Loading summary
Transcript52 lines
- [00:01]
Donna Rotuno
I see you.
- [00:02]
Disney Advertiser
Fire and Ash is now streaming on Disney. It's the film critics are calling the best avatar yet. A true epic and completely jaw dropping.
- [00:13]
Randy Sutton
This is the only pure thing in this world.
- [00:16]
Disney Advertiser
Return to Pandora on Disney.
- [00:18]
Mike Ruiz
It will be an adventure for the whole fam.
- [00:20]
Disney Advertiser
And watch the Oscar winning phenomenon at home.
- [00:22]
Randy Sutton
This is sick.
- [00:27]
Disney Advertiser
Fire and Ash now streaming on Disney. Rated PG 13.
- [00:34]
Donna Rotuno
This is crime and justice. I'm Donna Rotuno. Savannah Guthrie breaks down as heartbreaking details emerge about a ransom note tied to her elderly mother. Randy Sutton was in Arizona with Fox News during the early days of the investigation. He joins us shortly. But first, let's go to Mike Ruiz from FOX News Digital. Mike, bring us up to speed on the latest Nancy Guthrie news.
- [01:03]
Mike Ruiz
So, Donna, it's it's been a busy weekend and a busy start to the week in this case, although we have, you know, we don't know where Nancy is. But 141 days into the investigation, we are now getting more information about this follow up ransom demand from early on received in the first week since her abduction. And they're from what it seems like. So let me slow down a little. Several local outlets got ransom demands and follow up notes. And then TMZ got the initial ransom demand and follow up notes. And from what I'm looking at of all the different reporting from the people who received them, they're kind of all coming out now since the weekend with details they got from their second notes. And they all seem a little bit different, but something consistent is that the second note acknowledged that Nancy could have died after she was taken. And the reporting is that it's not necessarily they didn't kill her, but she died as a result of either medical conditions or something else kind of inadvertent, unintentional. When they took her, some of the notes were said to be apologetic, expressing kind of remorse for this, saying that they, they didn't want it to go this far, they just had kind of wanted the money. And then there's the the other aspect of it that you know. So the details, some of it is that she was buried. Some of it is that they, they wanted money for the location of her remains. But apparently not all of these notes wanted money for the location of her remains. So it's kind of a little bit different between all of them. And again, we don't really know for sure that these are authentic because the FBI has so far not been able to identify whoever sent these, whether it's the same person or not to all
- [03:04]
Donna Rotuno
these different outlets So I know you spoke to Harvey Levin today. Tell me what happened during your interview with Harvey.
- [03:10]
Mike Ruiz
You know, there's, there is some interesting, there is an interesting takeaway. I just got off a call with him. And we're going to have more on this at Fox News Digital coming shortly. But one of the several things that he revealed that I hadn't known before. So he, he had received after the initial ransom note, emails from somebody claiming to have information on this conspiracy that took Nancy. So someone who said that they had knowledge of a group of people involved with taking Nancy and the location of Nancy and that person, apparently. So from what Harvey told me, he has just gotten back in touch with the people that he was working with, who he was sharing the tips that TMZ received, too. They think that they could identify this person possibly soon. And although this person used different male pseudonyms or just, you know, names, they, they use different names. They always use the same bitcoin wallet in their messages. And despite all of the names being male names, they actually think that this person could be a female, which is the first I've heard of that. So that's kind of some of what we heard from him today. And I do plan on having more.
- [04:30]
Donna Rotuno
And tell me what happened this morning on NBC.
- [04:33]
Mike Ruiz
So Savannah kind of addressed, you know, as these notes are coming out, speculation swirls. Right? Well, what is it? What does this mean? People have a lot of questions online. People have a lot of questions in person. And something prompted Savannah herself to come out and address this stuff today. And so she, you know, she's the co host of the Today show. And she at the anchor desk asked the public for help. She want, you know, she's asking people to call these tip lines and collect this reward that she's offered. I mean, there's a combined reward of more than $1.2 million. And if you have information, she's asking you to call the FBI at 1-800- call FBI. If you want to remain anonymous, there is a local phone number you could call to, to be Anonymous. And that's 52088, crime. It is. They call it 88 crime. It's the local crime Stoppers affiliate. I think a lot of people are familiar with Crime Stoppers around the country, and they have a method in place to take your tip, protect your identity. They don't even give your identity to law enforcement. They just take your information, solve the case, and you get paid at a later date. So she renewed her appeal to the public. Somebody knows something. Somebody recognizes this guy. On the porch nest camera, and she's asking for help finding him.
