← Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
Sheriff: "Car Towed," "Being Processed" per "Search Warrant" "No one Ruled Out" | Nancy Guthrie Case
00:29:11
Loading summary
Transcript17 lines
- [00:00]
A
Five years ago, I was paying $65 a month for my subscriptions. Today, those Same subscriptions cost $111, and I don't even use half of them anymore. That's why now I use Rocket Money to manage my subscriptions for me. The app gives you a list of all of your subscriptions and reminds you of upcoming payments so you're not hit with any surprise charges. On top of that, it also sends you alerts when subscription prices go up, so you always know the price you're paying. If you decide you no longer want a subscription, you can cancel it right from the app. No customer service needed. And the the best part is Rocket Money even reaches out and tries to get you refunded for some of the money you lost. On average, people that cancel their subscriptions with rocket money save $378 a year. And overall, Rocket Money has saved its members $880 million in canceled subscriptions. Stop wasting money on things you don't use. Go to RocketMoney.com Cancel to get started. That's RocketMoney.com Cancel RocketMoney.com Cancel there's nothing.
- [01:02]
B
Like my American Express Platinum card. I love that I can earn hotel credits when I travel. I can also earn resi credits so you know I'm hitting the restaurants everyone's talking about. Plus, with the digital entertainment credit, I'm even more excited to catch my favorite shows. All in all, I can access over $3,500 in annual value with benefits and eligible purchases across travel, entertainment and more. Learn more@americanexpress.com Explore Platinum Enrollment Requirements monthly and other limits and terms apply.
- [01:36]
C
Hey everyone, I'm Ashley Banfield and this is drop dead serious. And what a day. This is day five of one of the more tragic stories that I think any family could ever go through. Nancy Guthrie, 84 years old, the mother of Savannah Guthrie, TODAY show co host still missing, presumed alive because there's no other information to go on, according to the sheriff. But this story is complex. It is mysterious, it is tragic, it is frustrating on many levels. A lot happened today. I'm going to get you up to speed on many things, including the heat that I'm taking from my reporting. Several days ago, I got a pretty big break on this case from an impeccable source in law enforcement, high level law enforcement, who told me that several things had happened in this case, not the least of which cameras were smashed outside of Nancy's home. Two of them, right. Also that Nancy's daughter Annie's car had been towed and was in evidence. And I am going to use specific language here because my source told me, quote, son in law may be prime suspect. And, you know, big pushback from sheriff's department in Pima county. And I get it. Saying at this point, investigators have not identified a suspect or person of interest in this case. That was a printed statement. And the sheriff, Chris Nanos, also went hard on that today in a press conference. But I want to break that down for you because there were several points in that press conference where language was very, very nuanced. And I also saw a couple of places where there were not denials of some of my reporting. So we're going to go through that all in a minute. More importantly, there are a couple of big news items today as well. An arrest of whomever allegedly decided that it was a good idea to insert himself into the Guthrie's tragedy and try to make money. Okay. Allegations are pretty severe for this guy and the punishment will be probably swift and furious. I'll get to that as well. Somebody who was a female faker who sent one of the ransom notes. That doesn't mean that all of the ransom notes have been cleared yet. There's news on that as well, and very interesting news on that, especially since Savannah Guthrie's brother, Cameron Guthrie, late this evening decided to release a post on Instagram again, much like his sister Savannah did yesterday. It is a specific request for whomever might be this kidnapper who sent a ransom note to please communicate. And obviously proof of life is top of their minds. Have a listen to this.
- [04:28]
D
This is Cameron Guthrie. I'm speaking for the Guthrie family. Whoever is out there holding our mother, we want to hear from you. We haven't heard anything directly. We need you to reach out and we need a way to communicate with you so we can move forward. But first, we have to know that you have our mom. We went to talk to you and we are waiting for contact.
