Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2/23 Press Updates: There’s a pool cleaner at the house today.


What could they be looking for 13 days later in the pool?!

Could be her regular pool maintenance and nothing interesting. I presume someone would have already checked the skimmer.

Yeah you can’t let a pool go weeks without maintenance. You’ll get mustard algae and other crap that’s really hard to get rid of. That was one of my “chores” as a teen and it s—cked.

The house is an active crime scene! That should be at the bottom of their worries unless they know she’s returning! No one is staying there right now now.

The perp who is responsible is really lucky the cops are so dimwitted in Tucson that they left the home completely wide open 2 weeks into a missing person /homicide investigation

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A lot of people already have backpacks. They don't need a special new one to pull off a crime purchased right before it happens. It's a needle in a haystack.

The fact that it's a needle in a haystack IS THE WHOLE POINT.

So yes, they DO need a special new one.

No one (except maybe you, apparently) would be dumb enough to use an old backpack that someone might recognize.

Better to use the most widely sold, generic backpack available.

Nice try. Any criminal worth their salt would realize that other criminals are undone by their recent Home Depot purchases of duct tape, rope, and a shovel. Don’t quit your day job.

Who says he bought it all together and at once?

You do. Thinking this backpack was recently at the nearest walmart.

Oh. Sigh. There. You go again, making assumptions.

Reading comprehension is fundamental.

1. No one said it was bought at the NEAREST WalMart
2. No one said the backpack was bought with other "supplies".

I bet you a Bitcoin I am right. I'll post my wallet address when the truth comes out and you can pay up. Lol.

Yawn. I find it hard to believe that someone is going to figure out this backpack before recognizing the guy in the video. But sure pin all your hopes on it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2/23 Press Updates: There’s a pool cleaner at the house today.


What could they be looking for 13 days later in the pool?!

Could be her regular pool maintenance and nothing interesting. I presume someone would have already checked the skimmer.

Yeah you can’t let a pool go weeks without maintenance. You’ll get mustard algae and other crap that’s really hard to get rid of. That was one of my “chores” as a teen and it s—cked.

The house is an active crime scene! That should be at the bottom of their worries unless they know she’s returning! No one is staying there right now now.

Who is worried about it? They come on a weekly schedule and she probably has the services charged to her credit card which wouldn’t be canceled. So they will come unless someone tells them not to. It would be more pain to try to cancel it than not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A lot of people already have backpacks. They don't need a special new one to pull off a crime purchased right before it happens. It's a needle in a haystack.

The fact that it's a needle in a haystack IS THE WHOLE POINT.

So yes, they DO need a special new one.

No one (except maybe you, apparently) would be dumb enough to use an old backpack that someone might recognize.

Better to use the most widely sold, generic backpack available.

Nice try. Any criminal worth their salt would realize that other criminals are undone by their recent Home Depot purchases of duct tape, rope, and a shovel. Don’t quit your day job.

Who says he bought it all together and at once?

You do. Thinking this backpack was recently at the nearest walmart.

Oh. Sigh. There. You go again, making assumptions.

Reading comprehension is fundamental.

1. No one said it was bought at the NEAREST WalMart
2. No one said the backpack was bought with other "supplies".

I bet you a Bitcoin I am right. I'll post my wallet address when the truth comes out and you can pay up. Lol.

Yawn. I find it hard to believe that someone is going to figure out this backpack before recognizing the guy in the video. But sure pin all your hopes on it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A lot of people already have backpacks. They don't need a special new one to pull off a crime purchased right before it happens. It's a needle in a haystack.

The fact that it's a needle in a haystack IS THE WHOLE POINT.

So yes, they DO need a special new one.

No one (except maybe you, apparently) would be dumb enough to use an old backpack that someone might recognize.

Better to use the most widely sold, generic backpack available.

Nice try. Any criminal worth their salt would realize that other criminals are undone by their recent Home Depot purchases of duct tape, rope, and a shovel. Don’t quit your day job.

