← Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
'Fake' Ransom Note Bombshell: FBI Says Some Demands May Be Real? | Nancy Guthrie Missing
00:56:37
Loading summary
Transcript70 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign.
- [00:05]
B
Hey, everyone. I'm Ashley Banfield, and this is Drop Dead Serious. And do I look like I have whiplash? Because I have whiplash. I just finished recording an episode of Drop Dead Serious, and wouldn't you know it? This happens. Let me explain what this is. There is a massive flurry of developments in the Nancy Guthrie investigation. I'll start here. Reuters came out with a report that floored all of us, saying that their FBI sources have said that the ransom notes, all of them, are bogus junk scammers, liars, not kidnappers. And that got people freaking out. And so I began my day figuring out that episode. And halfway through my day, Harvey Levin from tmz, who's been integrally involved in this story because many of the notes have gone to TMZ and investigators have followed into the TMZ building, into their servers, investigating with their teams. Harvey Levin said, hold the phone on that report because the FBI sources I deal with regularly are saying that's. That's not the case. It's more nuanced than that. I have way more detail than that coming to you in just a moment. But through all of this, it left us all thinking, well, who's Reuters talking to? They had an FBI source backed up by law enforcement saying all the notes are bogus. Harvey Levin, who spoke to two FBI sources, one in the investigation, one in leadership, said, not quite. Some of that is true. Some of that is not true. But. But the headline is big. And so I think with all the flurry of activity, the FBI based in Phoenix and, oh, what do you know, the Pima County Sheriff's Department all decided it was time to say something. Hence my whiplash. So let me read you their statements before I drop this episode on you, okay? And, like, pour a drink. So the FBI in Phoenix says this. The FBI and its task force partners have received several ransom notes over the course of this investigation. Some have been deemed to be extortion attempts without legitimacy. We did know that there was an arrest in California, but that would connote plural, so. Okay, I'm listening. Other ransom demands may potentially be legitimate and are still being investigated as such. This case continues to be investigated as a kidnapping for ransom case. The FBI has and will continue to offer all assistance possible in the investigation. However, local authorities remain the lead. Well, now you got my attention, because I want to know what Pima Cowdi says, since Pima is the lead. And here's Pima's statement, fresh off the press. Throughout this investigation, the Pima County Sheriff's Department has received information regarding potential ransom notes related to the kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie. Every tip and lead is taken seriously and is forwarded directly to our detectives who continue to work in coordination with the FBI. Any questions regarding alleged ransom notes should be directed to the FBI. They were the ones who told us that the Pima county sheriffs are in the lead. We appreciate the public's continued cooperation and the information provided throughout this investigation. Anyone with information that may assist investigators is encouraged to contact the FBI at 1-800- call FBI or submit an anonymous tip. So. There is so much to this, and there's a really good explanation why there's alternate reporting. Why Reuters got the comment. Because I believe in Reuters. This is a great organization. Right. Why'd they get the information they got from the FBI? Nothing to see here. All of the notes are fake, and a law enforcement officer backing that up. And then Harvey is getting his information that says, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. That's not entirely true. And then this series of statements comes out. Harvey's got a lot more detail, and it'll make a lot more sense once you listen to this episode. And then Harvey's also got an explanation for why his details are specifically different and why they match more of what the. The authorities are saying. Officially saying. Because now I think we're at that point where the authorities are finally being official and giving us official information. Anyway, I had a great episode all set. Incredible bit of analysis from a former FBI agent who spent decades doing exactly this. Investigating kidnappings, investigating murders, investigating mysteries, and getting solutions. Right. James Hamilton is going to weigh in with some remarkable insight into how this is all happening behind the scenes and what many of these agents are doing and why. This seems so effing chaotic. Here's the episode. Hey, everyone. I'm Ashley Banfield, and this is drop dead serious. Holy free holies. More confusion developments, leads in the Nancy Guthrie case. We're five months into this, and suddenly Reuters has come forward with a report saying that they've got an FBI source that says all of the ransom notes that we have heard about until now are all phonies. They're all scammers, they're all opportunists who had nothing to do with a crime and are just piling on to get their piece right. Ransom note number one. Ransom note number two, the ones that Savannah and the FBI tended to think were real. And then the ransom notes that came afterwards to TMZ saying, I know who did it. I'll serve them up on a silver platter. For the price of a bitcoin garbage. Reuters says that the FBI source they have says all of those notes are garbage scammers. Not the real perpetrators, not the people who really did abduct Nancy Guthrie. Well, if that's true, boy does that set us back. Because now what? Why would anyone have stolen an 84 year old grandmother out of her bed in the dark of night if they weren't doing it for ransom or money, why? What were they there for? So let me get down to the nitty gritty of what Reuters is, is reporting. They say that the FBI has deemed all three kidnapping related messages to be fake. And when I say three, I mean the first two and then the basket of all the others that came from a third person and there are multiples of those. Right. Came into Harvey saying, you know, we'll give up the, the kidnappers for a bitcoin.
- [07:20]
A
Right.