- [05:57]
Donna Rotuno
And so. Because what came out today is really not new information, at least to law enforcement. Right. This is nothing that we found out in terms of a new letter coming out recently. These are all letters that came out back in February, for the most part. What prompted this hitting the news? Do we know where all of this came from and. And why this is happening now? Because it didn't seem to me from the interview or the. The conversation with Savannah this morning that this was something she was, you know, wanting to put out there, and that since it was out, she thought it necessary to make some type of a comment and let the world know how she's feeling. And, of course, everybody can relate to how you would feel if you were in that position. You all have. Everyone has mothers or elderly people in their life that they, you know, are worried about. So tell me, what do we know why this is in the news today? Because this is really not new information. New to us, maybe, but not new to the investigation.
- [06:55]
Mike Ruiz
Right. You know, the details of this second note or these multiple second notes are new to us publicly, but they were all sent in the first week within less than seven days from her suspected abduction. These notes had been sent in, and some of it, or at least some version of one of it, leaked to a reporter. There was a story that came out over the weekend that kind of exposed some of the details in at least one of these notes. And then I think what happened from there is people who received different versions of the notes all kind of had maybe kept things close for this whole time, because I know that law enforcement has been asking them to. You know, they say that the more you keep close, the better it is for the investigation. And now I think that now that some of it came out now it's kind of a snowball effect that more of it has come out, especially where there are contradictions between the notes, because everybody says, well, we saw this, but not this. So here's our version that we kind of received, and this is what we think about it. And it just kind of snowballed from there.
- [08:01]
Donna Rotuno
Yeah, I guess my question about that is, why tell us about a note at all if you're not gonna really get into more of the contents of it? Because obviously, you know, we've all talked about in a speculative way that Nancy couldn't have lived this entire time, given her health, her age. But the fact that that piece of information was given to them, obviously, we could have presupposed it from the way Savannah came out and said, you know, we got your letter, we understand we want our mother back so we can celebrate her. Right. We could have all made the leap that what she was talking about was maybe that she was gone. But I don't think anybody really knew that that was actually part of a note. And I'm just surprised that they didn't put that out into the public. And has anybody talked to you about why that is?
- [08:51]
Mike Ruiz
Well, I think some of it is that people who have received the notes were asked to just not divulge too much. And people who received information in the notes but didn't get the notes themselves were asked to keep that close, too. So there was, I think, just kind of an agreed upon caution about putting this stuff out there, especially with somebody's life on the line and their whereabouts unknown. But you know, the kind of once the floodgates open, more stuff comes out.
- [09:19]
Bill Hemmer
Cheers to America's 250th birthday. Get 20% off your first purchase at foxnewswineshop.com with code FNRADIO20 20% discount excludes wine club offers and cannot be combined with any other promotion. Expires July 31, 2026. Must be 21 order to order. Please drink responsibly. History isn't just in textbooks. It's the story of us, the United States. 2026 marks 250 years of America. And throughout the year, Bill Hemmer takes listeners on a journey through the 250 most impactful moments in American history. From the spark of revolution to the B for freedom. The ideas, inventions and decisions that change the world. The 250 most impactful moments in American History podcast. Listen and follow now@foxnewspodcasts.com I'm going to
- [10:03]
Donna Rotuno
bring in Randy Sutton. Randy was in Arizona with Fox News during the early days of the investigation. I'm going to have Randy join us. Randy, how are you today?
- [10:13]
Randy Sutton
I'm fantastic. Thanks for having me.
