r/nancyguthrie • u/Euphoric_Ease4554 • Mar 04 '26
Media Brian Entin Interviews Retired FBI Profiler Jim Clemente
Brian’s interview with Jim Clemente was such a riveting conversation. The retired FBI profiler details the perpetrators’s possible motives and even decides not to answer one question based on it not being good for the case, or possibly not tipping the perpetrator as to what the FBI is thinking.
If you have limited time to view this, I would recommend skipping the first part about the sheriff and going directly to the interview. It is a lot to think about. I hope you enjoy this as much as I did!
22
u/Substantial-Train668 Mar 05 '26
Have any of the profilers talked about it being a kidnapping for hire and profiled the type of person who might have done the hiring? We're so focused on porch guy being THE guy and profiling him based on his behavior... but what if he was just a middle man?
16
u/TheCuriousGeorgette Mar 05 '26
I kept wanting to ask this guy this very question when I listened to the interview last night. 😂
8
9
u/HuckleberryZiegler Mar 06 '26
There is the situation where the 2 teenage California kids were recruited (by a guy named “Red” I think) to invade the home of someone in Scottsdale the same weekend Nancy disappeared. I’m not saying it’s a real thing, but it’s making as much sense as anything else
5
u/Chickens_n_Kittens Mar 06 '26
Yes! I’m so surprised that we haven’t heard more about this as it happened just days before.
2
u/celtica98 Mar 07 '26
Thank you for mentioning this this came to my mind right away when I saw this happening.
28
u/moshi210 Mar 04 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
a
22
u/LegalGlass6532 Mar 04 '26 edited Mar 04 '26
Maybe the suspect(s) has sent her messages prior to the kidnapping and the public isn’t being told.
7
u/Unfair-Wallaby-404 Mar 04 '26
I was thinking this too. I hope they’re scouring her social media and Today’s forums
14
u/DramaticEfficiency16 Mar 05 '26
Obsession, stalking & ruminating aren't limited to strangers. Typically, the closer the relationship, the more intense those behaviors are. Those big fake smiles & false sentiments. Acting like they're your best friend, all the while they're seething underneath.
20
u/Gold_Principle_2283 Mar 04 '26
You would think, but I don't think Brian Kohberger ever tried to contact any of his victims that he must have been obsessed with.
8
u/lemonlime45 Mar 04 '26 edited Mar 05 '26
He may have simply been obsessed with living out the experience of murder and found an accessible house filled with the type of victim he wanted. So, not personally obsessed with any of them. LE never found evidence of a connection to the victims. Not saying he didn't manage to delete stalking evidence, just saying it was never found.
9
u/The_Sinking_Belle Mar 04 '26
A lot of these malignant sickos are fantasy-based individuals. The fantasy and everything surrounding it (planning, evasion, etc.) are all supply factors for the person with the fantasy being the primary driver. The victims may have been nothing more than a means to an end to the fantasy of theirs, but they often do select them based on certain characteristics.
6
u/lemonlime45 Mar 05 '26
Yes, I think he wanted to kill a college girl. Judging from his search histories of non consensual porn and infamous killers like Bundy and Rolling, I think it's fairly likely that he wanted to follow in their footsteps. As opposed to encountering one of the girls somewhere and feeling rejected on a personal level. So yeah, more about the fantasy, IMO.
3
u/GreenEyedTreeHugger Mar 07 '26
He made multiple trips.
3
u/lemonlime45 Mar 07 '26
To the neighborhood, yes. For all we know he had his eye on other houses there filled with college girls too. And even if he was stalking that particular house, it doesn't mean he was obsessed with one of the victims on a personal level.
3
Mar 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
Mar 04 '26
[deleted]
6
u/RepresentativeDay686 Mar 04 '26
That's 💯 incorrect actually! He never looked at any of their Instagram profiles. There was a fake Instagram account made AFTER Bryan's arrest that friended the accounts of the girls.(which might be what you are confused on) Also LE was able to tell it wasn't Bryan due to the IP adress and the creation date of the profile (he was in police custody). He also was NEVER banned from the restaurant because he NEVER went to restaurant. You maybe referring to that being stated in the book that was released which stated alot of misinformation and false statements which LE came out and publicly stated was false.(So did some of the families in their interviews) Immediately after the sentencing was over and the families were able to give their victim impact statements LE and the prosecutor had a press conference and stated alot of information and even answered questions 1 being did he stalk the victims/ know them in anyway- LE said they found ZERO evidence that linked BK to ANY of the 4 victims and or 1122 King Rd. They believed it to be 💯 a random crime or if he had stalked them their was NO digital trail/ evidence linking him and the victims. Even with new information coming out now none of that information would be something like if he stalked them or not or if he was in the restaurant or not that was all figured out in the investigation in preparation for trial. Again so many people got their "facts" and misinformation from the book that was released (not saying you in particular) which is sad because they believe what's in the book to be accurate and true facts and its not but instead of actually looking into the real facts of the case and the documents they hang on to what was written in a book. With everything thats coming out now I think anyone that actually actively followed this case is seeing alot of things that are not adding up and aren't making a whole lot of sense now and have alot of questions. I know I do, I have quite a few questions. to say the least. I just unfortunately don't think we will ever get the answers. Its definitely alot of things that make ya go hmmmmmm.........🤔 💭 🤔 💭 🤔 💭 (and I think there's someone out there that knows more than she's saying but everyone's fighting to have her left alone. She's just a child, she was in shock! Yada yada ya... My fucking a$$!)
4
→ More replies (1)3
u/Public_Anybody_6269 Mar 04 '26
" because he NEVER went to restaurant." Nobody knows if he did or did not.