- [07:20]
B
So all three of those note baskets are, are not legitimate. So that includes the first ransom note that's from early February. Right. That came in February 2nd. And the second alleged ransom note that came in several days afterwards, like on Thursday. I want to say that note came in Thursday after Nancy disappeared early Sunday morning, Saturday night. Right. The FBI official told Reuters, quote, none of the ransom notes are believed to be genuine, end quote. And a second law enforcement sour reportedly confirmed the FBI's assessment. As Reuters is reporting, the FBI believes that the first two notes did come from the same sender, although Reuters says that the official they talked to did not explain how the investigators determined that. But I think if we go back, we were able to determine that early on because they had the same bitcoin information, they had the same IP address. And so it was never really questioned why those two notes didn't come from the first come from the same sender. But Reuters also says that the FBI has completely discounted the third message. And again, the third message is like a third collection of messages because it wasn't just one. It was, I mean it was kind of like harassment. You know, the, the person that was coming after TMZ saying I have the goods and I only want one bitcoin, which is about 60, $70,000, sometimes 80,000. It's up and down all the time. And I'm willing to, I'm willing to sell these guys out, you know, and the latest one was I have video of the main guy and Nancy likely on the last day of her death. And so that's the one that Reuters says their FBI source says is also just not real. Reuters Also said that the FBI sources didn't explain how they ruled out the third note. And they also, you know, clearly the Reuters report also clearly raises this issue about why then Nancy Guthrie was abducted at all. If it wasn't for ransom and none of the ransom notes is real, then why, why would you take somebody, right. You didn't take anything out of the house. Things aren't really disturbed. So it doesn't really answer the question as to then why. Right. It just knocks us right back to square one, which is who the hell does that? Who takes a grandmother for no reason? As for the Pima County Sheriff's Department, big surprise, they're not commenting, they're declining to comment on the ransom notes and referred the questions to the FBI. They haven't given a press conference since, I don't know, week one, which has led to so much speculation and so much confusion and consternation and frustration, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So don't expect anytime soon that you're going to hear much from the Pima County Sheriff's Department. But it does leave us back. If this is true, right. If the notes aren't real, it would lead us back to what do we got? Well, there's a sample of DNA that they don't know if it's from the perpetrator. They just know it's unknown male DNA in Nancy's home. And that's possible, right? It could be a delivery guy, it could be anybody, could have been a visitor from ages ago. But it's unknown male DNA that they've now had for five months. And we don't get any updates on it. We don't get whether they've figured out the mixture, whether they are running down the lead, finding out who it is, we don't know. And we've got the video evidence of the guy who's on the ring camera, the terrifying image of the abductor, the perpetrator that night with the mask and the gun and the ham fisted way that he tries to deal with the front, the front door, right. That's all we're kind of left with if these notes aren't true. But is that the case? And just when I thought I needed to go back to the drawing board and start rethinking this crime from the beginning. It wasn't but a couple hours that another report came in and this one is from somebody who is actually involved in this case. Harvey Levin received ransom note number one. The so called purported ransom seekers sent it to two Tucson TV stations And Harvey Levin. So naturally, those two TV stations and Harvey Levin are part of this story because the FBI descended upon them. Different teams, some of the same agents, descended upon the offices of tmz, went through all their servers, met with TMZ personnel, talk to Harvey, who owns it. You know, founder of. And so Harvey has been involved from day one because not only did Harvey receive letter number one, and then one TV station in Tucson got letter number two. The ones that everybody says tend to be real. Right. But then Harvey also received the second round of weirdness from somebody who says they know who did it and they're willing to give them up for a bitcoin. Different group. They don't say that they did the crime. They say they know who did the crime. Pay me and I'll give you the info. And that was a barrage of, you know, communications that went in to Harvey Levin. So the FBI is in on that one as well. Right. So Harvey is ingrained with the FBI and the investigative team. And so naturally, when this Reuters report came out, Harvey called his contacts at the FBI. He deals with a half dozen agents. So why the discrepancy in reporting? Because Reuters is no joke. Right? Reuters is a serious news organization. And Reuters reported that they had an FBI source backed up by a law enforcement source who both sources said, yeah, all the notes are fake. So why the discrepancy? How could that be? Right? These are all great reporters, people who are involved in the media, people who've done this work for a very long time. They're not hacks. Right? And here is the answer that Harvey got when asking that question. This is what his sources said. There are multiple FBI agents involved in this investigation. Many of them are at work. There are those on the task force. There are others as well. Multiple FBI agents involved in this case. Ask any of them what their official opinion is as to the ransom note number one, ransom note number two, and then the collection of crazy that came, you know, with the bitcoin demand. And many of them will have a different opinion. There you go. Therein lies, my source says, but my source says, and how they can differ within the agents who work the case involved tangentially or in it, they all have differing opinions. And so it is possible that a reuter source can have that opinion. And then those speaking to Harvey say it's actually different. And there are many opinions. So it's fascinating to hear that because it does explain why we're kind of back to square one and then back to square two. And then I feel Like I'm, you know, getting whiplash. I checked in with Jim Clementi, who is a former FBI profiler. He's well known in the true crime community. He wrote for CBS's Criminal Minds. And he said to me about the Reuters reporting and then Harvey's reporting. He said with his expertise, he believes that Harvey's reporting is more legitimate because he's involved. Like, because he talks to actual FBI agents who are involved in the investigation. And so I decided it would be a really good idea to call James Hamilton today. James is a former FBI supervisory special agent and the founder of the Hamilton Security Group. Guy's been to the rodeo for between three and four decades. He's been working these cases. He's been doing this work. And he's one of those sober thinkers, sober minded thinkers who's not so willing to go out on a limb, but willing to entertain all of it. And I asked him about these reports, but I also asked him about something else, and that is something that I was just noodling on my own. Yesterday. I had a meeting with a Spanish speaker and I asked her to come up with some language for me. If she were a kidnapper of Nancy Guthrie and wanted to write ransom notes. A saying, I want the money and I've got your mother. And then, baby, something went terribly wrong. I'm sorry. She died, and I at least did you a solid, and I buried her peacefully, the right way. So I asked her to give me sentences, in common parlance, something that would make sense, wouldn't be awkward or weird or wedging words in here and there, but in Spanish. I want you to come up with these kinds of communications, these sentences that would convey, I'm sorry shit went sideways and your mom died, and I have at least done the right thing, and I have buried her properly, peacefully, with respect. Right? So she gave me these sentences, and we ran them through Google Translate. What do you think came back? Perished. Your mother perished. That was the word that came back with her Spanish sentences. The translation came back as perished, which is not something that you and I would normally do, as, you know, common parlance, English and buried with nature. So I just think it's fascinating to at least be able to nail down. I always had my suspicions that this might be a Spanish speaker, but now I really feel a lot more confident given the translations that just were so awkward in English. Anyway, I asked James Hamilton about all of this and wanted to get him to weigh in on the flurry of reporting today. And then this little nugget of Spanish and what it means to him. And here's our conversation. James, thanks so much for joining. Drop Dead Serious. I'm very eager to get your opinion on the flurry of activity over the veracity of these ransom notes. First, before we get into the nitty gritty, just give me your, your gut feeling on the notes as we know them and all the action that has been happening surrounding these notes.
