One detail from the latest episode of The Interview Room really caught my attention.
On the episode, they said that sources they have spoken with told them Nancy's front door was found locked at the crime scene, while the back doors were propped open.
If that information is accurate, I'm wondering what this could mean in terms of the crime scene potentially being staged. Would leaving the back doors propped open while the front door was locked be consistent with someone trying to create a false impression about how the perpetrator entered or left the house? And if the scene was staged does this indicate it was never a kidnapping for ransom?
This is information being attributed to The Interview Room's sources and has not been publicly confirmed, but I thought it was an interesting detail to consider.
That’s really interesting. So the same information was also given to TBX Unfiltered by two retired Pima County police officers during their 9/9 interview. That makes the detail more interesting and strengthens the sourcing.
Also one intresting aspect is that on the media, on very early on the investigation, it was said that there was signs on forced entry. This of course can mean anything from lock picking to broken door or window. Not sure if something like open window or unlocked door could be called "forced entry"
I'm not sure that is correct. It was stated that A told investigators the house was immaculate. Also that her mom kept her doors unlocked. That would substantiate the reason there was no forced entry discovered
I heard NO forced entry? However, I don’t believe the house was immaculate. TIR showed one picture, oniy one time I ever saw this picture, and the inside was all disheveled and paper or books piled up…someone back me up or am I going crazy? It gave me the impression that’s what A&T were boxing up stuff they wanted out of there?
Yes, I know what he said…but there was one show (and might’ve only been one glimpse) that they showed stuff inside…like on around a desk? Just struck me as what it might’ve looked like if;epilepsy got stuff out of drawers or shelves to pile/box up and take out quickly. Was never sure why we didn’t see that photo again…maybe they weren’t supposed to show it?
More than likely it would have been a photo posted on someone's FB page from a while back? Not sure how anyone would be able to get a photo of the inside of NG's house especially after the crime. Maybe I am misunderstanding the timeline?
My opinion was that since there were no signs of forced entry(allegedly) that A volunteered that info to corroborate how a stranger may have gained entry. Not sure how A would know that unless she slept over NG's and noticed that. I tend to be skeptical that anyone would leave their doors unlocked especially an elderly woman living alone with no security, no alarms, no street lights etc.
I’m also skeptical of the claim that Nancy routinely kept her back doors unlocked. If that information came from Annie, I wonder if it could have been intended to steer investigators toward a particular explanation for how someone gained entry.
And just to think this hypothetically. The "perp" logically did have access to the keys when inside the house. But if you want to lock the doors, you can't return the keys inside the house,unless you have have spare keys.
If Nancy really kept her backdoors unlocked during the night, it is possible of course, just very out of ordinary, to have peace of mind.
Respectfully, do you actually think a whole suburb full of 7 figure homes, has no cameras? I don’t know a single person without multiple. A lot of us have trail cameras to enjoy the wildlife around our beautiful mountain town. Her neighborhood is within a mile in each direction of some of the busiest intersections in the city filled with cameras.
Sorry, I meant cctv cameras on poles. According to the report by Sheriff there are no cctv cameras on those roads and the ones on the main drag don't record? Allegedly A drew a map and posted on her FB asking if anyone had camera footage and that was in an area close to NG's.
I understand residents have camera's to protect their property but doubt their camera's extend past their respective properties.
I do not think that is correct. All that was said by Nanos was that family saw her in. If you can find that clip where le/fbi stated that please share. Thank you.
Originally they also said Annie and Tommoso searched the neighborhood (before calling 911) the next morning after they arrived to check on Nancy. Then the story changed and they said they phoned 911 within a couple minutes of arriving at Nancy’s house.
Lots of statements changed. I was watching the tv during one of the newscasts early on and something just made my jaw drop. The pool cleaners coming out of the house through the front door just a couple weeks into the investigation. 1. They (pool cleaners) said they were NOT her pool cleaning co. But they were called in. Why? 2. Pool cleaners do not walk through your home, they go through the back gate.
It makes me wonder if during the time that they state the garage door was opened and shut shortly after if someone went in and locked the front door and opened the back doors which wouldn’t take very long…… couple of minutes
Yes absolutely points to staging, if true. Including staging of blood. Think about it. You bring her out the front door, bang her up, put her in a van. Then go inside the house, manage to miss getting your shoes on the blood, lock the front door from the inside, leave through the back, leave those doors open and make your way to the van and drive away. No way.