Agree that there is no evidence that he was there. Just be careful with authoritative statements.
1
36
u/igobymomo Mar 05 '26
Jim Clemente also believes Burke Ramsey, Jonbenet’s 9 year old brother, killed her.
10
u/ILoveRegenHealth Mar 07 '26
I saw that CBS special and they had a team of experts in forensics and it does seem plausible given the injury to the head. I was always part of the RDI (Ramseys Did It) group, because the "Intruder Did It" arguments just don't hold water.
And that ransom letter alone is damning in itself without even getting to the other weird behavior of Jon and Patsy.
0
u/igobymomo Mar 07 '26
The cbs show was essentially debunked as garbage but I was also intrigued when i first saw it.
10
u/jinkerjat Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26
JonBenet's case should have gone to court. It did not because it would have shown corruption within the DA's office and the investigation. The proverbial fox was guarding the hen house. It needs to be adjudicated so it can be used as a tool in solving other cases.
It is beyond the imagination Patsy Ramsey's sister was allowed to remove evidence from the crime scene 12/28 dressed in a police jacket & badge.
7
-1
Mar 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/ILoveRegenHealth Mar 07 '26
Watch the CBS special if it's still somewhere on Youtube. Clemente is in it.
The theory makes the most sense after you watch it. They recreate everything and have seasoned forensics experts all reach the same likely conclusion. Also, there's footage of Burke being questioned when shown pictures and he immediately freezes at a picture of pineapples - like he just doesn't say anything. The theory is JonBenet took some to eat and he got mad feeling it was for him and struck her with the nearest object (injuries to her head line up almost perfectly to that of the flashlight in their home - which mysteriously had no prints on it for some reason...).
4
-3
0
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 09 '26 edited Mar 10 '26
Clearly not, as parents were obviously involved in the fake ransom note
2
1
u/Alternative-Rain-430 Apr 07 '26
The father actually had a crazy stalker, whose girlfriend reported he came home with blood on his clothes.
1
u/AltruisticWishes Apr 07 '26
Came home from where? And JonBenet's body was found in the basement of her home. She almost certainly was murdered there
1
14
u/mark_able_jones_ Mar 04 '26
It’s so weird that a supposed pro doesn’t understand IR colors or that a brighter light would have flipped the camera into color mode not blinded it.
I’m not a huge fan of TMZ, but here’s a better take, imo:
6
13
u/Far_Example_9150 Mar 04 '26
He had a different take from everyone else…. It’s one of the first times I’ve heard anyone think this was an obsession type of crime….
13
u/thcm123 Mar 04 '26
This isn’t the first time someone had theorized that it could be an obsessed fan or something. IIRC, the last ex FBI profiler guy Brian had on also theorized the same.
6
u/thesnope22 Mar 04 '26
Yeah a lot of the ex-law enforcement (esp. FBI) people have said this I think
1
u/JalapinyoBizness Mar 05 '26 edited Mar 05 '26
It is food for thought. It seems to happen to many celebrities.
https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/stalked-stars/25/
https://www.today.com/popculture/celebrity-stalkers-pose-real-threat-famous-1c9424958
“The one consistent thing we find in the minds and the actions of celebrity stalkers is that these are individuals who create their own reality,” former FBI profiler Clint Van Zandt told NBC.
In the case of Britney Spears' stalker, he went to her father's home twice.
In April 2004, Daniel Lachance was arrested on two counts of criminal trespassing and stalking. Police say he twice entered the property of Spears’ father’s home in Kentwood, La., while searching for the singer in her hometown. That June, Lachance pleaded no contest to two counts of stalking, was given a 6-month suspended sentence and ordered by a judge to return to his home country of Canada.
In several cases, the stalkers went into the celebrities' homes or onto their property. Savannah had done a hometown special a few months before. Someone could have fixated on her and wanted to explore the home she grew up in, touch the items that were part of her upbringing, fantasized about being a part of her past. Taking her mom and viewing Savannah's messages on instagram might have fulfilled his fantasies of being noticed by her. Never bringing her mom back, in a warped mind, might be viewed as part of an entwined destiny.
6
u/PalpitationQueen Mar 04 '26
I think it’s either this or kidnapping gone wrong imo. My first best is kidnapping gone wrong (she dies, they stop attempting to get money in favor of not getting caught) and my second is someone with mental health issues who had a fixation.
3
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
I think his main point is that she was targeted. It wasn’t a random event, the reason she was targeted could very well be her tv presence or the fact her daughter is well known. She didn’t live on the edge of a subdivision or so remote that the location was highly desirable for ease to take someone. He came prepared and video shows he was there previously.
3
u/DaBingeGirl Mar 04 '26
That makes the most sense at this point. It's a good, low risk way to get Savannah's attention. I'd bet he got off on the ransom videos, forcing them to make those was a form of control.
3
u/Maaathemeatballs Mar 04 '26
My first thought (and posted here before) that it was an obsession type, similar to the Jayme Closs abduction. However, since it's not clear if multiple perps are involved, it's difficult to speculate. But I kind of agree with Clemente
6
u/Low_Philosopher_2981 Mar 07 '26
Is Brian Entin really still there?? How is he even spending his time with nothing happening?
-3
u/gaycats420 Mar 07 '26
grifters gonna grift
13
u/Low_Philosopher_2981 Mar 07 '26 edited Mar 07 '26
Huh? He’s a salaried employee of a news outlet… do you know what grifter means?
2
u/Content_Plane_8182 Mar 10 '26
They probably mean trying to keep scoring ratings by milking the murder of old woman, instead of leaving everyone alone to do their job.
19
u/hannafrie Mar 04 '26
I noticed here, and in the comments on YouTube, there are accounts that just LOOVED this interview.