- [17:57]
A
The notes are inconsistent with proper kidnapping protocols, if you will. Kidnapping is, you know, usually done where you take someone and you want to get money, you know, and you give them back. And so there's always some establishment of, you know, demands with the family and, and or law enforcement. This case has always been very, very unusual and that many of these, you know, quote unquote ransom notes have been delivered to TMZ or other media outlets and not necessarily to the Guthrie family. So that is, it's very unorthodox in nature. It's against, you know, many of the kidnappings I worked. And so it's always been a little bit unorthodox. You know, that's kind of always been how this case has played out.
- [18:43]
B
I have always felt that, that kidnappers for ransom, they mean business, they are serious, they exist, they are a real violent, they have violent methodology and they don't like involving media or police. And usually that's the threat. Tell anybody and we kill her. So this is very unorthodox. However, there are some, some aspects to these notes that sort of throw us all akimbo. The fact that the kidnappers mentioned that she has a white apple watch that was on the floor, that changed the game for me because nobody charges an apple watch on the floor. An 84 year old woman doesn't charge her apple watch on the floor. And if that is truly where they found the watch, that is a significant detail that only the kidnapper would know.
- [19:33]
A
Careful with that. Pictures of Ms. Guthrie from the Today show with a white apple watch on. So that's open source.
- [19:41]
B
I'm good with you on that. I'm good with you on that. Because photos have told a lot of stories.
- [19:45]
A
Correct. And so then it's a matter of who would have that specificity. So if, if this crime scene was perfect and they ran it perfectly and there was only one group involved, meaning one law enforcement agency, and it was all handled to the letter. Fine. But again, there are a number of people who've been in and out of this crime scene. Law enforcement, coroner's office are not corner's office, but a crime scene. Law enforcement, different Law enforcement agencies and who. Whoever else has been in there? I don't know. And so is it possible that someone who was there saw the watch and said something to somebody? So, for me, it's not a complete game changer if I don't know the absolute security of that scene. Does that make sense?
- [20:32]
B
It does, but that would connote that somebody who has been in Mrs. Guthrie's bedroom said that information to someone. And the press is bending itself into pretzels trying to get any detail we can. And we can't get details from inside that bedroom. So how would the ransom writer, within 48 hours of her disappearing, have that
- [20:55]
A
detail if he had it? I mean, I. I haven't read that they said specifically that the watch was on the floor. I. I heard Apple watch and I heard light out on the back of the house. And both of those are open source. So that, again, wouldn't really move me one way or the other if. If that Branson note said, you know, she was wearing this nightgown. This was the color of it, and we left the watch on the ground. Okay, maybe. Right? Like, maybe. Okay, this is very interesting.
- [21:28]
B
And I. I seized that tiny detail off a CBS report just recently, and I thought, well, how did this just sort of, you know, get under the radar and barely eke out as a detail? For me, it's a massive detail. Could it be misreported? Sure, that's a possibility. But if that CBS detail is true and that the Apple watch, again, the white one we've seen in photos. But Apple watch on the floor is true. For me, that. That does really. And again, I don't care about the. The light on the outside could have seen that with a drone. But the Apple watch on the floor, that's impossible, I feel.
- [22:02]
A
Right. And. And this one. This is the note that was communicated to the media. Right. That.
- [22:08]
B
This is the first. Oh, this is the first note that went to two Tucson TV stations and then afterwards to tmz.
- [22:15]
A
Correct. But not to the Guthrie family, which they could. They could have done. They could have easily. You know, again, kidnappers, again, want money. They don't do this for kicks. So what's. If we go down this. You know, this theory that she's kidnapped for something other than money. Why are we having this conversation? Right? And to me, they would have made the demand or, you know, established communication, an ability to communicate. And he. This is what we saw. And here she is. Here's a picture of her, and here's how you get her back. And this is where I want my money delivered, but none of that was actually communicated. And so, again, very unorthodox. Again, what. When we say things like, you know, that would be a game changer or that would make me believe this thing's 100%, I just. I'm off awfully skeptical of these types of things, especially if, you know, there's not enough specificity and no proof of life. You got to have that one, you know? And again, I. I like that. I like. Yeah, there's an apple watch. Okay. And she had one. Great. Show me her. Let me talk to her, you know, let me know she's okay. I mean, that's just, you know, 101 with law enforcement negotiation on a hust. Takers. Let me know she's okay. Give me some proof of life. I'll get you your money. But none of that happened here. So, again, I. I'm skeptical.
