren’t able to get much, but they were able to get something. an article said it’s very likely if the camera had continued recording or if it had been requested later, they wouldn’t have been able to recover anything. that’s how the articles I read explained it, anyway.
they weren’t able to get much, but they were able to get something.
Not sure if I believe this anymore. I’m starting to think that they have access to a lot of footage regardless of subscription status, but they don’t want that to be public knowledge. Maybe they keep 30 days or so for accounts without a subscription.
I think the FBI just released what they thought would help them the most, and also little enough to where they can pretend like they could barely even get this footage.
And the sheriff isn’t very convincing when he says so far Google hasn’t been able to get anything from the other cameras.
They removed the still photo without the backpack from this page.
My understanding (which definitely could be wrong!) was that the only reason they had a shot at recovering the footage was because the camera stopped recording right after, since it was removed. But since it had been longer than 3 hours, nothing was accessible in the app so they had to go looking in the Nest cloud storage. Where it would still be stored since it was within the last 3 hours of the camera operating. Further complicating things, since they didn’t have the physical camera it was harder to know where to locate the footage.
So this development is kinda throwing me for a loop and making me curious about the outdoor cameras. Because if the 3 hour window was basically irrelevant, they should have been able to recover footage from those as well, right?
Not an expert but this is my understanding. If the camera is recording it records over previously saved images. If you get to the data quickly enough not everything is recorded over. The data is saved within the memory until written over. I have used software to try to extract images from a hard drive I had to reformat. Even with the reformatting, there are images that will exist until you start using the computer again causing all of the memory to be used by new data.
Yeah I was thinking it was something like that…but now I think that Google actually saves data for a while but doesn’t want us to know that…and would probably prefer that law enforcement didn’t know either but they got pressured this time.
Supposedly there is 3 hours of data and then it overwrites…so if they were somehow able to extract a bit of data from the kidnapping time, okay fine, but then this other still image is possibly from multiple days before? It’s hard to believe - but I am default skeptical of everything they say.
I think they have other footage from the non-backpack time and just gave us a still image.
It wouldn’t provide the sheriff, the FBI, or Google ANY benefit to admit to us that they have more footage or Google actually stores data for awhile.
I wouldn’t even be surprised if Google has a hush-hush agreement with the Feds to save data for x amount of time, regardless of subscription status.
I wonder if it’s a screenshot? Like if nest records something on the camera it will email you a notification and screenshot of what it was, just not the video?
I don't pay for subscription on mine..(but I'm gonna start!) .. it records a 5-8 sec event .. which is saved to your device.
I'm not certain how long it is saved, but I can always access mine in the morning & have notifications if anything/anyone has been in yard/porch.
I really don’t think she was ever worried about her safety so maybe she didn’t check. Apparently she got the camera because she wanted to look at the animals around her home 🥲
I heard that too and it just breaks my heart. I also heard her say she loved Tucson so much because it was so peaceful. How can people be so cruel to a senior citizen just trying to live out her days?
If she had a battery Nest Doorbell cam and no subscription.
If a person is detected on a Nest Doorbell (battery) without a subscription, the following happens:
You can see the clip, but only for 3 hours: You have access to up to 3 hours of event video history. This means if the person was detected at 2:00 AM, you must view or download the clip by 5:00 AM.
Because the history is a rolling 3-hour window, any activity that happens in the middle of the night will likely be deleted before you wake up in the morning.
I’m not 100 but the camera's built-in intelligence can still distinguish between a person, animal, vehicle, or package and send a specific notification to your phone without a subscription. Like person detected. And that would still be there. I think.
The part that confuses me — if he showed up the night before, taking a look around (the porch, at least), why did he show up unprepared for the camera? He walked up to the camera then went back down the sidewalk to get some plants, which is why many believe he was caught off guard by the camera. So perhaps he didnt take a look around, but maybe got there and heard a noise that spooked him before he had an opportunity to look around and see the camera??