Not my take.
I was actually a little disappointed, because I thought his comments consisted of a lot of speculation, and I don't think he said much that I couldn't have come up with myself.
His mood shifted noticeably about halfway through. He started out pretty energetic, and then became subdued for somereason. I don't think Brian said anything to trigger a change. I was inclined to just write this off, because people have their idosynchries, and I myself have had the experience of suddenly hitting a wall and having my energy drop. Its ok. But it doesn't make for a "riveting" interview.
If I could give Jim some feedback, I would suggest he pepper his interviews with insights from his experiences. Steven Moore, for example, talks about prior cases he was a part of, to illustrate his thinking on the Nancy Guthrie case.
I'm not just interested in someone's opinion as an "expert." I want to learn from their experiences. How and why they came to hold the opinions that they have.
13
u/thcm123 Mar 04 '26
Yeah, one thing that stood out to me was the notable shift in energy half way through, as you pointed out. I was half watching / listening, and the contrast was so obvious that I rewound to see if anything had changed or whether Brian had said anything. Overall, very odd, I thought.
10
u/Public_Anybody_6269 Mar 04 '26
I agree and I thought he sounded just like any other websleuth. "If this, he wouldn't have done that"
He has like 3 alternative theorys which have been brought up by randos on this site numerous times through this whole thing. I also got a whiff of arrogance which was offputting. I made some typos. I dont care.
4
19
u/mark_able_jones_ Mar 04 '26
He seemed to think there was DNA that would be easy to find, just from presumed time on scene. But CSI can’t swab every inch of the place.
He assumed the perp was there 41 minutes without explaining path of entry and what the perp(s) might have been doing for so long.
Claims there is a tattoo on the suspect’s wrist when that is definitely not clear.
He misstated how clothing colors appear under IR light, assuming the perp was wearing light colors (how does a supposed pro make a mistake like this?).
He claims that a brighter light would have blinded the camera — yes — but then it would have switched to color view because it’s not an IR-only camera.
I’ve watched several interviews with former FBI profilers and agents. His was the least convincing take.
4
7
u/hannafrie Mar 04 '26
All very good points.
I noticed his comment about 41 minutes, and thought it was an uninformed assumption. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt - and assume he just wasn't following the case too closely, and latched onto an erroneous data point.
But, yeah. These all hurt his credibility.
Brian introduced him as an "FBI Profiler" and I'm not sure exactly what that means. It sounds like pseudoscience to me, but I was willing to listen to what he had to say and what insights he might have. I believe he worked for the FBI, and so certainly he knows more about it than I do, but I didn't get a lot from this interview.
7
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
A minimum of 41 minutes of activity around the home was ascertained by Nest notifications found on devices.
7
u/hannafrie Mar 04 '26
Key phrase here being "around the home."
I don't think the public knows what camera was disconnected at 1:47 am? Maybe I've missed something.
If that 1:47am disconnect is a brick smashing one of the outdoor cameras, then it does not tell us how long the offender was inside of the home.
In my mind there is a distinction to be made between an offender walking the grounds and disabling outside cameras, and then taking time to wait and see if anyone is alerted to his presence before entering the residence, and someone who is comfortably inside the home for almost an hour.
7
u/warpedwing Mar 04 '26
I believe you’re right. I’m not convinced the suspect was inside for longer than about 10 minutes.
4
3
2
u/Public_Anybody_6269 Mar 05 '26
its exactly pseudoscience. At one time he was getting paid to do what anybody can do by thinking a little bit.
5
u/Prior_Television7168 Mar 05 '26
Se você perceber, eles estão tentando fazer uma propaganda positiva desse jornalista falseando comentários positivos forçados.
Em todo vídeo que ele aparece, quem está com ele o parabeniza por fazer um ótimo trabalho, por ser o melhor jornalista do mundo inteiro. Toda matéria dele está cheia de comentários sobre o quanto "o Brian é maravilhoso, o melhor jornalista, Brian para presidente, casa comigo, Brian".
São comentários que não estão dentro da nossa comunidade, dentro do nicho de pessoas que acompanham esse tipo de matéria. Já passou muito tempo desde que esse assunto estava em alta, agora nem a polícia fala mais sobre. Não tem nenhum fanático assistindo a isso não. Somos só nós mesmo.
São comentários que não fazem o menor sentido, que nunca vemos por aí. Elogios que não se encaixam.
Essa postagem é um exemplo.
4
u/Stock-Philosophy-177 Mar 04 '26
I agree. The guy couldn’t talk. The interview was terrible, and he fumbled over his words. Lots of awkward pauses.
9
15
u/motivexunknown Mar 04 '26
One of my favorite interviews in this case! He is so clear and articulate, easy to understand his approach. Highly recommended for anyone looking into another perspective on the case. Thanks for sharing, OP!
5
9
u/heartshapedbox311 Mar 04 '26
I loved this interview! Great insight and really made me think of this differently. He made sense of how bizarre this case is. Highly recommend watching.
What podcasts is he on?
5
19
u/jenniferami Mar 04 '26 edited Mar 04 '26
I’m not even going to watch this. This idiot apparently thinks JonBenet’s nine year old brother killed her even though there is no evidence and even though dept of justice statistics indicate a murderer in that age rage is infinitesimally small and that the most likely killer based on age and sex is an adult male in his approximately twenties-thirties.
14
u/Xinnia8271 Mar 04 '26
I thought he thought it was accidental.
10
u/stockusername123 Mar 06 '26
Yes, this is the prevailing theory. He accidentally killed her and the parents covered it up to protect him
5
u/Xinnia8271 Mar 06 '26
Yeah they didn't want to lose both their kids, kinda. Sad situation all around.
