477|Breaking News - Nancy Guthrie Kidnapping

This is Jim Clementi, retired FBI profile of former New York City prosecutor and writer

producer of Criminal Minds and with me today is the lovely. Morino Connell, 25-year veteran of the FBI and proud co-host of Best Case Worst Case. And also crime scene expert, right? Yeah, absolutely. And this has been a very interesting, we can have and sad and grim and tough, but very interesting.

There's been a lot of developments in the last couple of days, which is why we decided

to jump on and cover this.

So I know Morino you've been on dozens of shows and I have two and we've been trying to get information out there.

“What do you think is the most important thing to talk about first?”

Well, from an umbrella standpoint, this is a case for the ages. This will not be a case that falls away from the public eye for a very long time decades I'm afraid because so many things seem disjointed, there are things, it's almost like

one of these things doesn't belong with the other and we're not sure which one and why.

I cannot recall a case where I've been so unsure about so many things. Yeah, there's a lot of alternative theories and there's a lot of things going around. I mean, let's start, for example, I mean, the most you talk on Brella, what is the motivation for this crime?

“Is it kidnapping, which would then of course be money would be the motivation?”

Could also have changes of revenge or some other kind of motive, but money is generally the main motivator in a kidnapping case because kidnapping is defined by an abduction followed by a ransom demand for money. And so for money or some other thing of value because sometimes it's I want to get so and so released from prison, for example, or something like that, but the point is, in

this case, that all comes down to whether these ransom demands, we know there was at least one faked one, but are there more indicators that at least the two or three notes that we know about that came to media outlets and that they purportedly had specific information about the placement of a specific object and the situation at the crime scene.

“And therefore, it's probably reliable, that's the argument, right?”

Yeah, because obviously we're on the outside and law enforcement is on the inside and when law enforcement says that they had information that was consistent with what would only be known at the crime scene, I've got to go along with that for obvious reasons. The problem we have is a lot of the information that we've received since the beginning of this investigation from the sheriff has been walked back or changed or I didn't really

mean that, let me clarify and then say something that seems markedly different to me, but we don't know if that's strategic or not, right? And then, but then we look at the statements, the public statements made by Savannah Guthrie and her sister and her brother and they themselves, just they have a lot of internal inconsistencies. I mean, that very heartfelt plea that Savannah made with her sisters and her

brother sitting beside her seemed very sincere and it was clearly directed at the kidnapper, right? Exactly. Yes. But the sister's statements were very bizarre and polluted. Yeah, bizarre is a good word. Her behavior was bizarre and you know, so having done a number of cases where we utilize statement analysis, I looked at the words she used and I looked at her mannerisms and you could see, you could see her scrunch up her forehead while her sister's talking and then almost

to imperceptibly turn it from side to side, it's saying no. And it's just it's strange. Now it could

look like? Yeah. Right, we don't know that, so we don't know what this actually means, but we do

know that some of the things she said about, you know, her mother holds fast to her joy and we are human or we can only be human. We're merely humans or something. Right, it was very strange to me and obviously to you as well. Yeah. But you know, that doesn't mean she's implicated in the crime. It could be just how she deals with this stress and grief. But then the next statement that came out, you know, we heard, we hear you as if they got another communication from the kidnapper,

and then the brother made a statement by himself. But then the next statement, I was shocked

to see Savannah make a statement that was to quote her fans, where she actually was made up, her hair was done and it was as if she had passed through this horrific grief that she was exhibiting in the prior statements. What did you think about that? I didn't look, I didn't look at it that way. I just thought, well, she looks to be in a little bit of a better place, a more hopeful place and I was just grateful to see that because grief, this whole thing is just, you know, I know. And I was hoping

that the reason was because there was a communication and there was proof of life and there was hope

“that the other mother was going to be returned. So that's what I took it as. I don't think you could”

work your way through grief in such a short period of time without, you know, just in a vacuum. So I did take it as a very positive thing and then of course followed up by the release of those images, the video that was recovered by Google from the door camera and and the still images, and that was a major break in the case. It tells me tremendous amounts behaviorally about this offender. One, he's not as smart as he thought he was. He thought he prepared for everything and

glaringly he didn't. He didn't do anything to prepare for this camera and and then has to has to walk back and grab some brush and try to cover it up with that. I mean, unsuccessfully

“and in the process, I think he reveals a possible tattoo on his wrist and he reveals his gate.”