- [10:15]
Donna Rotuno
Thanks for being here. So, Randy, tell us you were out in Arizona covering this story for fox and, and tell us what you felt when you were leaving there the last day and comparatively how you're feeling about this, this new revelation, I guess today.
- [10:33]
Randy Sutton
Well, this has been a very frustrating investigation from a law enforcement point of view, from, you know, watching the, you know, some of the missteps that the sheriff's department did originally. And then of course, I've been, I have been very critical of the sheriff and his, his position on this and some of his, some of his aspects of, of what he has, his conduct. And here's the thing. You know, when you have a major investigation like this, this is, this is clearly homicide investigation. And, and I think early on we viewed this from the, from a law enforcement point of view that this was going to be a homicide investigation. I was criticized for saying it too early, but I think it's been borne out that that was probably the accurate portion of what we have now understood. And you have a very limited time to do it right here at the very outset. And there were so many missteps, there were so many much, there was so much damage done to the crime scene at the very outset that, that you can't get that back. And so from the, from the very beginning, this has been, this has been a very frustrating investigation for me to watch and then for, you know, to be, to be a commentator on it's, you know, you got to, I have to weigh my, my law enforcement experience from, you know, what I'm supposed to, you know, report on journalistically.
- [12:08]
Donna Rotuno
Sure. And obviously, you know, law enforcement is in a very tough position anytime cases have this level of interest. Right. Because of course, you don't want to put too much out for the public because you don't want to compromise your investigation. But yet at the same time, there's so many people out there that want answers, the community wants answers if a woman is missing and they don't know if they're in danger. So there's all of these different factors sort of playing against one another. And how do you make that decision? So let's talk specifically about this, this note. Right. Note number two, that now we're learning more about why, if you're going to tell us about note number two, why do you keep certain pieces of that out? How does that benefit the investigation? Does that hurt the investigation? Why tell us about a note at all? So sort of tell me about that from law enforcement's perspective in terms of what they did here with these notes and, you know, good or bad, obviously. But I'm just curious because this seems very, it's all very strange.
- [13:11]
Randy Sutton
It is very strange. And I think part of the problem here is that there has not been a one single leader when it comes down to the decision making of this investigation. We, you know, we, we saw that the sheriff's Department, Pima County Sheriff's Department took the initial lead on this investigation, and there's been a lot of criticism of why they didn't bring in the FBI at the earliest opportunity to do so. And, and I, for one, have been very critical of the sheriff for not doing so, because when you have. When you have a major investigation like this, there has to be a. A unified chain of command. There's always. When you have an investigation like this, there's. And you bring in different agencies, you bring in, you know, multiple agencies, as we have in this case. There has to be a lead agency. There has to be a lead investigator. That is the point of contact. That is the decision maker when it comes down to the dissemination of information. And I think that there have been so many hands in the. In the. In this. In the soup here, so to speak, that. That there's been some. Some very jumbled, you know, information that has been leaked here, sent here, divulged here. And. And I think that that's part of this was. Was because the investigative process at the very beginning was not as. As. As professional as it should have been.
- [14:39]
Donna Rotuno
Yeah, I don't. I mean, my goodness, I don't disagree with you at all. Tell me what your thoughts are, Randy, on not paying the ransom. Because, you know, no one's really, truly authentic these letters, but how do you truly authenticate them? Are you playing with fire to not pay? I mean, I can't imagine what's going on in the Guthrie home as they're getting these letters asking for money. And I'm sure your instinct is pay, pay, do whatever we have to do, get our mother back. And you know, what. What kind of plays into that decision to pay, to not pay? And would you have handled that aspect of this differently?
