Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - NANCY GUTHRIE KIDNAP HOAX?

Episode Date: July 2, 2026

New reports say the FBI determined ransom notes related to Nancy Guthrie were fake.   TMZ's Harvey Levin pushed back on the claim, having received several of the notes. Less than 24 hours later, FBI bosses say they've not made a ruling either way.   Investigators continue to treat her disappearance as an active case, with DNA and video evidence still under forensic review.  Now, who to believe? Joining  Nancy Grace today : Caryn Stark- NY-  Forensic Psychologist, renowned TV and Radio trauma expert and consultant, www.carynstark.com, Instagram: carynpsych, FB: Caryn Stark Private Practice Michael Harrigan  -   Fmr. FBI Agent for 22 years - Chief, Firearms Training Program at Quantico, VA. Led the FBI's Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP),   Current principle with the Pax Group, LLC, a crisis management and risk assessment entity  Brian Trascher  -  Vice President of the United Cajun Navy, https://unitedcajunnavy.org  Dr. Jim Jones -  cyber security and digital forensics expert, digital forensics program director and associate professor, George Mason University Dr. Kendall Crowns  -  Chief Medical Examiner Tarrant County (Ft Worth), Host of the Podcast "Mayhem in the Morgue", Lecturer: Burnett School of Medicine at TCU (Texas Christian University)  Sydney Silvagni -Investigative Reporter, 'Crime Stories' See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed human. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. The Nancy Guthrie kidnapped? A hoax? What? Does this revelation totally torpedoed the investigation as it stands tonight? Is this even true?

Good evening. I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. I want to thank you for being with us. A photo or video of Nancy Guthrie with her kidnapper. We know that Harvey got another letter at TMZ, and Harvey is definitely taking it seriously. So, Nancy, I don't trust a thing. What do we know tonight?

Is this real? First of all, what does Cash Patel have to say? Reuters is reporting that the ransom notes that were sent regarding Nancy Guthrie's disappearance are fake? Are you able to confirm that those have been determined to be fake? I'm not going to comment on that. We are continuing to assist that investigation.

We've always been in an assist role. It's a state matter being led by the state authorities. Thank you. Uh-uh. No. No. No. That's my friends at C-SPAN. I want to see that again. Guys, this is the director of the FBI. And I've been with him lockstep

until right now. Okay, I'm no body language expert, but I want you to look at Cash Patel. Reuters is reporting that the ransom notes that were sent regarding Nancy Guthrie's disappearance are fake. Are you able to confirm that those have been determined to be fake? I'm not going to comment on that. We are continuing to assist that investigation. We've always been in an assist role. It's a state matter being led by the state authorities.

Thank you. He looks from side to side. he blinks, and then he walks off the podium, steps away and walks off the podium, and dodges the question. In the last hours, a bombshell claims that the ransom notes, the ransom notes, are all a hoax. Then why at the get-go was Savannah told they were legitimate? Okay, you've got Cash Patel stating that, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, I'm not touching that hot potato. Don't throw it at me.

The state's in charge of that, i.e. Nanos. But this is what Nanos says. I think there's been a lot of talk about ransom notes. We're looking into that, and those are notes that we've been pretty consistent. You know, you divvy up the work, right? We took the DNA, we gave the ransom notes to the FBI. Ransom note, ransom note, hot potato, catch. That said, that's from our friends.

at K-O-L-D. So, Patel says it's a state matter, and that would be Nanos. Nano says, oh, we gave all that to the feds. Talk about a hot potato. Uh-uh. Now, who can we trust? Is this real? Let's hear what Savannah says.

The two notes that we received that we responded to, I tend to believe those are real. That from our friends, whoa, here it comes. Got it. Who's telling the truth? Are they just throwing it back and forth and back and forth? Patel says Nanos, Nanos says Patel. Straight out to the experts joining us. And what a lineup we've got tonight.

I don't quite understand what's happening, but to Dr. Jim Jones, joining us out of Hondon, Virginia. He is a cybersecurity digital forensics expert. He is a digital forensics program director, associate professor at George Mason University, your expertise is digital. But you have put many, many witnesses under questioning. What do you make of this pointing the finger? I mean, that's who we look up to for leadership. That would be Cash Patel. And I've agreed with him all along the way. But he is dodging, dodging. Yeah, I'm assuming that their technical experts are

are tackling this probably on both sides. The FBI is most likely better equipped to do the technical analysis. So I expect that's what's happening. The director just may not be aware of what the technical people are up to. Oh, whoa, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Dr. Jim Jones, you mean the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing? Yeah, I'm not buying that. This is a total dodge. Straight out to Michael Harrigan joining us, former FBI agent 22 years. You were with the feds. He's dodging. Why is he dodging?