Who says he bought it all together and at once?

You do. Thinking this backpack was recently at the nearest walmart.

Oh. Sigh. There. You go again, making assumptions.

Reading comprehension is fundamental.

1. No one said it was bought at the NEAREST WalMart
2. No one said the backpack was bought with other "supplies".

I bet you a Bitcoin I am right. I'll post my wallet address when the truth comes out and you can pay up. Lol.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A lot of people already have backpacks. They don't need a special new one to pull off a crime purchased right before it happens. It's a needle in a haystack.

The fact that it's a needle in a haystack IS THE WHOLE POINT.

So yes, they DO need a special new one.

No one (except maybe you, apparently) would be dumb enough to use an old backpack that someone might recognize.

Better to use the most widely sold, generic backpack available.

Nice try. Any criminal worth their salt would realize that other criminals are undone by their recent Home Depot purchases of duct tape, rope, and a shovel. Don’t quit your day job.

Who says he bought it all together and at once?

You do. Thinking this backpack was recently at the nearest walmart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems very bleak at this point. They have hardly any forensic evidence. No clues that we are aware of. All we have is that video. And a random glove far from the crime scene. It’s been 12 days. Everyone makes fun of the kidnapper for looking like an amateur, well, he seems to have done the job and not left a trace. I am so sorry this has happened and my heart goes to the Guthrie family. I will say the FBI, led by Kash Patel, is probably a disaster and bungled it.

I have seen a couple of interviews with experts this morning, and they actually seem hopeful. The backpack is key. They believe the suspect is from Tucson, so he probably purchased it locally. They will look at everyone who purchased it and pull driver’s license info to eliminate everyone who does not fit the height and facial features. This will narrow it down a lot. Sure, there is a chance that he borrowed it, stole it, or purchased second-hand. But it seems less likely. Even if he purchased with cash, they can pull surveillance video. Somebody will recognize him from the video. I am convinced that they are already closing in.

The cops sure seem to be operating from the 1800s. Who doesn’t shop online nowadays? Good god, they’re really hoping Walmart will solve this crime?

How are they sure the backpack is brand new?

Well they aren’t shopping online with cash. So they will have credit card info for purchases made online and shipped to Tucson.

Apparently it is the latest version of the backpack so they know it was purchased fairly recently.

Also, me. I don’t like to buy everything online. I am no Olympic athlete, but I do have the energy to walk into the Wal-Mart down the road. For something like a backpack, I would prefer to check out the size, quality, storage compartments in person.

My money is on the backpack being a dead end.

If I'm going to commit a crime. I'm shoplifting everything I can fit into my overcoat, and a backpack fits that criteria. Heck, I might even be so bold as to rip the tags off the backpack and fill it with the other pilfered items I need, hello horse tranquilizers, zip ties, duct tape.

No way I'm going through the Walmart check out line, who knows how long they hang onto the recording, but no doubt that data is going to a datacenter, where it gets compiled and crushed and tied to a list of every other purchase I've made, along with my image and my purchase details, how I paid, what day I visited, what websites I like to visit, etc. Too much money in data these days to just throw it all away. Those cameras aren't about security; they are about data mining.

Any criminal who watches any true life crime shows the perp always gets busted by the footage from Home Depot cameras where they are recorded buying, some combination of 10 feet of rope, 2 boxes of zip ties, acid, lye, woodchipper, plastic gloves, masks, respirators, industrial garbage bags, a case of plastic tarps, cement, cement mixer, duct tape, and a big old ax and bleach, lots and lots of bleach.

Well you ended your post saying that criminals always get busted doing the exact thing that you say a criminal would never do. So which is it?

I am not convinced that this was well-planned. I think he was desperate for money and this was a Hail Mary attempt to pay his debts. He might not have even known he was a future kidnapper when he purchased the backpack and other items.

Hello, not all perps get busted, but the ones that do, on true crime shows, are often busted by buying a shovel, an industrial-sized box of zip ties, and plastic tarps, on video. Any criminal with half a brain knows by now not to buy your supplies in a big box store (cameras). But that's okay...