- [04:48]
C
You should know the FBI is heavily involved in this case now, especially as concerns these alleged ransom notes. Right. And the ICAC also heavily involved in this case. Important because that's the International Crimes Against Children Task Force. But don't think of this as crimes against children. They do a lot with kidnapping and a lot with tracking kidnappers. So they were the ones that carried the ring light in and the iPhone tripod to help the Guthrie family record Savannah's statement on Instagram yesterday. Perhaps they also helped Cameron with his tonight. But the thing that the FBI said in the press conference today that was so interesting about Kidnappings and ransom was that kidnappers typically are much quicker to the gate with the demands. And the communications don't usually just end with the initial request. Right. The demands are typically discussed. There's typically communication. And this to the FBI today was unusual, which, for what it's worth, is what they have to go on at this point. And what they said was that absolutely zero contact has been made with the Guthrie family since the ransom note went to the media. So there's a couple of different ransom stories going on. You've probably heard several. I'm just going to be as clear as I can, as clear as the law enforcement authorities have been with us. There was one that went to TMZ via email. There was one that went to KOLD TV locally in Arizona by email. And there was one that went to kgun, another local station in Arizona. It is thought, but not 100% clear from the authorities that those three are all the same ones from the same source. But there's another one. Federal prosecutors have now charged a man in California, Derek Kalala. I don't know if it's Kalela Kalea. C A L L E L L A. And they are accusing him of inserting himself into this case by sending what authorities say was a bogus ransom demand to Savannah Guthrie and her family directly. They say Derek Kalila allegedly reached out directly to Nancy's daughter, Annie Guthrie, and her husband, Tommaso Cioni, asking whether, quote, the Bitcoin had been sent, end quote. And claiming that he was, quote, waiting for the transaction to go through, end quote. Let me just say that is going to be very, very hard to defend if someone had just sent a text and said, are you going to pay? That you could defend. Because it could be a question. I feel bad for you. Are you going to pay this? But no, that is very specific. Waiting for the transaction to go through. Federal agents say the message came through a voiceover Internet system that can disguise phone numbers. Congratulations. Guess what? Court records say that the digital trail was able to connect the account back to a Google email. And you know who it allegedly belonged to? Derek Kalala. So after being advised of his rights, prosecutors say that he admitted that he sent two messages. And the investigators say he told them he found the family's contact information online and had been closely following media coverage as the case unfolded. And according to the FBI, the messages were not the end of it. They say he also called the family directly. So if Derek Kaleila or Kalea, in fact did this, he's in for A world of hurt because the criminal complaint against him says he's facing two federal charges allegedly transmitting communication containing a demand or a request for a ransom for the release of any kidnapped person, and also making a phone call without disclosing his identity with the intent to abuse, threaten, or harass a person. And I did a little quick research, very, very cursory research here, but under California statute, a defendant who uses the Internet, again, that's. That's cross state lines, right? To extort a crime victim during an investigation has a realistic exposure to somewhere between a range of three to eight years in prison, federal prison. And that's the lower end because it can actually go up to a potential of life as a maximum if aggravated witness intimidation and criminal threats like strike priors are in play. So on the low end, three to eight, I mean, what kind of parasite does this? What kind of parasite? And I think we all know there are plenty, right? And that's just one of these ransom demands. We still have, you know, these three other communications that were sent via email, and they mentioned apparently floodlights at Nancy's house and an Apple Watch. Okay. Brian Enten has been out front and reporting a lot of this. But I do want to let you know that the timing of this is really interesting. So Monday is February the second. Lots of reporting on this. Visuals of Nancy's house, the crime scene tape has come down and news actually breaks. So Brian Enten actually asked the authorities in the news conference today, did the ransom note come in before all that news broke or after all that news broke, when you could see the floodlights and we knew about the Apple Watch. Have a look.
- [10:19]
E
When did the first ransom note arrive? And the reason I ask is because the Apple Watch has been in the news and on social media and you could see, like, floodlights on video. So was it before those things were out in the world? I don't have the specific time frame, as I said here today, of what time it came in, but that, you are right, anyone could see a floodlight hanging down, could have seen some of those things. The watch has been talked about. So that timing is. Is tricky, but that's why we're taking it serious no matter what and following the leads on that. But I don't have the time frame that the first note came in as I sit here today.