Well, I think in these cases, you know, when I ran the Bicap program at Quantico, we specialize in long-term missing person cases. And there's a lot of technicalities that go into these cases, and the crisis communication necessary in these matters are complex. Because you have two sides here. One, you have the need to get misguathery back to recover her, identify the kidnappers. The other side of it is the R-hoax notes is the investigative goal of identifying those hoax drafters and holding them accountable.

So it can seem somewhat disjointed through the media on these cases, but it's a very well-orchestrated and careful strategy to communicate this. And the director and the sheriff himself aren't the best persons to comment on the direction and of the case. case. You have to have trained communicators out there, and there's some pitfalls here. Okay. I'm sorry. Am I actually, who has killed Michael Harrigan and is wearing his skin? Because when you're telling me, the director of the FBI and the Pima County Sheriff should not be the ones communicating evidence on a case? Yeah, I'm calling foul, total foul. That's BS. Now, wait, you're not still working for the FBI, are you? Okay, yeah, no, you're not. Don't cover. I don't care who they are. This, I think, is either a grave mistake at the get-go by telling Savannah these were legitimate,

or this is a ploy, a ploy. Now, let's think this through. Why could it possibly be a ploy? Why did they tell us at the beginning that two of the ransom notes were real, and now, saying, yeah, no, no, erase, erase, Jurassic erase. I didn't say that. Who said that? It's his duty. No, it's their duty. And by the way, straight out to Sidney, joining us, Crime Stories, investigative reporter, this has unleashed a torrent, a torrent of hate onto the Guthrie family. Because when authorities come out and say, yeah, those ransom notes, we told you that we're legit and we've been investigating a lot. kidnap all this time? Yeah, forget that. That's not true. Now, the world, not me,

others are asking, well, wait a minute. If there was sensitive information, Sidney, in those ransom notes, who would have known that the Apple Watch was reportedly at the foot of the bed on the floor? Who would have known what pajamas Mrs. Guthrie was wearing that night. Who would have known the floodlight was askew and not working? Who would have known all that? Well, somebody in the home, i.e. blaming the family. Was nobody thinking when they dropped this bomb? Let's just say the proverbial turd in the punch bowl? Did they not think about what was going to happen to the Guthrie family when they did this? Explain to me what's happening. So we had this report from Reuters claiming their FBI sources told them that all of these letters are completely fake, that the FBI has ruled these out completely and are not considering the possibility that these were real anymore.

They have been completely dismissed. And like you said, that's been disastrous for the Guthrie family. Now people are questioning, why did they pay them any money at all? Why did they tickle this wire? Why did they entertain these? Guys, this has unleashed a torrent of hate on the Guthrie family. All along claims against them have been that the son-in-law, Nancy Guthrie's son-in-law, was the last one to see her alive that we know of, that he took her home.

He drove her home after a family dinner at his and daughter Annie's home. From that, it has been extrapolated that they are responsible for Mrs. Guthrie's kidnap. Now stating that the ransom notes are fake feeds into that claim. Back to Michael Harrigan joining us, Michael, do you see where I'm going with this? Yeah, I do, Nancy. I think there's some good questions here. I think you're raising legitimate questions about the communication and the information out there. And I think we have to remember that, you know, in these cases, the crush on the victims. In this case, Ms. Guthrie is incredible. The family is pulled this way and that way by all these disinformation coming out. And, you know, there has been mixed communication. But behind

the scenes, I mean, the investigators, when you look at what the investigators are doing, sometimes there's good reason to put out conflicting information because of suspect identification and tactics they use to maybe get a suspect to make a move or to spur further communication. Okay, could you explain what you're saying in regular people talk? Okay. What happens is the tactics that law enforcement use here, right? There's information they release. Everything in a case like this that law enforcement releases, whether it's saying a notice real, whether it's fake, there's a tactic behind the scenes in that.