- [23:37]
B
You know, I. I often hearken back to the ham fisted methodology of the man on Nancy's ring camera. And I think, well, isn't it possible that we're dealing with people, for lack of a better description, like the movie Fargo, they were just a bunch of idiots who did stupid stuff and thought they'd get away with it. And I kind of wonder if that's what we have here. And once maybe she died, they realized, oh, damn. Didn't. Didn't see this coming and didn't even realize that there might be a value to returning her body.
- [24:15]
A
Yeah, well, there's a couple of thoughts on that one. I hear you on that. But the challenge with it is they've been able to stomp FBI and other law enforcement agencies for well over, you know, a month now. And they're not that dumb, you know, so that's my problem with the dumb theory that they're a bunch of idiots is usually idiots get caught. Usually, you know, we. We arrest them pretty quickly. No one's been caught. No one's been arrested. We're getting very little details from anyone that has any active leads on any suspects of interest. The reward seems to go have gone nowhere. So I don't think they're that dumb. Certainly they cover their tracks pretty well. And we still don't have her, and we don't have anyone in custody. So I. Yeah, there's some things about the guy on the porch that are a little bit silly, but at the end of the day, he's the one laughing right now because we have not arrested him. Tore it in.
- [25:11]
B
I still pray to God, in my line of work, years and years of covering this whenever there's more than one person involved. There's no honor among thieves. And eventually somebody does something stupid, yaps in a bar when they're drunk, breaks up with a girlfriend who wants to get back at them, and the conspiracy tends to unravel. And let's just pray to God that happens here. Yeah, the night is young. It's five months in the grand scheme of things. But let's talk a little bit about these reports today. Reuters swearing up and down that it's got an FBI source that says all of the ransom notes are fake. Not just the two that the FBI originally and the Guthrie family tended to believe were real, but also the notes that were sent to Harvey afterwards by a guy or a girl, whoever it is, saying, I got the goods and I'm willing to serve them up on a silver platter, I'll sell out the. The main guy and the other person for a bitcoin. The royal report says that's garbage as well, and says that there's a law enforcement source backing up that this is garbage. That's the first report today. I'll get your comment on that. Knowing that there's been pushback.
- [26:18]
A
Yeah, I mean, again, it lacks specificity. If I said openly, hey, Ashley Banfield told me X, then, you know, people that heard that would go, okay, James Hamilton heard that from Ashley Banfield. When you say someone in the FBI, well, that's more than 30,000 people. Okay. And to say, yeah, I have a FBI source telling me X, and FBI is huge. So I don't really put a lot into that. Unless you tell me the case agent out of Tucson or out of Phoenix office said this, that's different. Or the FBI holds a press conference and Cash Patel says, you know, those things are nonsense. Well, then I. I don't take any of this as like, yeah, the FBI is actually saying this because that's not the way they do it. It's not proper. Again, I don't know who. Who Reuters is talking to, but if they're not working the actual case, I don't put a lot of stock in it. If it's some guy at headquarters who's just saying, oh, yeah, it doesn't mean anything. I don't know that that person at headquarters may or may not really know. I have to go to, again, the agents on the ground working the case alongside this, you know, Pima County Sheriff's Office would feel more credible, you know, if Reuters are reporting today, the case agent, John Smith out of the Phoenix Division is saying that the Reuters note are the, the ransom notes are nonsense. Okay, a little bit more credibility for me. But just some general FBI three letter. No, no, not.
- [27:46]
B
Doesn't mean that would, that would be a perfect world. And in my business of trying to get sources and information, you never get a name. You only get conversations that are held usually keep my name out of it. I'm not officially, I can't be on the record, but I've been, you know, in the know or I've been in the conversation or I'm familiar with and, and so who knows what, what Reuter's got. But I can tell you this. Harvey Levin has been a part of this story. And you know, the, the notes have been crazy that have been coming into him, but they've been coming into him. And so the FBI has been coming into him. They've been on site at tmz, they've been on the phone regularly with Harvey. He's dealt with six agents in this investigation so far and called two of them today. One of them Harvey described as actually involved in the Nancy Guthrie investigation. Right. There's a task force, there's only a handful, about half a dozen who are in that actual task force in Tucson office. He also spoke with an official with the FBI leadership. So he's got two of these folks that he's talked to today about the Reuters report. And let me just reiterate what Harvey said, his sources again inside the investigation said, not true. What Reuters has said, that two of those notes, the first two, are more likely than not to be real according to what the FBI's thinking is at this stage. And that the secondary player who's asking for the bitcoin to sell out the, the kidnappers, more likely that those are not real. But that is a far cry from saying all of these notes are fake. And so I tend to believe someone who's inside this story, who's actually a player inside this story and is dealing with actual FBI agents inside the investigation, that, that he would know more about it. Do you, do you feel the same way?
- [29:41]
A
Well, last week he was saying that they weren't responding to his phone calls. I was, you know, I. On another media last week and that individual was saying that Harvey was indicating that the FBI basically giving him the Heisman and they weren't responding to any of his communication. And now all of a sudden he's got two appointed sources inside the case, which is, you know, interesting. I don't, I, I don't know. I. Again, it's, it's a lot of this is pretty unorthodox. Again, we don't. Yeah, we don't run these cases through tmz. We don't. Kidnappers don't use Harvey as an intermediary. You know, this isn't. It's just bizarre.