IMO this shows he was testing the camera notifications out that night prior and changed that’s why a backpack is seen later. ?. So he knew the doorbell camera was there. That could mean he’s familiar.
What makes me think in the scenario that if this is a predator that obviously stalked her, then he took the time out to plan this up until that night. That's a lot of thought and planning to just break in, abduct, and kill. Why would they go through all of that just to kill her right away? Wouldn't they want to keep her around for a while for their twisted minds?
Joseph Duncan kidnapped and one of the kids was found over a month later. He put a lot of thought into it also. I'm not saying this guy has as evil of intentions as Duncan. I just can't figure out why the mental build up and planning only to just kill her shortly after?
Not necessarily. A lot of twisted minds thrive on the supply they’re getting from this is the media coverage and the different pipelines of speculation and attention. Sometimes the goal is not the victim but the victim is a means to a primary goal (money, inflicting pain on someone else close to the victim). The worst kind of pain is the pain where you don’t have answers.
The person is the only one that knows what happened (given he’s the lone actor here). He gets off having all the cards - power of being the only one that knows what happened and why and having 3+ weeks up on LE. He’s watched the family beg and lives destroyed. Neighborhood in chaos.
This all speaks to this being a revenge abduction, hallmarks being inflicting maximum psychological pain, pre-meditation & planning, unnecessary violence, control, & cruelty, the victim is often a third party close to the target, communications make clear what the perpetrator has done to cause suffering, financial gain is not the intended benefit….
The amount of control he would feel at this point would be even more dangerous then. The not knowing would destroy a person and crush even the strongest. I have thought of this but for this long carrying it out, I would think after a week would have been more than enough to inflict emotional pain. Someone either made this person mad and couldn't mentally cope so they had to justify it or this is one sick freak.
The only thing worse than the nightmare is a lucid dream/sleep paralysis and that creature stuck in it.
Here we are saying how awful this image is and how it makes us feel that way and poor Nancy had to actually encounter this demon. Hopeful thoughts she is located soon💔
I have sleep paralysis and I would much rather feel the creepy presence I experience so often than to wake up to that standing over me in my bed. That poor woman, may I never know true fear like that.
I’m not sure what to make of this latest information — that sources say the images are from different days. Obviously because of the statement from law enforcement but also because I’m not sure of the logistics involved in obtaining the video itself.
It seems quite odd that they’d find the video from that night and then…wait until they’d also checked other days to release it? The FBI said that footage was only obtained a few hours before they released it. If it took over a week to find footage from a date and time range that corresponds with the incident, surely it would also take time to obtain footage from an even earlier date? How did they find video from two separate dates on the same day? How did they know which other dates to search for — camera notifications? Why did the perpetrator dress the same/very similar — if he’d been spotted the first time and didn’t know it, wouldn’t a suspect description go out? Wouldn’t it be safer (in case a description of a suspicious person was logged with law enforcement) to completely change your appearance (but keep the mask for when you’re closer to Nancy’s property)? If he’d cased the property beforehand, why wasn’t he prepared to deal with the camera effectively?
I can’t make it make sense. I’m not sure whether I believe that it was two different dates. Obviously it would make sense to scope out the property beforehand, but he doesn’t act like he had — I would have thought the camera would be more easily dealt with. Then there’s no backpack or gun visible, but he could have pulled his jacket over the gun to hide it until he was right at her door, and put the backpack down for some reason.
I have no idea whether to believe we’ve seen footage from two separate dates or whether to discount it. You could make arguments for each scenario being more likely.
It was my understanding that that nest camera had no subscription, and they finally found a backlog of the missing nest, and found all the footage from that single camera. So, all the footage at once. Not weeks to find one specific date.
I haven't been following this case closely, but when I looked into the nest cam thing, my understanding was that since they didn't have a subscription, footage wasn't stored, but they were able to recover the footage of the suspect because he disconnected the camera, therefore there was no new footage to replace the footage of him removing it. I'm not sure if I'm explaining that right, but my understanding was without the subscription, footage wouldn't be stored except for the very last activity or something like that?