- [10:57]
C
So I can tell you right now, there was wide reporting on the Apple Watch separating from Nancy's pacemaker on Monday, and much of those communications, you know, started arriving Monday evening. So it's entirely possible Somebody just saw the news, saw the floodlights, heard about the pacemaker and the watch, and sent these notes out, just once again trying to insert themselves. Is it possible there is someone holding Nancy Guthrie? They've got to go on these leads. They have to go on these leads. They have to treat it as though it's possible. Which is why you're seeing these proof of life videos from the Guthrie kids. It's why you're seeing valuable law enforcement resources and time and energy dedicated to this big waste of time. If this is just some parasite, right? And it's why the sentencing range can take you up to the max. So let's turn now to the press conference, because some of the things the sheriff said today and how he said these things speaks volumes, right? There is a lot, including some of the things he said, I think, about my reporting and other people's reporting. Before I get to that, though, I do want to tell you thank you very much for watching this podcast and supporting my podcast. I can't do this without you. You mean the world to me, especially during a big story like this. And so I also need to tell you that my sponsors make this possible as well. And I am so appreciative of them as well. Joy and Blokes is one of them. And it's for us, it's for ladies, especially if we're feeling exhausted and anxious and foggy like the week that I've had. Or if you know you're gaining weight no matter what you do, and your doctor just blows you off and says, oh, that's normal for your age. No, that's not true. Not necessarily. You might be being ignored. And women's hormonal health has been dismissed for way too long, me included. So Joy and Blokes was created by a woman who lived this firsthand during perimenopause, and she decided we deserve better. And every Joy and Blokes lab comes with a real consultation from a licensed clinician who specializes in women's hormones. The treatments include hormone therapy and peptide therapy, personalized supplements, whatever you and your body actually needs. Not everybody, right? So just stop guessing and start getting answers. Go to joyandblokes.combanfield and use the code banfield for 50% off your labs and then 20% off your supplements, too. It's joyandblokes.com banfield. Use the code Banfield for 50% off your labs, 20% off all supplements. Click the link in the description because Joy is spelled J O Y and blokes is spelled B L O K E S. So the description has it all joy and blokes, it's healthcare that actually listens to women. Back to the case now and back to the press conference. One thing the press conference gave us today definitively was that the blood that was found outside of Nancy's front door, on that stoop, on those tiles, that's been confirmed. It is Nancy's blood. It is not a perpetrator's blood. It's just Nancy's blood. And they've confirmed that it is in fact blood. Brian Enten did that plenty well enough from News Nation being able to actually witness it for himself. The only DNA evidence that they've gotten back is that porch blood. But the sheriff did say there's a lot more that they have out for testing and they're still awaiting some of those results. They said sometimes it takes 10 to 20 days. They got an expedited, obviously blood. They got that expedited. So they were able to get Nancy's results back. And that is Nancy's blood. You know, it clears it up. But it's also hard to hear that they also process the scene for biological evidence. Still trying to process those samples as well. They didn't say which one and they would not, they would not go into the crime scene itself. Every question everybody tried, he said, no, not doing that. Let's talk suspects now, because this was my big reporting and again, I will use the wording that my impeccable source used. Please, if you're going to disseminate this, use these words. They're the words I have used. They're the words that my sources used. Son in law may be prime suspect now. Okay, the sheriff has pushed back hard on that, saying no suspects identified at this time. No suspects identified at this time. I get it. But also said no one's being ruled out very strenuously. No suspects identified at this time. And even went so far as to suggest. It's reckless to suggest otherwise. But I have been to this rodeo many times before. Law enforcement sometimes will be saying one thing publicly and doing something different privately. It happened with Bryan Coburger. December 19, 2022. They identified Bryan Coburger as the owner of the DNA on the knife sheath. And the next day, on December 20, the Moscow Police chief recorded and posted on the police Facebook, we do not have a suspect. Let me read it. No suspect or suspects identified and only vetted information that does not hinder the investigation will be released to the public. We encourage referencing official releases and accurate updated information so they had Brian co, they'd already followed him across the country and then they told us there are no suspects that have been identified. So I have been through this before. I have checked with my source regularly. Three days in a row. Nothing has changed. And what my source actually said to me today is sometimes when you're taking potshots, you are standing right on the target. Those were the words. Sometimes when you're taking shots, you are right on the target. So for what it's worth, I stand by this reporting, I stand by this impeccable source and I stand by the fact that some of these things in the investigation that have been released and then walked back from the sheriff's department and then changed. And I've got a few of those examples coming up have made me feel like something may be happening differently behind the scenes than we're hearing in the press conferences. Got a great example of that with somebody who asked, are you actively investigating the son in law? And the answer was we're actively looking at everybody we come across in this case, at everybody. He went on to say the Uber driver because Nancy took an Uber over to Annie and Tommaso's house earlier that day around 5, 6 o' clock for a family evening together. And so they have connected with that Uber driver. And then he went on to list, you know, the gardener, the pool person, everybody is a suspect in our eyes, he said. Then he said again, it