He reveals his countenance. He doesn't seem rushed or or never seen it or right or even

highly motivated. He just seems like it's matter of fact to him and he's relaxed. If you look at his lips, his lips are just like right and normally your lips would be pierced. Your face would show tension. Your eyes would be, you know, and we don't see that with him. I want to ask you one question before we move too far away from the notes. Okay. If you recall, I think it was yesterday, the FBI put out a statement that said the FBI is not aware of any community, any further communication

between the alleged kidnappers or whatever their verbiage was there and the gothory family. And everyone's like, oh, so there's no communication between the two, but I took that totally differently. I was like, why would the FBI feel compelled to say that they're not aware of any

“communication between a third party and the Guthrie that they are not party to?”

Didn't it seem like in Savannah's message that we hear you? You know, we will pay that there was such a communication. Perhaps there was a direct communication and, you know, you know, as well as I do that the FBI does not condone paying ransoms, right? They don't participate in that. Right. So it could be to, I guess, enforce that policy or to reinforce that policy. I'm not sure. I didn't know about that statement.

That's very interesting to me. I know. Wow. Like, um, but maybe they're trying to let me slide on. Yeah. Maybe they're getting a lot of inquiries about about a that communication that appears to have been made, but I don't know. But going back to his behavior

his eyes, his eyelashes, his eyebrows, his mustache, and his mouth were all uncovered.

“And there's also speculation that he was wearing eyeliner. It could be, but that's not the point.”

The point is that he was shedding DNA the whole time through his breath. Hairs, you know, rubbing against that mask, that face mask, you know, he didn't prepare. He, he wasn't right to be sophisticated. Everyone, everyone's talking about the night to a glove. He didn't, he didn't leave any DNA. People are saying that. And I don't, you know, I have no idea how many times you touch your face. Well, if you me, you touch your face a lot more

than the average Joe. But he put the gloves on. And now the gloves on the inside. First of all,

our full of his DNA, because he had his other cloth gloves on. Right. And then you touch your steering, you put them on and you might, you know, it might be out in front. Now you put the car in park or you open the door handle. Now the whole exterior of this hand has has your DNA. And because you've been breathing on that, those surfaces for, you know, weeks, months or years, right? And plus he goes into the house. It spends 40 minutes in there. He's breathing out

his DNA all the time. And if he had a struggle with the victim, that during that time, heavy breathing differently, he's leaving DNA wherever that took place. And if he has a cat or a dog, they're going to find cat fibers for both. Absolutely. Right. And and also the clothing, the fibers from those clothes are going to be all over that house. So there's a lot of things. I don't know because they haven't released it. How he actually gained entry to the house. I've heard about it from the front.

No, he couldn't. Because it has a burglar door on it. Right. And those those doors, I know from working gangs all those years, you need a winch and a truck almost to pull that door off. Right.

“Now could she have left it open? Maybe, but does an 84-year-old woman not lock up our house?”