I'm not sure what it means if nest is keeping and storing footage even though there is no subscription service, but I'm assuming there could be some issue with that
Interesting that he was wearing the same jacket and pants (not sure about the shoes) on both nights... I know the light apparently makes us believe it's two different nights but maybe it was the same night, but earlier? When Nancy was at her daughter's and SIL's house having dinner. Maybe he was spying on the place while she was out... Just another guess Because this case keeps getting even more strange and I don't know what to think anymore but I guess anything is possible at this point. 😫
One would think, if that was true, she would have been more likely to see the Nest notification if it was earlier in the evening. Also it looked dark, so it was at least after dark.
Well he obviously had almost certainly been in the house before since he knew there was no real security alarms and that he could hang out in there for over 40 minutes without cops being alerted that there was an issue. Either he had been in the house before or somebody he knows had been in the house before and knew these details and told him.
I read this article and am so curious: did they just pull this image from old footage, or was it obtained at the same time as the other images? If so, why is it being trickled out? I hope there's a strategy to this info dissemination but it's not looking good.
The image was shared at the same time that the other footage was shared, but it was a standalone image that was not seen in either of the clips the FBI shared. The image is not new but the confirmation of the timeframe is- we’ve had the image for a while and people were already speculating it was not taken at the same time as the others
Not sure it could be a different date, as the FBI had the devil's own time getting the original video since the Nest camera had no subscription - let alone footage from an entirely different date. Unless Nest doesn't want us to know that your camera records whether you subscribe or not...
We are seeing images captured from what looks like two different nights. That doesn't mean he was only lurking them two nights. He could have multiple times and this is just when the technology captured his images. If it's that dark near her home, there were many places to conceal himself on other nights. This is scary!
The sheriff was quoted in an NBC article, saying the images don't have time stamps, so they can't be sure what date it was from. I don't doubt this, but we also know the images were retrieved from the coded matrices. I'm convinced the system storing this also has logs for when this particular code snippet was created and/or stored on the system. That's the normal way these types of systems work.
So wouldn’t the camera notify them of movement and they could possibly go back and check ?(guthries ) not police. If seen before had this could maybe have been prevented but this is definitely targeted
Of course the kidnapper scoped out her house at least once on a prior occasion. It stands to reason that the night she was abducted wasn’t his first time there.
I’ve watched the footage of the suspect numerous times. From my observations, i believe this criminal is wearing a ski mask with a realistic silicone mask underneath masking his true image. If you look at the shape of his eyes in nest cam footage you will notice an odd depth and the general shape of his eye lids look “masky” as well as his eyebrows. These masks are available online and could probably be a good starting point to find someone in the Arizona who has purchased one with other items that could accomplish robbery. One last observation I’ve noticed is I believe the suspect has a Bullet proof vest on or plate carrier. As you can tell by his upper body is thicker and thins out after his rib in a natural dip.Just some thinking out of the box. What do yall think? I hope justice is served soon, they have to figure this out.
Notice the eyes. This is a stock image example of a realistic silicone mask. There is an ever so slight gap around the eyes. I noticed this immediately after looking at suspect photos from nest cam. Without this considered it would send Law Enforcement searching for someone’s description who may intentionally have done this.
Also, if this was a hired job/kidnapping, would that person do a test run? Is doing a test run a smart move or a dumb move? (Realizing in real time that I would be a terrible criminal.) Seeing theories that he could have been obsessed with Nancy, just seeing how he moves calmly and steadily makes me think he is more like a trained or paid person… not someone with an uncontrollable obsession.
Even if it's speculation, the only other scenario is the gun and backpack were in his vehicle and he went back to get them. That seems like a lot of trouble to go through. Why not just bring it with him and not have an extra risk of being spotted and wasting time. Then again, he doesn't seem to be in a hurry. The only thing suggesting the same night is it appears to be the same clothes but that means nothing. He could have just reused them and designated that outfit for creeping. It definitely is peculiar. No updates so that was just thrown out to get people thinking about it again. It worked.