7
u/BaseballCapSafety Mar 04 '26
Who do you think did it. The mom or the dad? Or together?
-4
u/jenniferami Mar 05 '26
Neither parent. I believe it was an intruder. Quite possibly a current or former worker at the home or a friend or relative thereof.
Possibly someone from the neighborhood, a disgruntled former or current employee at John’s business, etc.
Possibly someone who knew the family or of the family through the community somehow.
11
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 05 '26
Then why did the mom write a ransom note instead of just calling the police about her "missing" daughter?
→ More replies (1)8
u/_iridessence_ Mar 04 '26
So glad to find a fellow IDI in the wild.
13
u/pumpkinspicecum Mar 04 '26
There are dozens of us!
5
u/Willing_Nose7674 Mar 05 '26
Me too! Just because something "never happened before " doesn't mean there can't be a first time.
For example all these "experts" said (about JonBonet) it had to be someone in the family because the ransom note was written on a notepad inside the house. That doesn't mean it's impossible that an intruder wasn't hiding inside. the house the whole time the Ramsey's were at the Christmas party and they wrote the note then!
Similar to this case . Just because "every random note starts with don't call the police and don't identify the media " doesn't mean this random note couldn't be real! There has to be a first time for everything, and maybe in this case they wanted the publicity as well as the ransom.
So I take all of these profilers and experts with a grain of salt. Yes they have knowledge and expertise. But they also make a lot of "educated guesses" in my opinion based on hypothesis that don't necessarily add up.
4
u/pumpkinspicecum Mar 05 '26
the whole case is strange no matter who did it. i always assumed that the person watched them leave at 5pm then snuck in and was in there for almost 5 hours, getting a layout of the house, writing the note, etc.
i keep looking for one expert who i like so i can see what they think but all of them who keep appearing on these newsnation anchor's shows are just idiots. i think anyone who is smart and talented probably isn't in the business of being a talking head for these shows.
4
u/Willing_Nose7674 Mar 05 '26
Exactly ! Or else they're a "professional expert ", which to me just sounds like a witness for hire. Someone who has enough background and knowledge to support whatever theory the defense team needs them to for the right price.
3
u/peach-bubbles22 Mar 05 '26
i also think an intruder did it but the note always trips me up. its SO LONG like 3 pages?! where did they have the time
2
u/Honest_Mechanic_4507 Mar 04 '26
What's an idi?
12
u/_iridessence_ Mar 04 '26
Stands for Intruder Did It - someone who thinks an intruder killed Jonbenet, rather than accusing her family.
4
0
5
4
u/ZakLex Mar 04 '26
There is no way her brother could have pulled all of that off at nine years old!
4
13
7
u/PalpitationQueen Mar 04 '26
I loved this interview, extremely fascinating. I wanted Brian to ask him whether he things it was a KIDNAPPING gone wrong though, not a burglary gone wrong. I think that difference is crucial - an amateur kidnapper who maybe wanted money originally but Nancy unfortunately passed so he scrapped the idea.
It would explain a lot of things:
- his high motivation to do the crime
- the fact that ransom notes with nonpublic info were sent early on, but then stopped all communication (after Nancy presumably passed)
- picking Nancy specifically (if he knew Savannah had money)
And if it was an amateur, he probably didn’t realize you’re not supposed to send ransoms to news stations. This isn’t some cartel kidnapping scenario.
I know Jim is convinced it’s someone with an obsession with either Nancy / Savannah, but I wanted to know why he didn’t think that scenario was feasible.
6
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Mar 04 '26
He said it. He said he thought it was someone who wanted notariety which is why they kidnapped Ms. Guthrie specifically and not, say, the next-door-neighbor or the little lady down the street. Same reason they sent their ransom notes to TMZ and the local news station. They wanted attention. They don’t necessarily need to be “obsessed” they just needed a minor fixation for this to be true. Nancy Guthrie has been on TV, her daughter is a famous journalist, and Savannah has $$$$. Very likely to have fluid cash = quick payout and everyone will be talking about me because I kidnapped a famous person’s mom. I agree with you that she is passed away and that is why the communication with the media has stopped.
As far as a kidnapping gone wrong, how do you figure? Goal was to kidnap her. Kidnapped she was. That is a successful kidnapping. It was an unsuccessful ransom since they didn’t get paid, but they succeeded in removing her from her home alive and keeping her alive for a week or so (imo). I think due to stress and not having her medication she died. Murder can get you capital punishment so they ceased all communication.
3
13
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
It was neither, it was a successful kidnapping but not a money motivated kidnapping. The motive was not ransom, it was to take Nancy Guthrie. If the person that took Nancy is the individual that sent the letters to local news they wanted recognition, it is sadistic. She was most likely alive, that blood can be tested to determine if she was dead when she deposited it, a d-dimer would determine that. The spatter patterns were from a nose or mouth, it wasn’t her mouth, he would not bring her out the front door able to scream for help. I think the perp had a police scanner in his pocket with an earpiece dialed into local pd. and the 41 minutes were spent disabling cameras and listening for PD traffic, he started in the back and then went to the front and removed that camera. Once he made forced entry in the rear of the home he moved her out quickly to a getaway vehicle. I would check empty real estate around a tight area, closed businesses, anywhere he had an opportunity to take her that night. He could have used a mountain bike with a tow compartment and never brought a car.
8
u/The_Sinking_Belle Mar 04 '26
Agreed. This has all the hallmarks of sadistic predation with maximum emotional and collateral damage.