- [15:18]
Randy Sutton
Yeah, that's a great question. Because ransom kidnappings are very rare in the United States. This is not something that you see very often, and all agencies have rules and regulations when it comes down to making the decisions. When it comes down to a ransom demand, it is always up to the family. Now, they can get feedback from the law enforcement agency, but at the end of the day, it's the family that makes the decision if they're going to pay a ransom or not. And this is the. This is a major conundrum for law enforcement, because, you know, law enforcement's. Their interest is to find the bad guy and put him in handcuffs. That's what the. That's what law enforcement wants to do when it comes down. Of course, they want. They want the. The victim home. But the. The. The number one. The number one thought process is we got to get the bad guy. We got to put him in prison. We got to, you know, make. Make him pay for his crime. The family has to really make the, the major decision of do we want to part with the money in order to, to possibly bring our loved one home? And you can't. I, I mean from, from a, a human perspective, can you imagine being that, that family member that has to make that decision? It's just, it's heartbreaking, it's heart rending and yet they, they're listening to, to what law enforcement says when it comes down to the advice. And you know, this isn't like the, you know, 1947 Humphrey Bogart movie where, where they're going to, you know, bring, put the, put the, the money in a, in a suitcase and, and we're going to follow the suspect to the, to the scene of the crime. This is, we're in a whole new generation when it comes down to the dissemination of money and cryptocurrency and things that are so complicated. But at the end of the day, it is up to the family to make that decision. And I can't imagine the thought processes that are going on at this point when they're looking at the different pieces of communication that were sent and now guessing or second guessing what those decisions were made.
- [17:35]
Donna Rotuno
And when you look at these, these crypto accounts and Bitcoin and the ability to transfer funds, how does law enforcement determine whether or not these things are valid? Real. I mean, I know we're learning that some of these letters had the same Bitcoin addresses. How do you, how do you look at that and say this is viable, this isn't viable? What goes into making those decisions? And how does the family then decide whether or not they're actually going to do that based on the decision or based on the recommendation of law enforcement? Because frankly, I don't have a very strong knowledge of the way a lot of that currency works. And it would seem to me that if you are sending it to a specific wallet that there would be some way to trace that at some point for law enforcement. So kind of talk to me about that and you know, what, what you would do in that situation if you're the Guthrie family.
- [18:34]
Randy Sutton
Yeah, exactly. So, so the, the cryptocurrency aspect of this, you know, when it comes down to technology and, and the, the funds being delivered or being disseminated, that's where the FBI truly shines. They're, they're ability on the technological aspects is, is when it comes down to law enforcement is second to none. So those are the people that you're going to listen to. And of course they're looking at every aspect of this, of how to trace IP addresses, how to trace cryptocurrency. And those are the, those are the folks that if you're the Guthrie family, you want to get input from them and make a decision based on, on the experts. And so that's. That, that is, of course, as we said before, the FBI has a, has a different set of, of priorities here. So it's really, it's, it's a, it's a, it's a major conundrum when it comes down to the family making decisions about sending $5 million or $4 million, whatever it is, into a cryptocurrency account when that, you know, can it be traced? Yeah, it can. It can be traced later on, but you have to make that decision is do you believe that that is actually going to bring your loved one home? And that's really what it comes down to.
- [20:07]
Donna Rotuno
It does. And what do you, what, what are you looking for to make that determination? Because there, at some point, there's some leap of faith, right? Because here we are, we. We're still talking about these letters 142 days into this, and we're still discussing them. And like, I, I guess now that we're learning more about them. And if you've already learned from this letter and if you're, if you're believing that this letter is authentic in some way and you're learning that she's deceased, and then I guess you have to, A, trust that. But B, I guess if they were real to begin with, or you, you believe that they're authentic in some way, wouldn't you know, you have to wonder if someone's lying. But why would you lie if someone's gone? Because that was really your only way to ever receive any money, is somebody who was alive and, and ready to be sent back. So I guess I'm just wondering why they would A, not tell us that this was a portion of that letter, and B, why at that point they wouldn't say, okay, you know what? We're going to send some money to see if we can find her or, or get her back. I guess it just, all of it just doesn't add up to me. I don't know. I.
- [21:16]
Bill Hemmer
We're.
- [21:16]
Donna Rotuno
We're still at square one and we're having the same conversations.