And in a kidnapping case where life hangs in the balance like this one, you have to move quick at the beginning. You don't have the luxury of betting everything down to the very minutiae, validating everything. So you have to move on notes early in a case as if it's actually valid. You have to do that because, again, life hangs in the balance. But as time goes on and you're able to use technical resources, investigative techniques to dial down and find out that a note, okay, now it's not legitimate. And you find that out. Well, then you can put out that it's not legitimate.

So, you know, it's just a natural investigative process. It's much different than other crimes when you have somebody who potentially is alive. You have to move quick. If you don't move quick enough, you get criticized for holding stuff back. You move too quick. Sometimes invalid information gets out there, but it's a balance because you really need to get this unfortunate victim back alive. We have told you before that we had as many as five FBI agents on phone calls at the same time with our IT team trying to find out who sent these ransom notes or these alleged ransom notes.

And they have not been able to do that. You look at the first note where they make that demand of $4 million, and then the second, then they say if you don't meet the deadline, it goes to $6 million. And if you don't pay the $6 million by the deadline, we will kill Nancy Guthrie. And then the second note that the Tucson station received, we didn't. They don't ask for any money. They just inform Savannah Guthrie and her family that Nancy had died. And that seems to be why Savannah came out almost the next day and said,

look, we will pay you money to know where our mother is, in other words, to bring her body back. And it now kind of makes sense. The reason she said that is because that second last, did not ask for any money. That from our friend Harvey Levin at TMZ. I-HartRadio Experience, weekend gold tickets to Ilson Inc. In Montreal with Dom Dalla, Chris Lakin friends, Woolley, Deadmouse, Above and Beyond, Subfocus, and More,

with flights from Porter Airlines, three nights at Residence Inn downtown Montreal, and $1,000 cash. Enter for your chance to win at iHeartRadio.ca. Ilsonique in Montreal, every day you enter is another chance to win. Crime stories with Nancy Grace. Straight back to Dr. Jim Jones and Michael Harrigan, first to you, Harrigan, if this is a ploy by the feds, after all this time of telling us and Savannah that the first two notes were real, Not the notes, the emails, the missives later sent claiming, I know who did it, I know who did it. I can send a picture.

I've got it on a cell phone. Give me a Bitcoin. Give me a Bitcoin. Not those. We're talking about the first two notes. Those from the alleged kidnapper. Not the hyena, the parasite, the vulture, the ticks, sucking the blood of the Guthrie family, claiming, I can take you to an answer.

I can give you a picture, not them. We've been told all along these first two notes were real. Buy the FBI. Now, suddenly, midstream, they turn course. I'm not buying it. Because I don't think, Harrigan, they would have intimated they were real if they didn't believe they were real.

They would have said nothing. You know the feds you were a fed for 22 years. I was a Fed. They would never go out on a limb and let Savannah say, I think the first two are real if they didn't think that. So is this a ploy on their part? And if so, what type of ploy?

Well, it very well could be. I mean, in these kidnapping cases, tactics are very important in communication in what you release. And there's always a purpose for every statement that's made officially, not from unnamed sources, but from official releases. There's always a ploy. There's always a tactic. And unfortunately, unless you can see down into the case file and you actually have firsthand knowledge, you don't know what that is. But again, you know, the investigators are walking a fine line here because they have to try to get her back. And so this could be a way to maybe get the kidnapper or whoever wrote that note to reach out a second, third time now because maybe they haven't been able to identify it.

But then on the other side, they may know very well who sent these notes. and it could be advanced investigative techniques trying to gather enough evidence to make an arrest and a prosecution here. But how would coming out? I mean, I hear you, Michael. To Dr. Jim Jones joining us, he is Professor George Mason University. That's not shabby. Cybersecurity, digital forensics expert, digital forensics program director. Dr. Jim Jones, you have seen law enforcement for enough years to know that ploy.

happen. Okay, here's a simple one, a very simple ploy, and it's completely constitutional. Suddenly, a known felon on the lamb gets a notice. He's won a TV at some Thanksgiving sweepstake. He shows up, and there are a lot of other guys there that have won things. Guess what? It's a lie. It's a ploy. They're all fugitives, and they all get arrested. Nobody's getting a new TV. They just fell for it. It's a ploy. Here's another ploy. I would attribute this to the defense team in the Charlie Kirk assassination.