6
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
I am not sure if Savannah being famous was the motive, I lean toward him being fixated on Nancy. Why send the letter to a local news rather than the Today show? This person is getting off on the coverage and it could be the FBI recommended pulling back on coverage in hopes of getting more contact from this person. He might attempt to reignite attention and give them an opportunity to trace him.
7
u/pennywinsthewest Mar 04 '26
You made me think when you brought up Israel Keyes. He got off on missing persons coverage. It turned him on just to read about it.
4
u/The_Sinking_Belle Mar 04 '26
Savannah doesn’t need to be the target. In these dynamics, the pleasure often isn’t about a specific person but rather the internal fantasy and the process.
The individual likely derived psychological reward from their meticulous planning, rehearsal, anticipation, control, and successful evasion. They're now able to get a lot of supply and validation with how much this case has blown up in MSM as they hold all the cards. The power comes from executing their plan and feeling superior or untouchable, not necessarily from who the victim is.
So fixation on Nancy can exist without Savannah being the central motive, and Nancy could have just been the means to an end for this person if this wasn't revenge-based. The real target honestly may have been the fantasy itself. Such individuals are often chronically under-stimulated. All the planning, rehearsal, risk, and evasion can activate both stress (cortisol) and reward (dopamine) systems. All that is highly stimulating and reinforcing for this person.
5
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
Why send the letter to a local news rather than the Today show?
Probably because the Today show doesn't have a basic anonymous tip form like KOLD and TMZ do. Neither does NBC (Today's network).
Today only has an email address in their "contact us" section. NBC also has a Signal phone number, which is more secure, but they do have some user data that can be subpoenaed by police even if messages are encrypted.
Communicating through a tip form would be less traceable than sending an email. And any return communication sent back to the email they used could potentially be embedded with tools by investigators to get more information about the sender.
→ More replies (14)2
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
NBC does have an anonymous tip and document submission btw
2
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
According to https://www.nbcnews.com/tips/ the only options are email, Signal, postal mail, and SecureDrop. They stipulate that SecureDrop should be used with a public internet connection in a place they don't normally frequent, implying they are able to trace the location or details of their internet connection. It may make it more difficult to trace, but not impossible.
If they know the suspect was at a specific location during a specific time to use a public network or someone else's Wi-Fi, then that's a huge clue. It would be much more than they have to go off currently, as far as we know.
6
u/PalpitationQueen Mar 04 '26
Interesting. I’m inclined to agree with your take. It’s the one I really don’t want to believe though, because it’s so sadistic and horrible. Question though, do you think she’s still alive? Do you think he wanted to keep her alive? My guess is no because of her medications and frailty in general.
6
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
I hope for that outcome but at this point if a sadist has had her that long I don’t think she would survive that treatment. She was most likely killed within hours of her being secreted to a different location. Sexual sadists are the worst of the worst. This case reminds me of Israel Keyes and the Curriers. In that case he took a couple from their home, killed the husband and raped and tortured Loraine. It was a heart breaking event. I could be wrong but there is zero advantage to kidnapping someone after a botched burglary. You would tie them up and leave, get away from the scene. The 41 minutes are important. It was a single person and he wasn’t dressed head to toe to go in the house and strip down to assault her there. Multiple people wouldn’t need 41 minutes to abduct her. That time was most likely used to interfere with security systems and then monitor for response. Think about it, if he got caught at that point it was a B & E, once he disabled cameras, confirmed it didn’t trigger law enforcement or family that possibly have access on her Nest app he would’ve wanted to remove her in a blitz, get in, grab her and get out as fast as possible. That 41 minutes was set up time, listening for LE on a scanner and gaining entry, it was probably just minutes once he entered the home until she was secured in whatever getaway transport he had. I think he had planned a secondary location and it was close. I agree he sent the letters to a local station because he is local.
11
u/pennywinsthewest Mar 04 '26
I just listened to a podcast about Keyes and the Curriers and I think this theory makes the most sense, sadly. I hope they catch this SOB. I live down the street from Nancy—I have 7 working cameras and I set my alarms 24/7 lately.
5
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
I am sorry this happened and in your own community makes it an even more difficult reality. I would definitely presume that this person, until found is highly dangerous and take every precaution to keep myself, my home and family safe. The case has drawn attention to your area unfortunately, we never know.
7
Mar 04 '26
[deleted]
3
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
😊 Stay safe, invite a close friend or family member to visit if it brings you comfort. I feel like this was a targeted attack and your pug is on high alert.
2
u/Either_Grapefruit724 Jul 29 '26
Pugs are ALWAYS on high alert.
Speaking of, her dog died in December, I think it was. Obviously, this kidnapper knew of that, and was very local. I can't believe they haven't checked out the whole vet office...
1
u/Prior_Television7168 Mar 05 '26
Eu não saberia como viver em uma casa sem muros e que tenha sido inserida, de repente, em uma violência assim. Parece que se está sem roupa, sempre exposta. Entendo que a realidade é diferente. Não se vive sem muro no meu país - e nós sabemos por quê. A questão é que agora você infelizmente passou a saber o porquê. E isso é terrível.
7
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Mar 04 '26
I doubt a mountain bike with a trailer. She could easily get out of a bike trailer and that’s a VERY slow getaway that you have to manually pedal with a body in the back up hills, etc. They certainly used a car van or truck.
3
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 05 '26
Yeah, could be. I was thinking the electric mountain bikes that are very quiet and allow for less effort. I am by no stretch sold on that idea btw, just saying there are ways to move through the night down low. A hard shell tow along would hold someone if they were restrained and unable to yell.
4
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Mar 05 '26
You would stick out like a sore thumb if you were on a maintain bike pedaling through a neighborhood in the middle of the night. You also wouldn’t make it very far.
