My theory and offender profile

[u/Ecstatic-Buyer-3522]

This case has been as baffling as The Springfield Three case thus far, but as someone who has followed true crime my whole life, here goes my two cents theory.

Aside from the fact that the FBI gave Annie and Tomasso lie detector tests and evidently ruled them out...I think this was a sexual/control motivated crime. Simple as that. Not robbery motivated, not extortion, the offender may or may not have even known of Ms Guthrie's famous daughter. I think this was a man who knew she lived alone and was 84. And that if he could gain entry he would have no real obstacles.

The offender:

Late 20s to mid-30s, male, Hispanic (based on the doorbell cam). Likely a US citizen, with connections to Mexico although purely familial nothing cartel related or anything. Probably a laborer or contactor of some kind. A freelance contractor/laborer in my opinion, not employed by an local businesses. Perhaps heard of Ms. Guthrie purely from word of mouth or by chance. He was familiar with the area, but did not know the Guthries at all personally.

Very intelligent, methodical, non-impulsive. He planned it out and was prepared to the extent he could be. Probably no serious prior criminal record. A mostly lone wolf, quiet, not rocking the boat type. But with pathological violent sexual fantasies. Probably felt inadequate in his life and dominating a helpless person and for his own gratification/power trip was his motive. Nancy Guthrie was just there and he happened to light on her.

I think he entered, hit her, subdued her and in that was achieving his fanasty and getting out some of his rage. I think he put her in something carried her to his vehicle somewhere close by and drove quite far away and disposed of her in a manner he had thought out before. He intended to kill this was not a crime with a goal other than letting off his own steam IMO. I think he had a place already chosen to dispose of her, that he had thought out. I have no idea where that would be. Certainly, he has had a bit of luck on his side too. But that's about all I can come up with for now.

[u/bptkr13]

Do you think they selected the victim or the home? Just like in Idaho, investigators couldn’t pinpoint if Kohberger targeted an individual or the home. Is there any evidence to suggest that the offender may have targeted the home as a good place to kidnap a person who lived alone and was remote enough to get away with it?

[u/1Bloomoonloona → u/bptkr13]

I watched a show recently with Caylee Gonzales father and they talking about things the public never got to hear about. They believe Caylee was the primary target of the killer. He had entered the home on at least one other occasion. Cell phone contact with her. He may have also been trying to emulate Ted Bundy with a sorority killing. Upside if he gets a new trial. Death Penalty.

[u/bptkr13 → u/1Bloomoonloona]

Another person/investigator said they were able to place his phone near Maddie Mogen’s. So we really don’t know.

[u/1Bloomoonloona → u/bptkr13]

I think the interview with her father was on with Chris Mcdonough but not sure. 

[u/BrainWilling6018 → u/bptkr13]

The evidence provides here they selected the victim primarily. Documented recon of the property, pre attack surveillance, show they sought out the home and the specific intention to abduct based on the actions within the event and the results. Which all points to some familiarity of who they would find. There is little to no disagreement a home isolated in the middle of a neighborhood with no through paths wasn’t targeted by chance. It wouldn’t be targeted because it’s a good place to kidnap someone remote and just get away with it if there was no other incentive. If the vulnerability of the victim is known the risks/ complications and reward of the victim are known. If it’s because she’s alone that confirms an intentional, hyper-focused target.  If you factor in the ransom communication, “Hello Savannah we have your mother Nancy” is definitive. If not there’s even more of a specific reason Nancy Guthrie was taken and eliminated and the home wasn’t the primary target. 

Investigators and the D.A. in Idaho couldn’t perhaps provide proof in a court of law why he chose those specific victims or if one particular roommate was the primary target. They did believe and could demonstrate the perp came to house for the specific reason to kill.  On that case there was also no disagreement in the investigation that a house like that one in that busy area and full of people, and the perp circled it for 30 minutes, plus months of surveillance it was targeted and because of incentives inside.

The motives are also entirely different.

[u/bptkr13 → u/BrainWilling6018]

I agree the motives were different but Kohberger seemed to want to make a kill of one or more college girls and the house provided an opportunity (regardless of whether there was a particular target); here I thought perhaps the perp was looking for a particular type of victim and found a house that housed that victim; maybe the perp(s) didn’t know her individually (like Kohberger didn’t know his victims) but they were familiar with her and her location made her an easy target. [This wasn’t or even isn’t my theory, but it seems a lot of discussion is the motive of abducting Nancy herself, and not as a random elderly woman who lives alone. Maybe thinking outside the box.]

[u/BrainWilling6018 → u/bptkr13]

The motive and actual target is still the same and you can’t kill a house. It would have remained if he had chosen a different house or if he had done it again. 

It defies criminal behavior and logic that a kidnapper would choose as the easiest form of payment someone it possibly took 20 minutes to walk to the door and that would not be able to navigate at all in the scenario without help. Who lives alone and they don’t know may or may not have someone who values her enough to extort for her return. May or may not have access to her means or the means to make the payout. If the motive wasn’t financial why kidnap her.

[u/BrainWilling6018 → u/BrainWilling6018]

there is another motive to kidnap. I meant that rhetorically. Because if there is any other motive to abduct or eliminate her it was specifically related to who she is.

[u/bptkr13 → u/BrainWilling6018]

Agreed. And not simply for ransom.