The Tyler Robinson defense team put it out there that the bullets don't match Tyler Robinson's gun. What? Because the prosecution is built on that, right? Well, as it turns out, that's not true. It was a ploy, a ploy, what they hope to. chief, don't know that yet, maybe take the jury, I don't know or care. It was a ploy. So think, think, thinky, Dr. Jim Jones, how could putting it out there that these ransom

notes which they said were true are no longer true? How does that help me catch what I believe to be Nancy Guthrie's kidnapper and killer? Sure. it may go the killer or the kidnapper into sending more emails. And so the technical analysis is going to go back to a device, possibly even a physical location, maybe a library computer, a specific home or apartment. And so if they have that traced back that far and then they go the sender into sending another message, they've installed additional monitoring at that location and are more likely to catch the perpetrator coming in.

Okay. That's a little brilliant. Could you break that down in regular people talk? Okay. If I had to put you on the stand, we would work on that so you could say it really slowly and succinctly. Now, let me go with you one more time. How does putting a big fat lie out there, if it is in fact a lie, help me catch the killer. And yes, I know many people believe that Mrs. Guthrie died accidentally in the middle of a kidnap. That's felony murder. I will say no more. How am I going to find him or them because of this ploy by the FBI with Nanos trailing along? Sure. The investigators want the perpetrators to continue to communicate. That's their only chance to catch a break and trace it back to an individual. So every email message has essentially an envelope with it that says where it came from and the systems it went through, that's the easy technical part. That gets you back to a computer or a geographic region. Now you can monitor that location more closely, hope that the attacker is going to come back, send another message the same way.

And the first two messages came from the same IP address. That's a device identifier to a certain degree. So there's some reasonable expectation that the attacker could use the same communication method, but now law enforcement is watching more closely. Okay. Now it's sinking in, Dr. Jim Jones. Okay. You said the same IP address, internet provider address, and there's been a lot of confusion about that. Levin, Harvey Levin, our friend at TMZ, accurately stated that all the notes came from the IP address. But all the notes regarding the jackals, the ticks, the parasites, they all came from the same address.

Not the first two ransom notes. Those are two different IP addresses, but you're right. Karen Stark joining me, forensic psychologist, renowned TV and radio trauma expert consultant at Karen Stark.com. That's Karen with the C. Karen, you've been in this world for a long time analyzing what you see. You just saw Savannah Guthrie. Hey, control them.

Could you play her on mute and watch her? You know what? Forget it. Play it. Where she says, I believe those two notes were credible. Watch this, Karen. I can't wait to see what you're going to say. The two notes that we received that we responded to, I tend to believe those are real.

From our friends at the Today Show, Karen, I believe Savannah. Okay. We worked together at court TV when she was first starting out and legal analysis. She's a trained lawyer. She did not just fall off the turnip truck. She's very smart. I would like to point out genuine. Because of that, I believe two things.

One, if somebody in her family, were involved, she would not be draping her arm around them visiting a memorial site. She would have sought justice and vengeance would have been wreaked long ago. Number one. Number two, when she said, I think two were legitimate, did you notice she paused, looked off, came back, instead I think they were real. I don't think Savannah would look at the camera and lie. I really don't. I don't think so either, Nancy. I think that she really did believe that they were real. And certainly she was encouraged to believe that. You have to think of something.

When you're in that situation, you want hope. You want to believe that your mother is alive. So what I see is a daughter who is desperately hoping that this is true and her mother is alive. And why not believe that and continue that hope? I also really agree with the whole fact that. of the ploy of trying to get somebody to actually come forward, write some more. If we think about all the cases we went through Dancy where serial killers were writing, and when the newspapers or wherever they were sending their letters

were not covering them, they would get more upset and they would actually write more because they need the attention. They're narcissists. And so that could actually be what they're doing right now. They're trying to do. to actually bait the person to keep on going and writing some more so they can either trace it or already they might know and they want to see where the person goes. But I definitely think that's a ploy.

Michael Harrigan, there were problems with the ransom notes at the get-go, number one. And Dr. Jim Jones, please jump in. Oh, I'm just hearing in my ear, we're going to be joined by Dr. Kendall Crowns, Chief Medical examiner. Hold on before I go to Dr. Kendall Crowns. Michael, I want to talk about the problems with the ransom notes at the get-go. Every time I have ever analyzed or investigated a ransom note, it was immediate. Somebody's taken, you get a ransom. Immediately. They want the money. They don't want to cart the person around like a grocery card at Kroger, much less an 84-year-old woman with health problems. They want the money, and they want to either return her or kill her and be gone.