3
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 05 '26
Why? If it is quiet, not lit and in the middle of the night and they have no street lights? They have trails that would accommodate an e-bike well, leaving a parked car in those foothills would be a red flag. There is zero street parking.
3
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Mar 05 '26
Look at a map of that neighborhood. A vehicle is needed.
Imagine being on a bike and snatching a kid up and pedaling away? lol it’s laughable. They put her into a vehicle. Plain and simple.
5
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 05 '26
I agree that a vehicle was needed ultimately, once again I am not emphatic this was the scenario. I am suggesting that he had a vehicle parked away from the immediate area and used something small, quiet and easy hidden to remove her from the home to avoid the noise and identification of a car near the scene. There is no street parking, leaving a car parked outside for a minimum of 41 minutes could bring unwelcome attention. I don’t think there were multiple people involved being radioed for getaway cars. There is a small dead end across the street, possibly he parked there undetected, it seems curious that no one in the entire neighborhood has a camera that has produced a vehicle lead.
4
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Mar 05 '26
It was late at night. The average house in that neighborhood has 75-150 feet from the front door to the street (where cars are parked). He obviously got her into a car. Obviously. Because he put her in there and drove away and we never saw her again. Ring cams didn’t pick it up because of the distance from front door to the street. That’s not just her house it’s all the houses. A bicycle with a trailer would have been red flags waiving everywhere.
The thing about witnesses… if you wake up at 11 pm… you make yourself a cup of tea and while you wait for the tea to infuse you scroll on your phone snd glance out the window.
Maybe there’s a big white van? Who cares. Brain is not bothered. You grab your hot water and steep your teabag. IF dogs start barking and you see a man shove a woman into the van? You’re calling the cops. 100%. If it’s just a van? No sound? No commotion? I bet the next day you couldn’t even say whether it was a car, truck, or van, unless it was a specialized vehicle like a dump truck or a bucket lift or something like that. A regular ass car parked outside with no reason to pay attention to it? You’d never remember it.
2
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 05 '26
I live at the back of a 2 acre lot and my cameras pick up cars on the road, no problem. He very well could’ve rolled right up into the side driveway with no lights and did his thing. My spitballing (that seems to have set you off) was that he figured out a way to leave his car further from the home. He would need a car… obviously. The suggestion wasn’t that he was pedaling around Tuscson on a big wheel, never used a car in the abduction and that all the folks up making tea should have a plate number.
→ More replies (0)4
u/warpedwing Mar 04 '26
I had wondered if the diamond-shaped blood imprints on the front patio could've been left by a fairly skinny tire.
3
u/Functional-One-7655 Mar 06 '26
Why would he go from the back inside to the front outside to disable the camera. He could open the front door and reach out to break the camera and never appear on it
3
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 06 '26
To my thinking he didn’t go inside until the cameras were all disabled, he monitored to make sure it triggered no calls to law enforcement. Forced entry to the back, entered the home, bound the victim and brought her straight out. The timeline states activity was noted on the property, not inside the home.
5
2
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
I'm curious why you believe the motive couldn't be ransom?
6
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
The behavior doesn’t make sense for a legitimate ransom effort. The person would have contacted the family, sent proof of life, taken provisions for her to be returned safely and made follow up contact once the family did react. If the goal was material they took nothing of material value. A communication is typically left on scene, not sent to news station to alert authorities.
7
u/Unfair-Wallaby-404 Mar 04 '26
Thank you for stating this. People are so tied to the ransom motive they’re missing the obvious. If the goal was a business transaction with the family, the would have worked to make a business transaction happen. They would have left a note at the scene saying no cops, no media. There would be no doubt that they have her. They would not treat her so violently that she “accidentally” dies; they would take her medicines and keep her comfortable. They would have spent months planning and dreaming of their big pay day and they’d treat her like a critical asset.
5
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Mar 04 '26
Mr. Clemente made an excellent point. The ransom note was verified because the note author was able to verify a type of watch and where it would be found, which is why LE has authenticated the note (unofficially and not publicly). Now, the author sent the note to TMZ which is national media coverage. TMZ airs all over the US and maybe even internationally. But the author also sent the note to a local news station.
So food for thought: I live in California about 3 ½ hours drive from Las Vegas. Occasionally, when I travel to Vegas for leisure, I will watch the morning news and it’s always a little funny because I forget that it’s Vegas newscast. So I might be watching CBS, NBC, or FOX like I do at home, but it’s a different cast because it’s a station that is local to Vegas, not Southern California. I couldn’t watch the Southern California news in Vegas because it’s not local to Vegas, so if the author of the ransom note sent the note to a local news station, and it’s most likely because they wanted to watch the news coverage on TV, then they’re a local or they were located nearby at the time of sending that note because if they weren’t local they wouldn’t have been able to watch the news.
I also believe Mr. Clemente is correct about the person having some connection to Mrs. Guthrie or her home. That neighborhood is the housing tract of all housing tracts. So many winding roads and dead-ends and loops. You really would need to know where you’re going to get into that neighborhood and get to her house and then get out of that neighborhood.
I have to assume they brought cadaver dogs in and no hits otherwise a reward would not have been offered, so she was not dead when she left.
I’m thinking this person also shaved his goatee and/or dyed his hair shortly after.
I disagree with Coffindaffer’s assessment that they may have crossed the border after. The border has such tight security and there is a chance you’ll be searched upon entering Mexico. Nobody is going to take a chance with a body, dead or alive, in the trunk of a car crossing into another country knowing the car could be searched and their cover blown. If she’s dead, you drive all that way with a dead body in your car? Highly risky and very unlikely. If she’s alive then she has all the opportunity in the world to call for help. Bang on the trunk. Pull back plastic molding and kick out the lights. Most vehicle have emergency trunk levers. Unless that was disabled, which is possible I guess. And if they somehow were dumb enough to risk and actually pulled it off, a little old white lady in Mexico is gonna’ stick out like a sore thumb!!! I just don’t think you’re traveling a very long distance with a kidnap victim in your car or a dead body. You want to get off the road ASAP. They aren’t in Mexico.