- [30:22]
B
And yet these people, these authors. Did, you know, for. For better or for worse, whoever they are, I will say this. Harvey's repartee with his FBI contacts, because they have been at the TMZ office. I mean, they were literally there going through all their servers and everything. And he's the boss. He owns a place, so they'd have to go through him. He did say he had an idea. I'll do a documentary. I will pay this guy who says, give me a bitcoin and I'll give up the. I'll take the risk, but I won't do it unless you guys give me your imprimeter. I don't want to thwart your efforts. And he got the Heisman on that. But then suddenly, they came back to him and said, stand down. Stand down on the documentary. We think we're close to catching your guy. The yapper, the bitcoin fella, the guy who says, I got the silver platter and the video of the main guy and the day that Nancy died. So there seemed to be some movement based on Harvey's reporting last week, and then this came on top of that. So there. They may have re engaged based on Harvey's offer and based on the request from the FBI to stand down.
- [31:29]
A
Yeah, all great. Again, how does this get us closer to finding her? That's all. This just, again, to me, has felt like a distraction. The whole case has always felt like a lack of urgency, that it's just a distraction to find this body, Right? Like, again, this person who. He's saying, oh, yeah, I have a video of somebody that may be involved, you know, but I want one bitcoin. One bitcoin. You know, the FBI Reward is like one and a half million, and Bitcoin's 60 grand or something, so why not just go to the bureau and get your reward? You know, I think the last time Harvey brought this up was a guy said, well, I have a burglary conviction from 11 years ago. The bureau doesn't care about that. We don't care that you had, you know, a burglary conviction. Who cares? You got real good information. We'll give you the money. You know, that, to me, all that just sounds like a story, and it's just a lot of frankly, a distraction and, and hopefully, you know, I mean, the way we used to work them, you'd have a bunch of agents for different buckets handling different leads and hopefully they've got enough agents in one of these buckets is okay. Run the TMZ angles, right, because we got to make sure we're not expending energy, all the energy, you know, we got to, on the real leads. Right. I'm not saying this isn't a real lead, but it doesn't seem great to me or probably fruitful, but let's make sure someone's covering that. But then let's make sure we maintain, you know, who's the guy on the porch, those types of things, you know, there's, there's a lot of good evidence that they could be working through and hopefully they are.
- [33:00]
B
Hey guys, listen up. Most men aren't trying to stand in front of a mirror with a six step skincare routine. I get it. Nobody has time for that. And that's why Particle face cream is such an easy win. It's made specifically for men's thicker, more rugged skin. And it replaces six different products products with just one. It helps with the eye bags, the dark spots, the wrinkles, the dry skin, the post shave irritation. And it deeply nourishes with dead sea minerals. It has hyaluronic acid, vitamin E and jojoba oil. So your skin feels smooth and hydrated but not greasy. So my husband Chris uses the smelly stuff, which I really like, the eau de parfum. But then here's the face cream. It's like super cool looking and it's awesome. And then I also got him the shampoo, but I also use it because I like it. And more than a million men around the world already use particle. And every purchase comes with a 30 day money back guarantee. So check out Particle face cream using my link below and then also use my code, Banfield 20 because I got you 20% off site wide. You're welcome. But oh, I mean, what's so frustrating is that the notes seem to be the best possibility based on the sophistication of the digital forensics teams at the FBI. I mean, how could these morons on the porch and whoever his associates are, how could they outwit the strength and power of the United States government? And so far, five months later, they have. Which brings us now back to there's some DNA, a mixture, five months later, we don't know much about it. And there's video that's not great. And that Seems very, very frustrating to those of us out here who are hanging our hopes that those things will yield something. Because in the CO Burger case, it didn't take but two months and they had their guy. Right. Based on a minuscule speck of DNA that went to Othram. We don't seem to have that here. Should I feel as hopeless as I do?
- [35:03]
A
Well, I'm with you. I. I mean, I remember when it started and I was, I think, 48 hours into it. I said, if they don't find her within the next 24 hours, this is going to be a cold case. I just always felt that way, you know, that there was just nothing. There was nothing happening. Remember, right after maybe 72 hours, they did a bunch of traffic stops in. In Tucson. SWAT was involved. They pulled a few. A couple people out of vehicles. I thought, okay, they're going to get somebody. And then they let everyone.
- [35:33]
B
Pulled them out of their homes, pulled them out of their Uber, you know. Yeah.
- [35:36]
A
Yeah. And then nothing. Right. And so I always felt like, you know, after 72 hours, you're not going to find her, that this wasn't going to end well. And that's kind of where we are. And there's a reason I. I believe that. And there's a reason why I don't think you have DNA. There's a reason why no one knows who these people are. The reason why this ransom hasn't, you know, no one's, you know, turned anyone in. There's a real reason for that. I mean, again, I. I don't think these folks are from here. That's why I don't think you're getting DNA. They're not from America. The reason you're not getting people calling in to get the ransom saying, I know who did it, is because they. They don't know these people are not from here. I've always felt that way. And as this continues to go on, like you said about, you know, maybe one day some guy in a bar. I don't think so. This is one of these things. If it's. If I'm right, you know, they'll take this to the grave with them, these professional criminals. You know, that's what I've always thought.
- [36:34]
B
Yeah. And I. I be honest with you, when I look at the guy on the porch, Cam, he doesn't look like a pro to me. You know, he didn't come prepared. They were. Everybody's got a camera and he's grabbing a vine. And I'm different than everyone else. I don't think he's trying to cover it up with leaves. I think he's trying to use that vine to get between the camera and the mount and yank it off because it's very, very thin. It's. It's barely the. The width of a quarter. And so without a tool, that's your next best thing. A strong vine that you can haul it up. He got it off somehow, you know, he got the camera off somehow and took it with him. But, you know, again, the ham fisted nature of it makes me think that there'll be some kind of ham fisted effort later or behavior later that will serve them up. You don't feel so.
- [37:17]
A
No, I think you would have caught it by now. I think you would have found her by now. There's a lot of money at stake. A lot of, you know, one point, I think it's 1.5 million is a reward right now.