But there was days, days delay before we get the first ransom note. That was the first problem. Then they didn't give proof of life. Second problem, you want millions of dollars. You better give me proof of life. We've also been told, not verified, Savannah and her family wanted to pay the ransom, or at least negotiate to pay the ransom,

but they were advised not to. Okay. Where am I going with this? The fact that there were problems with the ransom notes to start with could mean one of two things, in my mind. One, they weren't real, but Savannah said they were. So that's not right. Second choice, Mrs. Guthrie, immediately upon kidnapping, passed away. So they could not give proof of life.

And they were trying to get the money while they figured out what to do. That's the second alternative. Do you have a better idea? No, I think Dan said, I think you hit the nail on the head there. There's a lot of possibilities here. And I think when the notes first came in, because of the time and the potential of her life being in grave danger at that moment, I think they have to proceed fast and they have to consider as if it's real. But as the investigation goes on, they give more information.

They're able to vet it out and show that it isn't real. So I think you're absolutely correct that there's some problems here. And I think the most glaring one was the fact that why wouldn't they provide a proof of life? That's critical because you want to get that money. If you don't provide proof of life, you're not going to get any money, really, when it comes down to these cases. But the other side is investigators may very well know that she is deceased. Maybe there was information at the scene to show that she likely is deceased. So there was no way for the kidnappers to provide proof of life.

But then it moves into the second phase, which is the need of the family to get closure. So maybe providing some information that only the kidnapper would know, maybe a picture of her clothing, even of her body, or something she was carrying would help them get the money. They would have some leverage there over the return of the body. Okay. I'm with you. I'm with you.

And I'll tell you why I think they realized very quickly that Mrs. Guthrie may have passed on because of another Insta that Savannah put out there. I want you to hear this lesson. We received your message and we understand. We beg you now to return our mother to us so that we can celebrate with her. This is the only way we will have peace. This is very valuable to us and we will pay. To Karen Stark, forensic psychologist, do you hear the buzzwords Savannah used right there?

This is valuable to us, Mrs. Guthrie's body. We want to celebrate with her as in celebration of life. It's never too late to do the right thing. In other words, even if my mom is dead. We understand. that my mom is dead. All of those things and more suggest to me that she is responding to

the second note that reveals Mrs. Guthrie has passed on. I would agree. Completely, Nancy, because there are so many clues, like you said, where she's no longer saying, you know, bring her back a lie. We want her. She's actually saying,

very subtly that she's dead and we would still like to have her and we will do whatever it takes. And in some ways, if you look at everything that unfolded, to me, she died very quickly. I mean, because she actually needed her pacemaker, I think it was, her cane, and her pacemaker went off. So how long could she possibly have lived? whether that was intentional, accidental, it seems accidental. But I do think they knew, and I think she did die immediately. I want to make sure I understand the facts. And if I'm wrong, Sidney jump in.

The pacemaker did not necessarily turn off. It got disconnected from Wi-Fi. So we know she was at home. Many people online, a lot of hateful trolls say she never made it home that night. The daughter's lying. did make it home that night because her pacemaker connects to the Wi-Fi in the home. So we know she's there. We also know that her pacemaker spikes, the heartbeat spikes around 2 a.m.

Then shortly after that, it's disconnected from Wi-Fi. In other words, she's taken out of the home. So we know she was there. So everybody claiming the family just got rid of her right there at the supper table and never brought her home, that's not true. She did come home. That said, Dr. Jim Jones, cybersecurity digital forensics expert, professor George Mason University, digital forensics program director, you've got Cash Patel, you've got a fleet of IT troublesheaters. Why can't we catch him? And how can we catch him?

Yeah, good question. The technical analysis is going to take us back to, again, a device or a location. And depending on the sophistication of the sender, that data is then held by a provider. And so law enforcement has to get legal authority to get that data, which leads them to another commercial provider. They have to get legal authority. They get that and on and so on. And so A needs to B leads to C, which I assume is what they've been doing, you know, for the last five. months is walking this back and that takes time. If the attacker is sophisticated, he has taken some measures to obfuscate his original location. And so now they're into the, we have run all the technical leads to their end. How do we negotiate, how do we manage a ploy that's going to cause the attacker to continue to communicate so that we might get a break? They're really trying to connect the dots and put together this vast sea of information, and somewhere in there are the threads that could let them narrow down the suspect pool.