would be reckless to report that someone is a suspect when they could very well be a victim. Well, if it's not true, you're absolutely right. And this is the reporting from a law enforcement source. Son in law may be prime suspect at this time. And then he went on to say, we just really don't have enough to say this is our suspect, this is our guy or this is our gal. That's a quote. We just don't know that. The family's been very cooperative. And then he said, sometimes people can be mean out there and that can really harm us and harm our efforts. I can assure you there's no intention of being mean. Reporters come up against this all the time, especially in gag orders, especially in investigations and the only information the public gets are the neighbors or anybody who's worried is what we are able to find from our sources. Once again, impeccable source have been at this game for a very long time. As for the cameras, I reported from my source that the cameras, and I'll use the words that my source used, nest cams were smashed and the sheriff was unusual with that today said that the cameras were removed, said the cameras in the timeline were they were disconnected. And then when a reporter asked were they smashed? The answer was, quote, don't know where you got the information about smashed. We're not confirming that. Didn't say. No, he didn't deny it. Also, a reporter pushed further on that and said, regarding the disconnected camera, do you believe that camera was taken? And the sheriff said, we do not have it in our possession. We have not located it. So is this semantics? The cameras were potentially smashed off of their mounts and taken because he said, we don't have them, we have not located it. And then he confirmed that there are actually two, which is what my reporting said. There were more than one. There were two cameras that were smashed. He also said that something triggered the first camera at 1:47am so that's sort of when they believe that perhaps the proximity to the house for whomever did this began 1:47am but the camera company can't give them video of it. They just know that there was an alert activity. There's activity on the camera at 1:47am there's also activity that's recorded. Even though the camera is disconnected and removed around 1:47am there's activity that is alerted at 2:28amSo about 45 minutes between the first alert and the last alert on those cameras. Two camera hits. And the problem is, is that the information from the camera company doesn't delineate which cameras. And was it an animal or was it something going by? It just says alert again, because Nancy Guthrie apparently didn't have the subscription to actually be able to see what was detected. It just said person detected. The software just said person detected. Let's talk about the vehicle. I reported from my source that the daughter of Nancy Guthrie, Annie, her car had been towed and was in evidence. And today when asked about the vehicle, the sheriff said, the vehicle that was towed, that's standard. It's part of the search warrant process. It's being processed. So I think that is clear that that reporting bears out the bizarre part of this news conference. There were a few bizarre, but one of the more bizarre parts of this news conference today was the sheriff has said to several different outlets in several different ways who dropped Nancy Guthrie off at 9:48ish on Saturday night? I think it was varying stories. Annie or Tommaso or Annie and Tommaso. And so the reporters asked for clarity. What was it? Was it one, the other or both? Who were the last people to drop Nancy off? And see her. And the answer was alarming. Just family. We're gonna go with family. That was what the sheriff said. Just family. We're gonna go with family. New York times was told by the sheriff that the last person to drop off Nancy Guthrie was Tommaso, Annie's husband, Tommaso. I don't know why he wouldn't say the same thing during the news conference or clear that up, but he decided to say, just family, we're going to go with family. As to forced entry, he didn't say there was or there wasn't. And I reported there was forced entry. That came from my source. He said, I don't know where that comes from. Whether there is or isn't forced entry, that's something we're not discussing. So again, doesn't knock it down, doesn't confirm or deny. So a reporter asked, was this targeted? And the answer that was given is, that's why we have the FBI. Maybe it is a kidnapping, he says. And yet on Monday, when I interviewed the sheriff, he said definitively to me, it is a kidnapping. I'm not sure why they're hedging on that. And he said, we don't have anything to rule that out. Again, I'm not sure why they're hedging. Many of us were told it is an abduction, it is a kidnapping. And as far as motive, the sheriff said, my guests work is as good as yours. The FBI also said there's nothing to indicate that Nancy was taken because she is Savannah's mom. That's interesting. So nothing maybe in these ransom letters says, I know that you've got this, you know, national news anchor who's very successful with NBC behind her. Nothing suggests that according to the FBI. So the investigation and the strategy. The FBI said that they've looked through banks, social media, phone companies. They're looking through the digital footprints. They're still going door to door and asking questions and asking for ring cam. They have contacted pharmacies to find out if maybe, please God, they have gotten her the life saving medication that she needs, but there's been nothing so far. And they are not communicating with the Mexican authorities. This is very close to the border. There's been a lot of talk about the border patrol, but this was definitive. They do not think that she was taken out of the country. They do not think that she was spirited across the border. They are not even communicating with the Mexican authorities. Clearly they do not believe that is a big part of this investigation. This question was huge. This next one, are you Withhold. Are you purposely withholding information because of the active investigation? I listened very carefully to this because I feel like the sheriff has called me reckless because of my reporting. And I stand by my reporting and I stand by my ironclad source. So I listened very carefully again to this question. Are you purposely withholding information because of the active investigation? And I want you to hear for yourself exactly the words that the sheriff used. Take a look.