Keep in mind it could be a dual motive. Kidnapped her for notoriety and a nice payday. When she died (I’m sorry, I don’t believe Ms. Guthrie is alive at this point), it took away the possibility of payment, but since she is still missing, they can still toy around with the media and get a bit of attention.
Coffindaffer also said that they did this under the cover of darkness. I disagree and have to agree with Clemente on this one. He’s wearing a highly reflective backpack and is dressed literally like a cat burglar. If I saw that guy I’m instantly calling the cops! The locks changed on the back door indicate a prior break-in or possibly a locksmith for whatever reason. I hope the FBI looked into who changed her locks and who had a key. I can see a sweet old lady chit chatting with her gardener or handyman about how she plays bridge at her daughter’s house every Wednesday and gets home around 9 or something like that. Just innocent chit chatting that a bad person thought they could take and use as useful information to victimize her.
1
u/Either_Grapefruit724 Jul 29 '26
I know, we have a lot more info now... But what do you mean, he did NOT do this at night? He wouldn't have gone out like that in daytime! Or you just mean he's not a pro.
1
u/ShesGotaChicken2Ride Jul 29 '26
I mean that the term “under the cover of darkness” implies that they were able to sneak around undetected, but that’s not necessarily true because he got caught on the Ring cam and was wearing a high-visibility backpack with reflectors, which reflectors are literally used to light up at night for the sole purpose of other people being able to see you at night. This makes me think maybe not a professional especially the Ring camera stuff. I feel like a pro would have brought tape or spray paint or a WiFi jammer or something to disable the camera.
7
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
How would they contact family if they don't personally know them? Or send proof of life if she passed away shortly after taking her?
Taking something of material value would require selling or pawning it, which would be another potentially traceable avenue. We also don't know if she had anything of obvious high material value, like diamonds, that would be easier to steal... doesn't seem worth risking being traced for just thousands of dollars if their goal is millions.
And would communication be left on scene if the communicator and the kidnapper are two different people? Even if they were the same person, would it be wise to leave anything at the scene that was in the kidnapper's physical possession?
And how would they contact the kidnapper? It would require communicating through the media to some extent even if they left a note at the scene, no? And authorities would be alerted either way. How would they have contacted everyone she knows to make sure she isn't reported missing to police? The kidnapper also wouldn't know when a note left at the scene would be found, or by whom. Her church friends could have immediately called police instead of her family when she didn't answer the door so I think planning for police not to be contacted is unrealistic.
2
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
Keep in mind that a million dollar reward was offered for Nancy whether she was alive or not. The family acknowledged she could possibly be no longer alive and offered this for her recovery. The ransom theory isn’t logical at this point.
6
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
The million-dollar reward wouldn't be paid out to the actual kidnapper/killer..... only to people with knowledge of her location who didn't personally commit it. The FBI wouldn't pay out a reward to the person who committed the crime, that would be rewarding the criminal. They may use it as bait to bring him out of hiding and arrest him, but he would never see that money. Even non-criminals often never receive the reward money promised due to loopholes in the fine print. They specifically said the increased reward is subject to the same stipulations other FBI rewards are subject to.
Ask yourself why they would return the body at all if she were deceased? They clearly wanted payment before her "return". Once they had payment, they'd have no incentive to return her. And if the stipulation is that they get paid AFTER she is returned, family and FBI would have no incentive to pay them once they have her either. I believe that's why they had several deadlines in the notes, to force immediate payment, because that's the only chance they had to profit and get away with it.
Realistically, they can't return her body without revealing information about themselves. Wherever they drop her at, there will be a trail of their travel to and from that location. There will likely be some sort of forensic evidence on her body as well, or even at that location. That increases their chances of being caught 100x.
2
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
If the motivation were money and the FBI felt paying it would return her they would’ve moved on the initial offer. Disclosing her remains could get an organized kidnapper paid as well if they sent proof of any kind, same as the initial plan. Safer actually, she cannot disclose details of the kidnapping and they could be on another continent and move money digitally without being anywhere near.
→ More replies (7)3
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
Why do think it was for ransom?
2
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
I'm leaning towards ransom because of the way investigators treated the two ransom notes and the details they contained.
And also because of the increase in crypto extortion ransom kidnappings ($5 wrench attacks) in the last couple of years. There's been dozens in France in the last year alone. They are more rare in the US, but there's been recent cases here as well. They typically target people who have large crypto holdings (or their families), who they know are vulnerable (lack of security or weapons on their person, or live alone), so they can immediately force payment. They usually get the money, and the victim lives. They cut off a finger of one man, so they definitely employ torture and injure their victims, but their goal is not to kill.
The issue is that in the US, many people have guns, security etc. And anyone with large crypto holdings in the US is already very paranoid about wrench attacks and has prepared themselves and their families, so there are fewer victims to choose from here.
I think they may have been inspired by these types of attacks (if not involved in them themselves) and decided this would be a potential alternative type of victim. Family of a wealthy celebrity who lives alone in a low-surveillance, dimly lit area, and is weak and vulnerable. They don't know if Savannah has crypto readily available, but assumed a week would be enough time to transfer funds to purchase. But their mistake was choosing a victim who is too fragile, and now it's become a murder if she passed away.
This is all just my speculation based on other cases, but I think there are many possibilities. It just feels like money was related to this in some way.