I find that very difficult to believe. So he walks up to the front. And maybe it was because he knew that was his egress area. And so he crashed, crashed, broke the camera down. But he had to break the camera down before he went around the back. Or interestingly, the video stops right before he would try to gain entry. I mean, there's an actual chance that this guy had a key to that front door for some unknown reason. Because the the video stops. We don't know. We can soon actually

don't. But if we're, yeah, but if we're, if we're talking about the back door was left open, is that what you're saying? Yes. Okay. So that's that's probably how he got in. But the fact is that when we see somebody remove a victim from their home, if kidnapping and ransom isn't the primary motive, the reasons why they do that are because they have a known connection to that victim, a known connection to that home, or both. So, you know, there's roofers, there's repair people,

there's pool people, there's yard people, there's delivery people, there's Uber people, there's plenty of different ways that people could have interacted with her. And she's kind, she's friendly and she's talking to them. And in that process, she innocently reveals that she lives there alone and is vulnerable. And so that could be what gave this person or persons. The, you know, the idea to commit this crime. We'll see. But I do believe that that video that is

critical and it will, it will solve this case because again, behaviorally, when that video came out,

something that he thought would never be a problem because he destroyed the door, camera, he thought, no way that they're going to have any video. That video is going to be his downfall. It shows his height, his general weight, it shows his gate, it shows how, how he moves, it shows, it's confidence level, it shows his calmness, it shows his lack of preparedness, it shows his unprofessionalism, he is not a sophisticated criminal. I've heard people say,

“just because of the mask, I think, that they thought it was some kind of a cartel.”

I know, hit. And that's ridiculous. There's no indication of that at all. And if it were cartel hit, we would have had that ransom note within 20 minutes of her going in. And he would have been in it out of that house in minutes, not 40 minutes. What do you take, not tactically, but what do

holster that was way too big for the weapon that was in it. It seemed to me that this guy is a

macho guy or thinks could be, but it also is somebody who's never been trained in firearms. I mean,

no way, anybody who's actually had any training would, would hope wear their weapon that way. It's something that I had to tell the actor and criminal minds, Matthew Goobler who played Dr. Reed because he would wear it there and he did it there deliberately to look quirky and and different. But I told him, it's dangerous as hell. And it, it looks on professional, but he did it as a character choice. This guy may have done it because he wanted both of his hands

to be free and he wanted her to know that he had a gun. But it being there if he's facing the victim,

“then chances are that's the easiest place for it to be taken away from him. That's why most people”

wear it on their strong side or in their back where they can hide it. But he wanted to be seen. And I see what you're saying that, you know, it's sort of a cocky move, no pun intended, but the fact is that it's a stupid move. It shows his inexperience, it shows his lack of forensic and criminal sophistication. Because again, he handled that gun probably way before he ever put on those gloves. Right? He purchased it. He left his DNA on it, you know, and it's exposed. And that, you know,

there can be secondary and tertiary transfer of DNA. I am certain that it's all over that house. Hopefully, that your evidence texts collected it. A decade ago, I was on the trail of one of the countries most elusive serial killers, but it wasn't until 2023 when he was finally caught. The answers were there hidden in plain sight, so why did it take so long to catch him? I'm Josh Zeeman, and this is Monster, Hunting List, the investigation into the most notorious killer in New York

since the son of Sam available now. Listen for free on the iHeart Radio App, Apple Podcasts,

“Spotify, wherever you get your podcasts. Going back to that glove, which I think could be one of”

that glove that they found yesterday on the side of the road, going back to that glove, if I have that, if that's the glove for my left hand, and I have the glove on before I exit the vehicle, and I reach my hand in to unlock that door. I'm going to be putting my hand right on the

same spot where my fingers have been a million times. We could have that sort of a transfer,

but I think you're going to agree with that case. I know, I'm agreeing with your point, but I think if that were the case, we would already know who this guy was if he was in the system. Well, they just, well, no, well, yes, if he was in the system, but if they can develop DNA profile off that, then forensic genetic genealogy will tell us who he is. It will.

“It will. And so there's no question that he made significant mistakes.”