Dr. Jim Jones, once again, you just said something brilliant. Ran out of technical leads. In other words, they have not identified the author, the sender of those first two ransom notes. So now what can they do? Chase their tails? No, a ploy, a ploy, putting it out there that these notes were not real.

Dr. Kendall Crowns joining me, Chief Medical Examiner Tarrant County, that's Fort Worth, host of a hit new podcast, Mayhem in the Morg. He is esteemed lecturer at the Burnett School of Medicine at TCU, and I see he's joined by his co-star, Dr. Bones. Dr. Kendall Crowns, thank you for being with us tonight. Dr. Crowns, if, if one of the missus was retreat. that Mrs. Guthrie is, quote, buried in nature, that's certainly putting it euphemistically, that means dumped in the desert or put in a shallow grave.

How can we ever identify what is the most encouraging news about finding her body? How can we find her? And if we do find her, how can we identify her? Okay, well, we'll start with if the body is buried. If she's buried, it is Arizona. Arizona is a dry, arid environment. There's not a lot of humidity. So usually bodies in this environment, they will decompose,

but they will actually mummify. They dry out. The skin becomes hard and leathery. And the organs, of course, all decompose as well, but they become like a mummy, like you see in the Egyptian mummies, etc. If the body is found at that point and brought into a medical examiner's office, they can actually inject fluid into the fingers and expand the mummified tissue and then get fingerprints from that. The other thing, if she has dental records, they can use dental records as well to get her identification done. And in worst case scenarios of hands and teeth are gone, still strips of dried muscle can be taken and they can attempt to get.

get DNA from it or from the bone marrow to send in for DNA comparison testing. So she can be identified even if she's mummified at this point. How she'll be found, it could be difficult. Usually with mummified bodies, this scent kind of dissipates quite quickly, but cadaver dogs, things of that nature, can usually still find the body. So at this point, if you're dealing with a buried body or a decomposed body that's been dumped somewhere, someone's going to eventually smell it or spot it and then they can be identified. And Dr. Kendall Crowns, can she not be identified by her pacemaker?

I know my mom's has a serial number on it, like a VIN number on a car. That's correct. I forgot about the pacemaker. The pacemaker itself does have a serial number on it that can be then compared to medical records, and that is also a very easy way of identifying a body. Also, if she had any artificial hips or anything like that, they too will have serial numbers on. Experience. You end up how with weekend gold tickets to Lassau Montreal.

Thomas Rhett. Mumford and Sons. Well, here's my pride and here's my share. John Party, Old Dominion, Carly Pierce, and more. And the prize gets even sweeter. With flights from Porter Airlines, three nights at Residence Inn downtown Montreal, and $1,000 cash.

Download the free IHeart Radio app, listen to PureCom. for 10 minutes and enter to win. Lassau, Montreal. Every day you listen is another chance to win. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Back to Sydney Silvani, Crime Stories investigative reporter. Now, I understand,

the FBI is walking it all back. Maybe they are real. Are you kidding me? No, that is exactly what happened. We got this report that said the FBI is not considering any of the original three notes as real. And then TMZ, a few hours later, came back and said, wait a minute, our FBI sources are saying that's not the truth.

That's not the case. They're still trying to determine whether or not these are for real. And the TMZ report did say, hey, we're with the FBI. But depending on who you talk to in the FBI, they might have a different opinion. So yes, some people may say, oh, we don't think those are real, but others are still giving it thought. But the investigation is continuing. So it's very confusing. We're getting a lot of mixed comments saying, yes, it's real.

No, it's not real. We're still investigating. So it's very, very muddy waters. It was almost like, you know, these kidnappers were not banking. on the fact that Nancy Guthrie would die in their watch, freaked out, didn't ask for anything, and just went underground, and she's saying, no, no, no, we will pay you,

but they have never to be heard from again. So that's kind of the bottom line to this, which is the official position of the FBI is those ransom notes are more likely than not real, but they still don't know, and they are still are still looking at those notes. We are told today that they are still pursuing those two notes, the two alleged ransom notes. They have not determined, I want to repeat, they're real, but they have definitely not

determined that they're not, and they lean more toward legit than not legit. Now the official I talked to said, look, this is a big organization, and there are multiple agents on this case. And if you talk to all of them, their opinions are going to vary. And so it depends on who you talk to. And that seems real enough that not everybody would agree. But the official position of the FBI is they have not discounted these two ransom notes. the official in the FBI who asked, I don't use this person's name, said this. It is more likely than not

that the two ransom notes are real, are real. Dear Lord in Heaven. That's our friend Harvey 11th over at Team Zee, and did you notice at the end? He's looking down. Harvey Levin doesn't need a script. He doesn't need a prompter. I guarantee you what he was doing was reading the exact words from his FBI source.