- [24:31]
F
You know, this is no different than any criminal investigation that we conduct here. Law enforcement has conducted investigations since 1865 here in Pima County. We're always mindful of what it is that's in front of us and what we should release and can release. There's legal guidelines that guide us, but there's also strategy too. So, you know, I'll leave that for you to determine.
- [25:03]
C
So that is fascinating to me. This is no different than any criminal investigation that we conduct here. We're always mindful of what's in front of us and what we should release and can release. There's legal guidelines that guide us, but there's also strategy to. I'll leave that for you to determine. So possibly my reporting is being knocked down for that reason. Maybe not. Again, I have said from the beginning, law enforcement reserves every right to change their minds in investigation. And they should be open to that. They should have been open to it in John Ramsey. They should have been open to it in Ed Smart. They should have been open to it in Richard Jewell. Eventually they were. But that is what they're supposed to do, go where the investigation takes them. But right now, my source says it has taken them to the son in law who may be a prime suspect right now. Okay, so then should the federal reinforcements have been brought in earlier, meaning the crime scene was dismantled, the tape came down. I think it was like 30 or 40 hours from the 911 call. And the sheriff is, he's owning it. He's saying, look, I get it, the Monday, Monday morning quarterbacking. He says, I will take that hit. Other people who are very knowledgeable about investigations have said, don't worry, the FBI is going in for something entirely different. Yes and no. They may or may not have been able to get what they needed when they put the crime scene tape back up and went in for like two hours yesterday. But the courts are an issue. And the courts would have to sort that out in any potential prosecution afterwards because a defense attorney will say, are you kidding me? This evidence was compromised. There were reporters walking all over the place. The crime Scene tape was down. Anybody could have gone in. So it could be an issue. But oftentimes it might not be either. So there's 50, 50 on that. And there's a few other quotes directly from the sheriff that I'd like to share with you from Fox Digital.
- [26:58]
E
Sheriff, you said you've identified no suspects. Have you ruled out anyone she was with on Saturday night?
- [27:04]
F
You know, we've talked to so many. I'm sure that my investigators have feelings about this one's clear or this one isn't. But. But no, I wouldn't say anybody's ruled out yet because what if. What if I rule you out and then later I learned something else? No.
- [27:19]
C
Have you been in communication with anyone.
- [27:21]
A
Who you believe could be the kidnapper?
- [27:27]
F
You know, it goes back to what we talked about. Nobody's eliminated. But we just really don't have enough to say, this is our suspect, this is our guy we know or our gal. We just don't know that.
- [27:41]
E
Are you actively investigating the son in law in this case? There were reports earlier this week and you refuted that. You said you haven't eliminated everybody. Have you eliminated him or come close to it or are you actually looking at him?
- [27:52]
F
We're actively looking at everybody we come across in this case. Everybody. We would be irresponsible if we didn't talk to everybody. The Uber driver, the gardener, the pool person, whoever. Everybody is so cliche, but everybody's still a suspect in our eyes. That's just how we look at things and think as cops. Does that mean we have a prime suspect? No. And the family's been very cooperative. They've done everything we've asked of them and we want that relationship to continue. And sometimes people can be mean out there and that can really harm us.
- [28:39]
C
The FBI has now offered a $50,000 reward for information that will help finance. They're also going to start putting up billboards in the vicinity. And then I thought it again, strange. There was an announcement made at the end that there will be no further press conferences unless warranted. Unless information is warranted. So I just want to keep you up to speed on all of the reporting. And I have had so many phone calls from media outlets and former colleagues and, you know, people I've worked with for years or known for years in the business asking me, are you sure? Are you sure? And I am standing by my reporting. I have done this a long time. I had a reporter ask me recently, well, you've left a major network where the standards are different and now you're working for your own outfit. Have you relaxed your standards? I have not relaxed who I am and what I have built over four decades of being a correspondent, an anchor, a war correspondent, a victim of 911 and someone who has spent more hours in court than I could possibly ever count. I have not. This would be the exact same reporting if I worked at CNN, MSNBC, Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS or NewsNation. So just so you know, I have an incredible source. I stand by that source. I have communicated regularly with that source and I have also said exactly what that source said and how things can change. So if you're going to re report again what I say, please just use the words that I use. And then also be mindful when you listen to how the Sheriff answers because I am seeing a lot of room for movement there. As always, I'm so thankful that you are following this case with me that you watch and listen to this podcast. Thank you for being a part of this community. And remember the truth. The truth isn't just serious, it is drop dead serious.