- [21:19]
Randy Sutton
No, you, You've. You've hit it on the head. And, and I think that this is the, you know, the family is. Is. Is being given information from law enforcement. They're being given information from, you know, different news sources. That are getting these ransom demands and these, and these, you know, messages of, of. Yeah, well, you know, I'm sorry, but she's passed away and, you know, trying to still figure out a way to get some money out of this deal. But at the same time, there is, we, we know that there have been, you know, the, the fake sources. We know that there have been the scammers. And it is, it is so difficult to make a determination from all of these sources of which, what do you believe? Which one of these, of these messages do you believe that has enough credibility that you're going to act on? And, you know, now that we've gotten a little bit more information than we have before based on, you know, it seems like, you know, there's been some connectivity to several of the initial emails, the initial messages that might bear, you know, some, some credibility that this might be someone who actually has knowledge. But now we're looking in the rearview mirror, and when you look in the rearview mirror, everything is 2020.
- [22:44]
Donna Rotuno
Let me ask you this. If the investigation was handled differently from the beginning, and I know we all agree that it should have been, what types of information do you think that you may have been able to get out of that house that you now wouldn't have been able to, given the fact that they didn't do the right things and follow proper protocol, what types of things would you have been looking for? So let's say you got the case today and it was brand new, and, and what do you do when you walk in there and now if you get the case where it is today and all of these, you know, missteps have happened, is there anything you can do to fix it? So kind of talk to me about the beginning, how it could have been different, and now is there any chance to do anything with it given the fact that it was kind of messed, messed up from day one?
- [23:30]
Randy Sutton
Yeah, that's a great question. And the reality is this, that a pristine crime scene is your best opportunity to mine whatever information you can on a forensic level. And we know that since this became, was initially reported as a missing person and it was treated like a missing person for what I believe a little bit too long, that the scene itself was, was severely compromised. You had people traipsing around the, the crime scene, which really damaged any forensic abilities, you know, the, the ability to, to develop forensic evidence that could be, you know, you know, looked at and said, okay, this is the real deal. Because you have so many, you have so many people involved now that to, to try And. And. And. And review that. Those. The. That. That footprint of whatever evidence that they found there and then discard those people that weren't part of it. It is a massive undertaking. So initially, the. The. The real. The real screw up here was in the way that the scene was originally handled and how it was compromised. That's unfortunately, that's the. That's the major reality here.
- [25:02]
Donna Rotuno
If you were brought in and they said, what can you do? What. What do you do if you were brought in today to say, you know, what, you're taking this investigation over, what do you have to do day one? And is there any way to kind of salvage this? I think we saw something similar in Gilgo beach, right. There was years of. Of no real movement. They brought in a new chief, and then they decided to have a new task force. So kind of. What would you do if this is thrown into your lap today?
- [25:27]
Randy Sutton
Yeah, no, the. The. Yeah, well, unfortunately, you have to go right back to the very beginning, to the very beginning of how this investigation began with the initial phone call, and literally retrace every aspect of the investigation. It is a massive undertaking, and because of the compromising of the physical evidence at the outset, much of it, there is no going back. You can't recreate a pristine crime scene. So now you have to look at everything that has been collected. And you can imagine between the FBI and the Pima county, there's been so much forensic evidence that's been. That's been collected. Now every piece of that has to be gone over again. And it is a. And it has to be done by the best investigators in the country. So you, once again, you have to. You have to literally go back to the very beginning, retrace every one of these investigations, investigative opportunities, and then from a fresh set of eyes. Say, is there something that we missed here?
- [26:51]
Donna Rotuno
Yeah, for sure. I mean, I know that there's a lot of investigations and a lot of cases over the years that are open for a very long time, and eventually they do get solved. Randy, what do you think the likelihood of us having any answers on this case anytime in the near future? What do you think the likelihood of that is?
- [27:09]
Randy Sutton
I gotta tell you, I think that. I think without a shadow of doubt in my mind, there were. There were more than two people involved in this. In this crime. And I think because of that, you have a weak link. Because, as we know, if one person keeps a secret, it's never a secret after two people know. And I. And I believe that there was more than two people involved in this. And I think that there is. That there is a very strong possibility that there will be information from one of the parties that are involved in this that will come out, and I think may wind up being the key to solving this case. I think that there is more of a likelihood of that happening than not.