Exact words. Quote, it is more likely than not that the two ransom notes are real. Are real. So, all of this drama, all of the hate, raining down on the family when it's put out there that the notes are not real, including Nanos, who should keep his pie hole shut at all times, claiming the notes aren't real. So who sent them?

Somebody that knew her Apple Watch was, we've been told, on the floor at the foot of the bed, somebody that knew how to describe Mrs. Guthrie's pajamas specifically, someone that knew, quote, sensitive details about her home and the scene, someone that knew about the light being, askew or malfunctioning, who would know that? The family, when they first got to the home. So now, a torrent of hate, as I'm describing, has been unleashed on the family, and we circle right back to where we were.

If Harvey is to be believed, and I do believe him, that the notes are. real. Okay, thanks. Straight out to another special guest joining us now in the last moments. Brian Schrasher is with us, vice president of the United Cajun Navy. He is out in the field. Brian, thank you for being with us. Now, Nanos is under attack again. It just never ends, does it, for disallowing the United Cajun Navy to come all the same. and help at the get-go. What exactly happened, Brian? Well, thanks for having me back, Nancy.

And, you know, yeah, early on, we had sent our incident commander out there just to kind of, you know, do an assessment, see if there was anything we could do to add to the search. Initially, the sheriff's office, the communication we had with them was that they were not accepting third-party help. We decided to go ahead and put a full plan. in writing together to submit to them, just to let them know that, you know, we did have some professional resources and capabilities to add to the mix should they need it and submitted it back and they basically just reiterated that they were not accepting help from outside agency. So we just stood down and went back to other operations.

Brian, you have done this for a long time and you've had a lot of success with the United Cajun Navy as well. How important is it to? have as many boots on the ground in the first hours after a kidnapping. Why is it so important? Our opinion, Nancy, is that anything we do can't hurt, certainly, as long as we're not interfering in any sensitive areas, you know, staying away from crime scenes, anywhere where law enforcement strictly does not want us, we don't have to be, but we feel like extra sets of eyes and ears and hands and feet

can't hurt. Certainly, especially with our technical capabilities through, you know, canine dogs, thermal drones, fixed-wing aircraft. We have a lot, you know, for a civilian nonprofit, we have a pretty good track record of recovery, and we're proud of that. And we just wanted to offer that force multiplier, but it was not requested and was turned down, ultimately. Yeah, not just not requested. You got a big fat, no, no. Brian Trasher is with us, Vice President United Cajun Navy. Have you ever heard the children's nursery rhyme?

All the King's Horses and all the Kingsmen couldn't put Humpty together again? Have you ever heard that? I sure have. And the reason I say that is because you have a window, a very brief window after a crime, a violent felony such as kidnapping Mrs. Guthrie. you have that short window to gather evidence before the crime scene is ruined, especially outside. But we saw it happen inside too while Nano stalled about bringing in the feds. You can't put it back together again.

No matter how hard you try, it's impossible. The conditions change. The scene is compromised, if not contaminated. You can't put it back together again when you were turned down. United, Cajun Navy was turned down. That scene is gone. You can't go back and fix it now, Brian. That's right.

You know, and again, like we usually refrain from openly criticizing, you know, law enforcement, but based on reports that we heard about the way the crime scene was treated and the actions in the first few hours and few days, again, we didn't think we could make anything worse. That was our opinion. But yeah, you're right. You get this far away from it, and I think they made some mistakes, and you can't put the manure back in the horse. It just doesn't work that way.

To Michael Harrigan, joining us, former FBI agent 22 years, also chief of the firearms training program at Quantico. He led the FBI's Violent Criminal Apprehension Program, VICAP. Okay. That includes unidentified human remains, the discovery and recovery. Michael, you heard my Humpty Dumpty analogy. Agree or disagree, because while you're saying that, I want you to look at your monitor. Everybody in his little sister came into that crime scene pizza was delivered to the crime scene

while Nanos was still in charge of it, while he refused to bring in the feds. I'm not just talking about the United Cajun Navy being turned down saying, yeah, yeah, we're good. They were not good. The interior and the surrounding area, the terrain have now been compromised. The interior was compromised immediately. On the screen, we're now showing you people going in and out. Journalists going right up to the front porch, taking pictures of Mrs. Guthrie's blood. I mean, no.