This case will be solved. However, the question remains is Nancy still alive, and it's hard to think about it, but this has been a long time, and especially with her medical conditions, it's a very difficult thing. Two things. One, when I first saw those images, I'm sure the same thing flash through your mind. I thought my God, that poor woman, so wake up to that. That's your worst nightmare every single time. Secondly, I wanted to point out that the front door is

would be next to impossible. Not only does it have that heavy gate on it, that gated door, that rot iron door that's impossible to get by almost. It's hard to breach, but behind that is a really

thick like a thick oak Spanish style door. So that those of you that have never kicked down a door,

you just look at a door like that, even now to this day, I'll see a door like that, and it's through through four inches thick, and my hips will hurt, just look at it. Think in about it. If you've ever kicked one, now conversely, go around to the back of the house by the pool by that back door, and it's one of those wooden doors, not too thick, with nine little panels of windows, this big. Yes, it's very easy to preach. Not a French door, it's just a regular door

with those nine little windows in it, and you could punch through, but it doesn't appear that anyone had to punch through it, but you know that you could you could boot that door down.

those kinds of doors that you just described, we advise against, especially with the smaller

“the smaller pains of glass, but the fact is that they got into the house, we don't know”

how they did that, but they obviously, at some point, open the back door, and at some point, open the front door, and so I'm glad that they're re-valuating the blood evidence on the outside of the house, because I know we didn't mention it here, but you had said that they put up a white tent over that area. Right. And that tells you, I don't know, because they obviously swapped the blood on the front porch initially. And you and I both know in a pattern at large, you're going

to have to swab it numerous times, because you want to be able to get any and all blood, any and all DNA depositors that are represented there, you want to get their blood. Also in that blood,

“you see the foliage that he pulled out of the front yard to put to obscure the camera, you see some”

of that in there as we noticed initially. At first, I thought it was probably a bird's nest,

because as you know, birds nest often build their nest behind those fixtures, but that obviously was not the case once we saw the video. So they're putting up the, they put up a tent in front, and there's two theories of thought right now. One is they're trying to determine the exact height of the individual by using measuring the bridge, measuring everything, you know, which makes sense. It appears that he should be about six feet tall, we'll see. And then the second date, what my

first thought was was that they were now going to measure the drum, drum, the blood droplets,

and do a full forensic scaling of where they are, which way they travel, how many of them are,

you know, all that kind of stuff. So they did in fact do swapping, which will enable all, all those will be ready to go into court, you know, that they'll be good to go. The stuff they come up with now will probably be challenged. I would, I would, you know, I would be preparing for battle for that for that stuff. Of course, because it's been exposed to

“the public and other things since then. But one of the other things I think they can do is that”

that clearly the, the images that they, the video images and the, the stills that they have can be colorized because you can, you can look at known colors. They can, they know the color of the brick, they know the color of the stones on the floor, they know the color of the mat and the light that's hanging. They know all these colors and then by using AI, they can interpret the colors of his clothing and his backpack, his eyes, potentially his hair, all that. And that's all, again,

huge mistake on his part. But hopefully it is being done or has been done already and, and that, again, will be another huge leap forward in terms of being able to identify the, where the clothing was purchased and who purchased it. Yes. Now, there's also that video going around that I said you a little while ago, off someone's home ring doorbell not to be confused with the nest doorbell system. And it shows an individual who is similar in shape and size and wearing a jack,

great jacket and carrying a backpack. He's wearing a backpack, but that's not the backpack that we saw in the video. It's a yeah. Yeah, he's wearing one, a black one and he's carrying a earring and a light or like blueish or grayish. I mean, certainly the jacket is not the same as the one being worn in the videos at Nancy Guthrie's house. It has a hood. It has a big zipper on the side. It's a, it's, it's much, it's a bigger winter jacket. It's, it's hanging down. However,

there are some interesting behaviors in this guy. He, he, he appears to, he's carrying one backpack in his left hand and he, for some reason, lifts it up on top of the wall, lifts it over the wall and tries to unlock the gate at the side of this person's house. He's unable to do that, but he keeps moving his hands to his lips to his mouth as he's walking there and as he's walking away. Right. And we know that the offender had a mouth camera or a mouth flashlight in his mouth

same type of flashlight in his mouth? Yes. Yes. It's possible. And like there's one situation.