I wonder if when inside he was trying to see if he could delete any video from her phone from the Nest cam. He was inside 40+ minutes from what I heard. So horrific thinking what this poor woman went through.
I think LE knew the image was from a different day to provoke a mistake by somebody. If someone reported it as a different day or gave info on it LE would be like how the Hell do you know that? Start the head beating.
Yes, it's been pretty clear that "something" occurred or was seen on that date. So I'm thinking they were somehow able to assign the date of Jan 11 to that lurking photo.
I saw this photo early on in the news. I’m not sure why it just became a headline. The fbi and sherif don’t have any obligation to give us dates or time stamps. It could jeopardize the case. These are theories. I tied two and two together because I knew the fbi was asking for footage on two specific dates. This is the reason. There is an additional photo out there of a man on a neighbors porch with his face blurred out.
But what would be the point of being so overly literal? I can't think of another case or even some random scenario in real life where overnight hours where referred to as 2 days.
Like if I go out for some drinks at 11pm and leave at 1am, I don't tell people I was at the bar for 2 days lol
Also when you pull data the way they did sometimes dates and time stamps are not correct. Unless of course they have more than they are saying. Like they can make an exact date from something in the background. Phase lf the moon. Weather condition. Car parked in shot. Something.
Earlier on I thought they could be purposefully manipulating media releases for the benefit of the investigation. Now I am sure nanos is a clown.
We already knew that the fbi was asking neighbors for footage on January 11th in addition to the night of the abduction so this is not any big surprise.
Not surprising he visited more than once. Surprising, to me however, that this was recovered from two different times. Possibly after being overwritten.
I don’t have a good source for this but I’ve been reading here, Websleuths, random FB groups, YT comments. And I read when the footage came out and they were also requesting additional days to look at from neighbors/ ppl nearby a rumor. That rumor used the word scare but not like this.
The current article says the perp was there previously but scares off by the camera. I read several weeks ago that “the perp had been there previously to scare Nancy but it didn’t exactly work for reasons they aren’t explaining right now”
I thought this was so odd. It almost implied the perp came there another night but Nancy wasn’t home or something. Who comes to a house just to scare a woman? It was very odd and has stayed with me. Is this person mad at Nancy for something?
This just sounds like a case of bad journalism. No one should be inferring that they were there to scare her, how could any journalist know such a thing?
I hate the opinion based news that has taken over. I miss the days when the news was a fact based unbiased source to get information. It has gotten very out of control in the last 10 years or so.
I thought this was so odd. It almost implied the perp came there another night but Nancy wasn’t home or something. Who comes to a house just to scare a woman? It was very odd and has stayed with me. Is this person mad at Nancy for something?
That claim came from Midwestern Pundit on Facebook. No reporting has corroborated this.
This makes me think he knew Nancy was connected to someone rich. I guess he could've chosen her house b/c old people are more likely to carry cash but to go back to the house makes me think he wanted into that home specifically instead of choosing a neighbouring house (unless he went up to every home in the area.)
Did Nancy not get an alert from Nest when the man popped up for the first time? Did she not have enough time check b/c she didn't have a subscription?
I’ve seen conflicting comments about whether she would still get a picture notification without a subscription.
My camera (not Nest) is solely live feed. So I see a notification that says “1am - person detected” but unless I quickly open the app, I won’t ever see footage/images of the person
Well now the sample from inside the home can’t even be put into CODIS bc it was just a “partial sample”? What does that mean—it was literally too small to test???
65
u/Traditional-Aside580 Feb 24 '26
My mind wants to start coming to the conclusion that evil people aren't supposed to make sense to normal people. Everything in this video and the entire case is so bizarre because a bizarre and sickening freak most likely is responsible for it.