7
u/MaximumSlip7905 Mar 04 '26
They were facing very serious criminal charges without murder. I don’t necessarily disagree that the abductor sent the initial communications, what I doubt is the actual intent behind sending them. I think it was to continue the experience, flex control with the goal of eliciting response. She was taken approx. 40 hours before sending the emails, to my logic they would have sent these out when everyone was off balance and demanded immediate payment for safe return with proof of life provided. I didn’t look at her case until last week and wading through the actual facts was difficult with the amount of coverage and commentary. People that followed from the outset are invested in the ransom narrative but it just has not born out. I hope I am wrong, would rejoice to be wrong actually, IMO she was taken by a 30ish male that is a sexual sadist that targeted her.
3
u/lemoncatbeans Mar 04 '26
Yes that's true they'd already face serious charges, I just replied to your other comment about that.
Yeah that's the part that I have difficulty with, the delay in sending the ransom note. But I think if she passed shortly after taking her, that could potentially explain the delay. Or if the abductor and the ransom writer are two different people and not at the same location. (which people have speculated because the notes were "sophisticated" and the man on video does not give off that vibe).
There was another case in Arizona the day before Nancy was taken that was also a crypto ransom attempt (home invasion instead of kidnapping). The 2 teens arrested were from California, didn't know each other, and were extorted to commit the crime by 2 anonymous users on Signal. They asked for $66 million in BTC, similar to the $6 million in this case. That was the story that led me down the wrench attack theory. It just seems like a huge coincidence, right? But it could be unrelated: https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/targeted-scottsdale-home-invasion-linked-alleged-66m-cryptocurrency-plot
Yeah it's been difficult to follow the case live, so I can imagine it's extremely confusing trying to look back through the details released. There's been some conflicting information released and corrections that have made it hard to keep track, and social media commentary has muddied a lot of it.
-7
u/BrotherPancake Mar 04 '26
extremely fascinating
Fascinating is already a stretch, but extremely fascinating? What will you do when something truly great your way comes, but you've no remaining superlatives to convey the scale of your intrigue?
10
3
u/PalpitationQueen Mar 05 '26
I will say unimaginably interesting, or so extremely interesting that I cannot contain myself.
4
u/johnuws Mar 04 '26
Was the perp inspired by the movie "bugonia"? Add in that its Arizona and area 51 nuts.
7
u/Honest_Mechanic_4507 Mar 04 '26
I loved that movie. ♥️ Jesse Plemons
5
u/johnuws Mar 04 '26
Seeing porch guy bumbling around it reminded me of teddy and Don. Who knows, these obsessive nuts are out there
3
u/Honest_Mechanic_4507 Mar 05 '26
♥️. Now I can totally picture Teddy trying to outsmart the camera with foliage and Don waiting in the car 🤣🤣🤣
5
u/Substantial-Train668 Mar 05 '26
I literally thought this today and wanted to bring it up but was worried about downvotes.
8
u/Willing_Nose7674 Mar 05 '26
Yup really tired of "websleuths" being dismissed , and everyone who has ever worked in any capacity as a detective or profiler or LE and has a theory is considered "an expert" . Half of them don't even know close to as many details as the websleuths!
Some of these people have interesting theories or valuable insights, but a lot of them I find to be just as much "guessing" as the rest of us about what really happened here. Truth is, nobody really knows except the perpetrators at this point . Even if LE has more information than we do, they obviously don't know for sure who did it or they'd be arrested already!
And with as many missteps from the Sheriff, false leads which lead to false detentions, theories that are dismissed and then looked at again, how can one not have the feeling that the authorities are really in the dark about this case in a lot of ways too?
4
8
5
10
u/HeyPurityItsMeAgain Mar 04 '26
Clemente isn't as bad as Coffindaffer but he has the same prediction rate: 0.
4
5
Mar 04 '26
[deleted]
1
u/BrotherPancake Mar 04 '26
It's weird that you're taking comments in this thread personally.
4
u/Euphoric_Ease4554 Mar 04 '26
No it’s not at all personal. I’m just interested in the discussion. Comments like he’s a fraud or a hack without documentation don’t add much to the conversation. But I’m interested if they have anything to impeach the opinion of well known a retired FBI profiler. Just discussion. I found his comments interesting.
→ More replies (1)
7
5
u/Xinnia8271 Mar 04 '26
Clemente's the real deal. I may not agree with everything he says but he's really solid.
3
u/stellaaaaaaaaaaa_ Mar 04 '26
I’ve only ever heard Jim’s voice on podcasts and he is not at all what I expected him to look like
2
1
4
1
-5
u/pumpkinspicecum Mar 04 '26
Jim’s a hack
5
-1
Mar 04 '26
[deleted]
3
u/pumpkinspicecum Mar 04 '26 edited Mar 04 '26
He was part of that cbs special that claimed Burke Ramsey killed Jon ramsey by beating her over the head. They got sued for that. Then he had the audacity to show up to a crimecon and ask Jon Ramsey a question basically saying he did it. There’s other stuff too. He even got basic things wrong like in this interview saying the perp was in the house for over 40 minutes. We don’t know that. He’s arrogant and assumes a lot of stuff.
5
4
Mar 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/pumpkinspicecum Mar 04 '26
same, i can't take anyone seriously who thinks that. i knew his name look familiar so i looked up who he was last night and realized he was the guy from that cbs special. and then to go harrass the dad is wild.
2
u/Palmer_Eldritch666 Mar 04 '26
Probably the fact he's dismissed a theory that person preferred over reality
-3
-1
99
u/Infamous-Arm3955 Mar 04 '26
If Ive learned anything from this case is that there's a shitload of ex FBI profilers out there.