- [27:58]
Donna Rotuno
Let me bring Mike back in. Mike, let me ask you, in your conversation with Harvey, did you talk to him about the fact that these letters are showing up at, you know, media offices and news channels and news stations rather than going directly to the family? Because I don't believe they were ever sent directly to the family. Is that correct?
- [28:19]
Mike Ruiz
Well, so these ones, the ones that we're talking about this week that we're getting the new details from, were not sent to the families. They were sent to media. There. There was at least a couple of demands sent to Savannah's sister Annie and her husband, Tommaso, that were what they're called, imposter demands, that they came from a guy, allegedly, who is now arrested, and he's gonna, you know, he's facing felony charges for this. A California man named Derek Kalela Calla. I'm not sure of the pronunciation there, but he is accused of, you know, trying to extort the family, not of having any connection to the kidnapping. And there's a big difference, too, in the method that he used to allegedly used to go after Annie and Tommaso, which was over this voiceover ip, which is basically a fake phone that's Internet based. And he used this fake phone to get in touch with them and to demand ransom. And he did ask for crypto, allegedly. The. The much more sophisticated messages sent to the news outlets, they have not been able to trace those. They don't know who sent them. They don't know that they came from one person or multiple people. Who's an imposter if anybody's legit. So much more sophistication involved in those notes that went to the media outlets, and probably that's by design. If they are kind of some hacker masterminds who know their way around computer infrastructure, they would on purpose not go directly to the source and try to not get caught. One of the things that's come out is that they use the tip boxes to these news outlets rather than send a. An email that could be traced, you know, directly back to the sender.
- [30:05]
Donna Rotuno
So, Randy, given the power and the resources and the reach that the FBI has, is it odd that they have not been able to gather more information about the person that sent the two Letters that they deem may be legitimate.
- [30:21]
Randy Sutton
Yeah, you know, I've been wondering about that myself. With, with their forensic capability abilities, I am a little surprised. I also, here's, here's the reality. They may know more than they're telling us, and that there is. They're playing a long game on this that, you know, listen, this could be a foreign actor. This could be someone that is not even in this country. And they're, and they're looking at, at, at the long game here in trying to make the determination about the, the, you know, the, the culpability. So I, I, I was. I wonder the same thing, you know, I, Because I know the capabilities that the FBI has and, and, and, and, and, and everything is traceable. Let's. Let's face it.
- [31:09]
Stitch Fix Advertiser
We're.
- [31:09]
Randy Sutton
We're in a whole new world here, and everything has. Leaves a digital footprint. And if you're gonna, if you're gonna be the bad guy, the last people you want on your tail is the FBI.
- [31:21]
Donna Rotuno
Well, I guess there's some positive aspect of the fact that this is back in the news and we're talking about it, and maybe because we're talking about it, it reminds those that were involved in this that everyone is still paying attention. And obviously this investigation is still ongoing. And the only thing that we can hope is that they have answers for Savannah and her family and that at some point, they will not only know what happened to their mother, but that they get her back and that they can put her to the proper resting place and that this is solved in some way just so they can go on with their lives and not live with the actual, you know, pain and torture that we saw in her face, her voice, and her eyes today on the Today show. So, Mike and Randy, thank you both so much for joining me today. Thank you for joining me for another episode of Crime and Justice. Remember, we want to hear from you. Send us your thoughts, questions, or theories, and we will answer them on air.
- [32:23]
Stitch Fix Advertiser
Stitch fix. Stop shopping. Get styled a plus on the outfit. Ms. Turner, you are about to slay parent teacher conferences.
- [32:30]
Donna Rotuno
Oh, these just the most perfect fitting jeans my stylist sent me.
- [32:34]
Randy Sutton
Oh, hello, you who didn't set one
- [32:36]
Donna Rotuno
foot in a mall and stick.
- [32:37]
Randy Sutton
It looks amazing.
- [32:39]
Stitch Fix Advertiser
Just share your size, style, and budget, and your stylist sends personalized looks right to your door. Stitch fix, get started today@stitch fix.com. to my stylist, this look is dedicated to you. Thank you. Thank you.