- [37:27]
B
It was 1.2, but there's a few other efforts that, you know, add to that.
- [37:31]
A
Yeah, I don't think so. And I. I always felt with the flowers, I thought. Always felt they were using a jammer. And I always felt like he was trying to see if there was a signal coming off that camera, an emotion activated signal. That's why I thought he was using those flowers, because they use it.
- [37:46]
B
Motion, though. Why would he need flowers to be motion?
- [37:50]
A
I don't know. It. That's interesting. I. I've always felt that he just was trying to see if that thing was on or not.
- [37:59]
B
I want you to take your FBI mind back to that video and watch his fingers because they're gripping and if you're dangling or you're trying to do something, you're not gripping.
- [38:08]
A
And.
- [38:08]
B
And I can see him gripping. And that's what made me realize. Hold it. I think he's actually trying to get between the. The mountain and the camera. And again, a friend of mine has the same camera and alerted me to it and said it is super narrow. We can barely get. You can't get your fingers in there. You got to get a tool and it's got to be like the width of a quarter, you know? You know, or a nickel. But the vine could have done that. And his motions seem to be doing that to me anyway, to my untrained eye.
- [38:37]
A
But it could be awkward, obviously. Very awkward. The way he carried the pistol was awkward, but not.
- [38:44]
B
Yeah, all of it unprepared, Awkward, Unsophisticated.
- [38:47]
A
Yeah. Again, not caught. And no leads and no prints and no DNA. So it. It's Tough. I, I sure.
- [38:56]
B
We don't know if there's no DNA.
- [38:58]
A
We certainly haven't had a match yet, depending on what labs working it again, we. We didn't send it to the FBI lab. We use some private lab. And then now the Florida one, it's a good one.
- [39:08]
B
They've got huge success rates. But that's another thing I wanted to ask you about. But we're five months in, and there's some mixture. How long is it going to take to deal with it? Or do you think they're going down the route of the, you know, genealogy, which means that's just. That's just gumshoe detective work. That could take months and months and months.
- [39:27]
A
It could. And you know, again, if you're. Remember, if they're not from here, and we don't get DNA from people usually when they come into the country. Okay, so you're not going to have a match. And genealogy, probably, maybe it works. It's going to take a long time, but that's hoping against hope. I mean, certainly that's a lead bucket again to somebody from the bureau or the task force is working, but it's going to take a long time. Again, these people went back to where I think they're from. They may not come back again. Right. So I just, I'm not as positive about it as you are, but again, that's later. I'd like to, you know, the urgency to find her today would be what's driving me not, you know, DNA months from now. And. And I certainly would like to hear, you know, who's running this case. I would like to hear from Nano. So I'd like to hear from the sheriff, give a press conference. Where are we? Where is the. Right, like, where's the public pressure when people say the FBI, like, that's a huge organization. Put a face to it. Who's in charge of this thing? Right. Like, and I think I read earlier that, you know, Sheriff Nano said that the family can talk to me if they want to call me. What? Why aren't you calling them? Why aren't you updating them? Like, where is that? I just. It's so unorthodox. But those are the questions that I'd like to have law enforcement to answer. You know, like you're asking today about the Reuters note or, you know, the kidnapping, ransom notes. Are these things nonsense? Will, tell us, tell us, because there's a family out there right now who is, you know, on every single word. So the Reuters story is tearing them apart. Right? So Reuters breaks this thing that the, you know, the notes are nonsense, and then, you know, some FBI person's telling Harvey, oh, no, no, they're good. So you think about the. The Guthrie family. They're on a roller coaster of, okay, that. That's nonsense. We shouldn't put hope in that. But now Harvey's saying that, the FBI saying, no, they're okay, we should put open it. Can you imagine what that does to the Guthrie family? I mean, it's just callous and it's completely. You know, it just. It tears me up.
- [41:37]
B
It's so unnecessary. Don't get me started on how Sheriff Nanos has handled this. I feel like it's been Keystone cops, sadly, from the beginning. And, hey, I'm a huge law enforcement supporter. I'm one of the co hosts or the, you know, the fill in hosts of. I'm one of the fill in hosts of. Of On Patrol Live. I. I have a deep respect for law enforcement, but when I see this kind of behavior and an ego that he's got and how his men and women don't back him, don't support him, you know, there's a problem, and I feel like there's. Like you said, the first 48 hours,
- [42:08]
A
it's so critical, and it was, you don't go home. Like, I. I remember. I mean, I've worked them, and you're.
- [42:13]
B
You're.
- [42:13]
A
No one goes to sleep. You're working until you find what we call can to can't see. You know, sun up to sundown. You keep working, period, until you find the victim. That's. This isn't a homicide, you know, or any property crime type case. This is a kidnapping. Live body. You need to do everything you can to find this individual. And you read reports about search and rescue. Was not called in. They said no, no helicopter right off,
- [42:39]
B
48 hours later, the. He called off the search. He said, there's no concern for the community. There's no. There's no risk out there. There's no threat out there. What? And he opened the scene up all within 48 hours. And I just thought, what the hell is going on? Until I found out that his guy's inside. Were saying, we've got our prime suspect. It's the brother in law. So I feel like they had some kind of tunnel vision early on and said, case over. We've got it figured out. We'll just walk over and pick up Nancy.