This isn't that difficult. A family member did it. They want their inheritance now, or maybe the initial plan was ransom money, which = serious gravy, had she survived the ordeal. But this is an 84-year-old. So, she probably stroked out in the trunk or had a massive heart attack. If that happened at this point, the body needs to be found sooner rather than later, because the only play is the inheritance. A good clean transfer of money.

People are greedy; many families are weird about money. One person has it, and someone else doesn't. Little chance her money was being willed to Guthrie, or at least that was the perps' thinking, so while she may not have been rolling in dough, she had enough to make a difference to someone. I've seen families ripped apart over much less.

The perpetrator is a very close family member who was annoyed that an 84-year-old woman was soaking up resources and wasn't dropping dead quickly enough for their liking. She was old, very, very old, past her expiration date, so maybe she was getting to be an expensive resource sucking pain in the petard, which made her expendable, so she needed to go now.

Or maybe she ran off with the pool boy and didn't want her kids interfering or ruining her fun. That would be a great ending to the story!

A close family member would have had a more savvy way to get in the house rather than having a staring contest with the Nest camera (that they probably helped install) and then throwing a flower over it.
If it was the inheritance they were after, there are much easier and less risky ways to off someone than dragging them out of their home, hiding the body, and faking a ransom. All while capturing the nation’s attention. They could have snuck in the house and covered her face with a pillow. I don’t think Savannah Guthrie’s 84-year-old mom dying in her sleep would have gotten quite as many headlines. There certainly wouldn’t be a 180 page dcum thread. Maybe they would be able to examine her to see if she was suffocated, but I doubt they would suspect foul play and request that.

A close family member kidnapping her is unlikely because it would be difficult for them to hide their sudden wealth. So this would only be possible if it was a debt that Savannah or her mother would not help with. They probably would have previously asked though, so Savannah would know about the debt and suspect them.

I do hope you are right about the pool boy.

Agree that this is not a close family member- if someone was after an inheritance, there is zero reason to take her vs. just have the person "die in their sleep." Also, if someone dies in their sleep, the inheritance is distributed a lot faster and with less fuss than if they go missing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems very bleak at this point. They have hardly any forensic evidence. No clues that we are aware of. All we have is that video. And a random glove far from the crime scene. It’s been 12 days. Everyone makes fun of the kidnapper for looking like an amateur, well, he seems to have done the job and not left a trace. I am so sorry this has happened and my heart goes to the Guthrie family. I will say the FBI, led by Kash Patel, is probably a disaster and bungled it.

I have seen a couple of interviews with experts this morning, and they actually seem hopeful. The backpack is key. They believe the suspect is from Tucson, so he probably purchased it locally. They will look at everyone who purchased it and pull driver’s license info to eliminate everyone who does not fit the height and facial features. This will narrow it down a lot. Sure, there is a chance that he borrowed it, stole it, or purchased second-hand. But it seems less likely. Even if he purchased with cash, they can pull surveillance video. Somebody will recognize him from the video. I am convinced that they are already closing in.

The cops sure seem to be operating from the 1800s. Who doesn’t shop online nowadays? Good god, they’re really hoping Walmart will solve this crime?

How are they sure the backpack is brand new?

Well they aren’t shopping online with cash. So they will have credit card info for purchases made online and shipped to Tucson.

Apparently it is the latest version of the backpack so they know it was purchased fairly recently.

Also, me. I don’t like to buy everything online. I am no Olympic athlete, but I do have the energy to walk into the Wal-Mart down the road. For something like a backpack, I would prefer to check out the size, quality, storage compartments in person.

My money is on the backpack being a dead end.

If I'm going to commit a crime. I'm shoplifting everything I can fit into my overcoat, and a backpack fits that criteria. Heck, I might even be so bold as to rip the tags off the backpack and fill it with the other pilfered items I need, hello horse tranquilizers, zip ties, duct tape.