It was ruined, Michael. Yeah, absolutely missteps were done, forensically, procedurally. And I think that's what happens in these major cases. You come together quickly. It's got to be a multi-agency approach on these things. You've got to leverage both your federal partners, your state, your local. Everybody's got to work together as a team. And unfortunately, these things happen so quickly.

And I think what's going to come out of this case, and I think what has to come out of this case is the, is lessons learned. How can we as law enforcement, not just that individual county sheriff's office and the FBI and other agencies involved, but how can other agencies across the country see what was done, see what was done right, validate processes, but also admit and own what was done wrong because improvements are key now going forward. It's all water under the bridge. You know, these things happened, whatever missteps were done. But the beautiful, here and the benefit will be identifying those missteps so other agencies can learn and we can do better next time. So absolutely I agree with you. Missteps are made and I think in any case like

this, rapidly unfolding, major case, there's going to be misjudgments and missteps, especially when you have the benefit of the 2020 vision of hindsight. You will absolutely see things. Wow, they sure trained you at the FBI. They gave you a special class called putting perfume on the big missteps. I just call it effing it up. But that said, I was analyzing Cash Patel, the director of the FBI, but I got a theory about why he is so evasive and why he said what he said. Watch it one more time. Reuters is reporting that the ransom notes that were sent regarding Nancy Guthrie's disappearance are fake. Are you able to confirm that those have been determined to be fake?

I'm not going to comment on that. We are continuing to assist that investigation. We've always been in an assist role. It's a state matter being led by the state authorities. Thank you. Hmm. Sydney-Silvani crime stories investigative reporter. I think he's mopping up somebody else's mess.

That's from our friends at C-SPAN. Because before Patel was asked that question, Nanos had blurted out. Think on it some morning talk show that the notes just, they weren't real. So then everybody goes to Patel to clean it up. Are they real or are they not real? And he dodged it. He doesn't want to trash Nanos and say Nanos is an idiot.

He doesn't want to give away any more information. I suspect he was cleaning up after Nanos right there. He sounds very frustrated giving this no comment response, which I think goes back to, I mean, when we heard Patel saying, how they were locked out of the investigation. And now we have Nanos claiming, oh, the ransom notes are the FBI's jurisdiction. We did eat up the work and the ransom notes are their job. And so for all of this media speculation to be going on, they're real, they're not real, they're still investigating.

I think Patel is very frustrated having to kind of clean this up and keep this quiet and keep the investigation as Christine as possible. And you know what, Karen Stark? It doesn't matter that now they're saying, yeah, okay, wait, we are still investigating those notes. They, yeah, they are legitimate. Maybe they're legitimate. They're doing the backstroke. But that is not going to stop the haters that have heard what they want to hear.

The notes are fake. The first two notes are fake, i.e., somebody intimately familiar with the scene and not a kidnapper wrote the notes. The hate on the family is not going to end. And we know that, Nancy, this happens all the time with public figures. There are a group of people who are out to blame the victims who want to believe that something happened, that there's some kind of cover-up, that the family is involved, and they will look for any sign that the family has something to do with it,

which is so wrong for the family. Think about what that's like. To already be missing your mother, to have all this hope that you hope she's alive, then maybe she's not being confused, and you have people attacking you and saying that the truth is you're behind it, and this is a great big cover up.

So I can't think of anything worse for that family. If you know or think you know anything about Mrs. Guthrie's disappearance, please dial toll-free 800-225-5-324. There is a $1.2-plus million-dollar reward on the table. 800-225-5-3-24 or, if you want to remain anonymous, 520882-7463, 5208847463. We remember an American hero, Inspector Justin Lins. New York City PD, died as a result of the 911 terrorist attacks. After 30 years on the force, leaving behind wife Rita and daughter Erin, American hero, Inspector Justin Lins. Thank you to our guests, but especially to you for being with us.

Nancy Gray is signing off for tonight, but I'll see tomorrow night, and until then. Good night, friend. This is an I-heart podcast. Guaranteed human.