- [43:06]
A
Yeah, well, you remember the first. What I. What I remember reading and hearing specifically was that the first deputy Saw she just walked away. Like some, you know, older. You know, like you have. Sometimes elderly will walk away from their house and get lost or whatever. And that was what they were going with. And the family's like, no, no, no, you don't understand. She can't walk to the mailbox box. Right? So immediately from the beginning, they didn't realize the seriousness of it, which, you know, when you're working these cases, every second matters, and you're spending the first hour saying, oh, she's just a missing person. Let me have another cup of coffee. She'll turn up. No, no, you've already lost 60 minutes.
- [43:41]
B
Let me tell you something. I don't know why they would have said any of that, because I had inside information from a source who was there. There we go in the front door. Said, there's two patrolmen who responded to this who were young and inexperienced. And the person who saw those two patrolmen said, you need to get out of here. There's blood on the floor. The back door's propped open. This is a crime scene. And this is bigger than just responding to a missing elderly person that's within. That's within minutes of arriving. So I don't know how they ever came up with a story saying, you know, maybe she's walked off, but.
- [44:16]
A
Right. Hey, real quick, if I could go back. Sorry. Real quick. You said something, and I want to make sure your listeners know and you're not. When you said, you know, supporter of law enforcement. Look, you. You can, and I am. We both are supporters of law enforcement, but because we question what they're doing does not mean we are bashing law enforcement in any way, shape, or form. All we're asking for is, you know, just some accountability. That's it. That, you know, just some communication and some accountability. And remember, the victims matter. Like, there's nothing anti law enforcement about your position. My position. And it's fine to ask some questions. I mean, that is completely fine. So just be careful with that one.
- [44:54]
B
Well, I'm glad you said that. I agree with you 100%, and I actually want to dovetail off something else you said. Okay. And that was the sophistication, or lack thereof, of. Of these people who aren't from here. I actually spent some time with a Spanish speaker. Wish I could say I'm a Spanish speaker. I'm not, but it's better that I'm not, because I really have an unbiased approach to how to deal with the linguistics of the notes that were written. And I asked her to convey to me, if she were the kidnapper and wanted to send these notes out, especially the second one, how would she say, I'm really sorry things went sideways, your mom died, and we buried her. How would you convey that in the way that it feels. They've tried to convey it. And she gave me the Spanish sentences that she would use, including enough sensitivity, but not too much, because clearly they're criminals, and noting that it's over, and we buried her. And we. We at least did. Did you write by doing it the right way? And she gave me the sentences, and we ran them through Google Translate, and wouldn't you know it, what came back was she perished, not died. That was the actual translation from the Spanish speaker's gentle way of. Of conveying that the. Her mother had died and that she was buried with nature. The expression that the Spanish speaker gave me was, I'm trying to say that we gave her a peaceful burial and we did right by you. And it came back, she was buried with nature. So I tend to think these are Spanish speakers.
- [46:39]
A
Well, I. I agree that whoever wrote the note was a Spanish speaker. I think that's right. And when I read it and her. Sorry. When I heard the language, I felt like it was a Spanish speaker. Not. Not surprising. I mean, you got to think about where this case has happened. This is in North Dakota, right? This case has happened. And as soon as it broke, everyone was talking about so close to the border. Most people speak Spanish in that area. Okay, fine. And what have you had in the last, you know, month? You've had a group in Mexico. I forget their name, but they look for. For, you know, missing folks, Right?
- [47:14]
B
All the mothers. Yeah, the. The missing mothers group that got the tip that she was buried, and they
- [47:19]
A
were looking for moderated cortisone or something. I think it's mothers of the heart or something. But, you know, that, you know, again, it wouldn't take a rocket scientist who speaks Spanish to know the stories, you know, obviously very popular, and write some fraud note or fake note trying to get one bitcoin and, you know, write it in Spanish, use Google Translate, then send it to Harvey or Tucson Media Station and try to get some money. Opportunist. Yeah, that doesn't surprise me at all. Yeah, but it doesn't really get me, like, okay, they did it. They are the ones.
- [47:56]
B
Now, it's interesting, James and I just got the name. It's Buscando Corazones Nogales. And if they were just opportunists trying to make a Buck realize they haven't. Why then would they engage this. This Spanish mothers group five months later?
- [48:13]
A
No, I'm not saying they. They engage the Spanish mother's group. I'm saying the Spanish mothers group caught, you know, obviously public. There was a lot of publicity around them searching for her. Right? That was all covered by a bunch of different news media, national, international. They could have seen that story and just fired off a fake, you know, fake note. Oh, we buried her in nature. We feel terrible. Can you give me one Bitcoin, you know, for my trouble? You know, again, opportunists. And I think if that's the right same note, it started with time is of the essence. Okay? All frauds start with time is of the essence. Every fraudster I've ever worked starts with time is of the essence. It's critical. You must do it now. Don't tell law enforcement. You know, that's just 101 fraud. And so, I mean, again, I wouldn't discount it, but I also wouldn't put all my hopes and dreams into that and say, oh, this is it. This is it. You got to be really. That's one thing about working these cases, you know, and hopefully there's somebody you know in the task force doing this. But you've got to be careful not to get too high or too low. And it's very, very hard, especially in one like this where you've got a human being that's missing. You want to get her, but you can't fall in love with your. Your lead, right? You have to work the evidence, and you can't get so in love with that lead that you. You kind of start to ignore, you know, the evidence, and you want to believe it's so bad that you kind of will it to be the truth. You just can't do that. So again, I'm not saying any of these things are false. I'm just saying I'm skeptical, but that's just my nature. Based on 34 years of doing this,
- [49:47]
B
I think it's a brilliant thing that you just said, you can't fall in love with your lead. You've got to be so open minded. And Harvey actually said that in his conversations with his FBI contacts today. They said the following. There are multiple agents on this case, and opinions among them vary. So depending on who you're talking to, you might get. The notes are fake. The notes are real. So that makes perfect sense as to why all of this, you know, confusing reporting. I do want to say, by the way, it's. It's worthy to. To repeat this one, 800, call FBI for anybody out there who might know anything, something, Even if it's tiny. 1-800- call FBI for any kind of tip on the Nancy Guthrie case. And James, I have to ask you, with your three to four decades of experience, what does your gut tell you about this case? What do you think think may have happened to Nancy Guthrie?