No way I'm going through the Walmart check out line, who knows how long they hang onto the recording, but no doubt that data is going to a datacenter, where it gets compiled and crushed and tied to a list of every other purchase I've made, along with my image and my purchase details, how I paid, what day I visited, what websites I like to visit, etc. Too much money in data these days to just throw it all away. Those cameras aren't about security; they are about data mining.

Any criminal who watches any true life crime shows the perp always gets busted by the footage from Home Depot cameras where they are recorded buying, some combination of 10 feet of rope, 2 boxes of zip ties, acid, lye, woodchipper, plastic gloves, masks, respirators, industrial garbage bags, a case of plastic tarps, cement, cement mixer, duct tape, and a big old ax and bleach, lots and lots of bleach.

Walmart, Home Depot, and all those other places still have you on camera shoplifting.

Yeah but not if this was planned a year ago or even months ago. Footage is often taped over and there’s no proof this person was even local.

Loss prevention departments will retain this footage and track shoplifters. But I doubt it was shoplifted here. You know the saying - don't commit a crime while you're committing a crime.

If the shoplifter looked black or dark and of Latino origin, or just dark, you might be onto something, but no theft loss department is following the movements of a white guy or even a light-complexioned Asian person in the local Walmart. Everyone knows they can rob a store blind and get away with it. Profiling has its limitations. Which is why their first suspect was a Latino man with brown skin?

This lady is white, and she was most likely done in by a family member, another white person... what's up with the FBI? I thought they had the best profilers on staff. It's the obvious person, the kooky relative, not the random brown person who happened to have been in the neighborhood, but this is Trump's FBI, so of course it had to be the brown Latino guy. That would have been a great counter to their bad press, and all the bad feels generated by the ICE toxic crackdown on the hardworking, head-down, Latino Minnesotans and their bunny-hatted toddlers.

Shoplifting while white, 99.9% of the time, you get away with it.

It's the local cops making the mistakes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A lot of people already have backpacks. They don't need a special new one to pull off a crime purchased right before it happens. It's a needle in a haystack.

The fact that it's a needle in a haystack IS THE WHOLE POINT.

So yes, they DO need a special new one.

No one (except maybe you, apparently) would be dumb enough to use an old backpack that someone might recognize.

Better to use the most widely sold, generic backpack available.

Nice try. Any criminal worth their salt would realize that other criminals are undone by their recent Home Depot purchases of duct tape, rope, and a shovel. Don’t quit your day job.

Who says he bought it all together and at once?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2/23 Press Updates: There’s a pool cleaner at the house today.


What could they be looking for 13 days later in the pool?!

Could be her regular pool maintenance and nothing interesting. I presume someone would have already checked the skimmer.

Yeah you can’t let a pool go weeks without maintenance. You’ll get mustard algae and other crap that’s really hard to get rid of. That was one of my “chores” as a teen and it s—cked.

The house is an active crime scene! That should be at the bottom of their worries unless they know she’s returning! No one is staying there right now now.

Who is worried about it? They come on a weekly schedule and she probably has the services charged to her credit card which wouldn’t be canceled. So they will come unless someone tells them not to. It would be more pain to try to cancel it than not.

What is puzzling is why they would ask for 1 bitcoin vs just taking the reward if legit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a world in which this crime was supposed to just be perceived as a missing persons case? As in whoever committed the crime simply wanted everyone to think Nancy went missing by wandering off?

Instead, the press exploded and it spiraled into fake ransom letters, crime scene investigations, and more?

Now the actual criminal is as flabbergasted as the general public about what to do next?

I think that’s a likely explanation. Burglary gone bad, the perp panicked and thought if he removed the body people would just issue a silver alert and assume she got disoriented and wandered off into the desert. My guess is blood is because she fell when was startled getting out of bed and hit her head on furniture or tile floor, or he hit her in the face/head with flashlight or his backpack or something. I don’t think the perp is very smart though.

Nothing was stolen. Nothing was missing they said except Nancy.