“One, I have it frozen here at this point. There's one point at which he can kind of see”

that he's got something. Is that the one with his right pocket where it looks weighted from a weapon and the size and the weight is, look at, look at that picture. It does look like he's either putting in or taking out something as well. Yep. That's the one I was referring to, yep. But I don't know. I don't know if it's the same guy. He's his movements. The guy that we saw at Nancy Guthrie's house,

like you said, was very calm. His movements were very smooth. I don't know what is going on here.

But whether it's, uh, some attempt at a burglary or, uh, whether this guy is, you know, homeless and looking for a place to sneak in to sleep at night. I have no idea what's going on.

“I don't need that. It is suspicious. Obviously, he doesn't live there. And, uh, fortunately, the”

FBI has been notified of this and hopefully they'll vet it and we'll see if there's any connection. Yep. And there's one image where he's throwing that lighter colored backpack up onto the wall. And when you look at that photo closely, if you screenshot it and blow it up, it appears that what either, it looks like it could almost be bloody on the, on the part of the backpack that would rest against your back or that the items of clothing inside are very dark, much darker than the ones

around it, which is strange because you normally wouldn't be able to see something like that while looking at a nylon backpack. Backpack unless it was wet or something was seeping through. Hmm. Well, I don't know. I can't, it's just, the quality isn't that great, but, no. But, um, I will say that there does seem to be a reflector on the back of that backpack, and there were reflectors on the backpack, and not on the back, not that I saw on the back,

because it was touching his back at the time. But I see what you're talking about, the sort of like staining that appears to be there. Hmm. I'm not sure if that's a shadow or or something on the backpack, but, but I did see, I don't see reflectors on the shoulder straps, but that could be just because he's kind of holding it by the shoulder straps. He may be, he may be blocking that. In fact, there's one, I'm looking at it now, there's one image where he does seem to be something

light, you know, in his hand. Uh, yeah, and you know, as he walks away, you see him, you know, apparently take whatever was in his mouth out. You know, when he walks into frame, he is touching, bringing his hand to his mouth, and then dropping it down,

and then you see him go to his mouth a second time, and then he kind of reaches,

it's weird. He reaches into his crotch area, and then and then lifts the bag up over the fence up on the wall, and right, like he's reaching for the weapon, but to me, this is the image that looks like he has that weapon in his pocket. Yeah, it could be. Yeah, I mean, when you see the jacket move as he approaches that back wall, there's something in there, yeah, something weighted and then mount. He also has something in his back pants pocket, too, but yeah, you can, you can see that it is, it is rigid,

and, you know, there's a straight line, you know, yeah, but look at this, look at that image, where it looks like he has something on his hands. Like could that be the gloves that he was wearing beneath it, or could that be the fleecy stuff that we saw on the arm, as he approached Nancy's

“front door, remember? It looked like he had fleece from the inside of his jacket, but it could”

have been from whatever we're seeing here. Could be, you know, I don't know. I don't believe this is the same kind of jacket that he, that the guy was wearing at the, at Nancy's residence, because

have hoods that roll up, but also people committing crimes will often wear a different jacket

“or bring a different jacket. So they should get into it. Yeah. But it's possible, but we'll see.”

Yeah. Well, this is unfortunately an ongoing case, but more and more people are calling

in tips, which is great, and I know it's overwhelming for the officers and agents that are taking

“those calls and running to ground those tips, but that's exactly what the, the data”

day is of law enforcement investigations, especially in a very intense and an exigent

missing person slash kidnapping slash abduction case. Slash who done it slash who knows what

“happened. Okay. Right. Well, hopefully we'll find out soon, and hopefully Nancy got through”

it's still all right. Yes. Yeah. All right. Thank you for your analysis and could luck on all the other shows and news programs you're going on today. Same with you. Thank you for listening, and that's all from Best Case Worst Case. We'll see you next time, signing off.