- [50:38]
A
Oh, I. I believe that, you know, a burglary group hit her house. They didn't think she'd be in there. She was in there. There was a struggle, unfortunately, you know, they. They took it too far and they took her and they took her south of the border and they buried her and they got on a plane and they went home. That's what I believe happened.
- [50:58]
B
Think that there was a burglary that. That went wrong and. And she died right there. And they took her. They take her.
- [51:04]
A
I think that they, you know, they panicked and they took the body, thinking maybe they put DNA on it. So might as well take the body with us and dump it when we go across the border and jump on an airplane to go home.
- [51:15]
B
Meaning you think she died in the house?
- [51:17]
A
No, I think she might have died in the car. You know, again, you. I think they took her out. I don't. I don't feel like she was dead at the moment they left. I think that they heard her real bad and they like what? Well, we might as well take her. We don't want to leave evidence of, you know, her and we put her in a car. Again, I'm not of the belief that they knew it was. It was Savannah's mother. You know, I. If you look at some of these criminal groups, the way they operate, the way that house lies, you know, and again, when I say that people get. They freak out because it. Well, it has to be. It has to be because it's Savannah Guthrie's mom. Right? Because that story really makes me excited, unfortunately. You know, I've worked a lot of these cases where they don't have anything to do with that. There is crime, right? And there's a lot of crime in that Tucson area. There's a lot of, you know, this group criminal group out of Central America that was hitting high end houses that's very prolific in that area. And her house fit a profile profile they like which is backs up to a wooded area. Golf course or wooded area trail they like that. Easy and easy out ingress you graphs. They picked the wrong house. Basically. Basically, they hit a house. They didn't know that the Mother, you know, was Savannah Guthrie's, you know, mom, that's what I believe. I don't know, you know, I could be off and certainly if I'm working the case, and there it turns out, no, this was targeted at Savannah. Okay, I would be open to hear that. Again, don't fall in love with your own theory, but the lack of DNA, the lack of fingerprints, the lack of an arrest, a lack of a body, all points to me like they went south. They buried her somewhere, they got an airplane and they went. That's why, you know, again, when we're talking about lead buckets, you know, certainly the bureau's working through leg at Mexico City. Certainly they're working through flight logs, certainly looking at everyone that flew out going, you know, further south into Central America, and they're running those names against what came in across the border through cbp. That's long term gumshoe detective work. But that's. That might be a break. You. You might get something like that where you. You have somebody that came across and then they're. They're, you know, leaving out, flying out later, and they put it together timing wise. But, you know, we. Again, no cell phone traffic. All the evidence you usually see in these cases, we're not getting any of that, right? A cell phone. A cell phone hit. We didn't get that. DNA didn't get that. Fingerprints didn't get that. It's just. To me, it speaks to something more than just, you know, some. Some idiots that. That grabbed her and didn't know what to do. I mean, because if that was the case, we'd have something and we have nothing. Five months later, I hope that you
- [53:58]
B
and I are going to meet on another podcast.
- [54:00]
A
That'd be great.
- [54:01]
B
More hope, you know, with some nugget or some better lead or a result, you know, from this investigative process. But. But. James Hamilton, thank you for this. I really appreciate it. You expertise is. Is just so valuable.
- [54:13]
A
Well, thanks for having me. Thanks for, you know, highlighting this case. I think a lot of people callously say, why should we care? And it drives me crazy. I mean, we. Again, we. This is America. We. We want to live in a country where, you know, if our mother gets taken, law enforcement, you know, gets. Gets the people, if they can't find her, at least get the justice for the family, you know, and that's why we care. And we should all really highlight this case. So thanks for doing that. Thanks for staying on, and I know you will, and I'm. I hope I'm wrong. I hope she shows up and, and she's okay. I just, I, I don't feel that in this case.
- [54:47]
B
Well, I appreciate your commitment to justice. Thanks so much for being on.
- [54:50]
A
Thanks.
- [54:52]
B
My great thanks to James Hamilton for joining me for that conversation. I always love it when I talk to guys who actually do this for a living, for decades, because they think very clinically about it. The emotion doesn't come in for so many of us. We're so upset or frustrated or sad. It can cloud falling in love with a lead or a theory. But for him, it's more like, no, it's kind of like science, you know. But I want to tell you something that just came in right after I finished interviewing James Hamilton. And this was from an unrelated news conference that happened just in the last hour. And I'm recording this on Wednesday, July 1, Canada Day. Happy Canada Day today. And this is what is being reported. During an unrelated news conference on Wednesday, reporters asked FBI Director Cash Patel about the notes, but he refused to provide any details. And this is the quote from the FBI director. I'm not going to comment on that. Kash Patel said. We are continuing to assist that investigation we've always been in and assist role. It's a state matter being led by the state authorities. Oof. That effectively means Sheriff Chris Nanos is in charge. For what that's worth. Thank you everybody for listening. Thank you everyone for watching. I always love having you here. If you haven't yet subscribed, please do me a solid and jump on that subscribe button and join our membership as well. It's really nice to have our group and we do these little private events every so often. Thanks for watching, thanks for listening. And don't forget, truth isn't just serious, it's drop dead seriously.