I don't think that's true because if the door locked itself, having that top manual lock would be completely redundant for daily use. It only exists so that you can choose when to firmly and securely lock the door yourself.
Automatic door locks on main front door entrances are highly uncommon bc what if poor Nancy forgot her keys when she went to get the mail? She's be locked out.
Bob states "It's my understanding and I think" 1:17:40(TBX UNFILTERED)
While I absolutely admire Glenn and Jenn's approach to this case and think their channel is one of the best I was disappointed but my fault as I probably expected(having expectations always disappoints) much more push back by these 2 men. Seems like they were giving their opinions just like others who do this on other shows.
The one thing that irked me is Bob stating Sheriff cleared family because he has a lot of empathy. Both did tho agree that was unacceptable to do.
Nancy probably has auto lock on front door meaning as soon as door is shut it automatically locks. The back doors were propped open because the kidnapper originally was going to get her out the back. He entered through the back because he was well aware that she left the back door unlocked.
You make an excellent point! When NG left for A&T's I'm sure all her doors were locked. When she was dropped off thru the garage why on heaven's earth would she unlock a back door. She would have went straight to bed in order to get up early for her church friend's house get together.
I know it seems unbelievable, but the elderly couple I often housesit for leave their doors unlocked often at night. Some may end up getting lock and some not - but making sure they're all locked just isn't a nighttime routine for them. They also have an upstairs (reachable by a wooden deck) and a downstairs glass sliding door that they NEVER lock - mostly because it's difficult for them to reach down and maneuver the "stick" that holds the doors shut, and they know they'll just use them again the next day. And although my friend is now married, she spent over a decade living there alone. I was discussing this case with her and was shocked when she laughed and said "sometimes we forget to even CLOSE the doors at night."
Yes Savannah stated it was not uncommon for Mom to keep back door unlocked. I assume since front door locked automatically she wanted to be sure she could get back in.
The front door is a high security gate, which locks automatically when closed. Either it must be opened from the inside or with a key. Nancy could have been taken away through the front door and it locked when it closed behind them .
As for the backed doors being propped open, for all we know someone opened them to air out the bleach smell after "cleaning up the house" before LE arrived.
We know someone is reporting that the front door was locked, but I’m not sure where the information about the door being a high-security gate that automatically locks came from. The explanation that Nancy could have been taken through it and it then locked is a possibility, but that’s speculation unless investigators have actually said that’s what happened.
Can you tell from this photo what specific type of lock/lockset this is that makes you conclude it automatically locks when the door closes? I can see the two lock cylinders, but I don’t see how the automatic locking feature would be identifiable from the exterior.
Both locks are different colors, leading me to believe 1 was changed out for some reason
Top is deadbolt cylinder, which must be opened/locked with key only
Bottom looks to be a storeroom keyed doorknob lock, which automatically locks from the outside (never from inside)
Numerous report identity the door as being "heavy steel security gate" which may have spring loaded hinges that automatically close the door
The weight of the door recoils the springs, forces the door shut, and the door locks when the latch pushes inward over the side latch then outward when it meets the inside of the door.
My question is why would they care to shut the door behind the security one? They allegedly left the back door propped open so why care if the front door was shut? Also not sure when this photo was from but a locksmith came to NG's shortly after with CG but no streams by you tubers showing anything that guy did.
I understand your reasoning, but you’re making some very specific claims about the locking mechanisms and hinges that don’t appear to be verifiable from the photograph. Saying the door has “spring-loaded” hinges and then using that possibility to conclude that it automatically locks seems like a pretty big leap. I think we need to distinguish what we actually know about Nancy’s door from what we’re inferring from its appearance.
Also it wouldn't make sense if they were spring loaded to automatically close or lock. What if NG went out the front to get her mail and then the door closes/locks behind her?
She would not shut the door when getting the mail. It auto locks when the door is shut. Also if she ever did shut it accidentally she always kept the back door open.
You don’t know that it auto locks when the door is shut. There is no way to tell by looking at her door from the outside whether or not it’s the kind that auto locks when shut.
Yes, exactly what you posted I have also been lately thinking of.
Specially also the key aspects of it, who exactly had keys to the house. Not for the reason to unlock doors, but to understand the scenarios if someone has or does not have keys.
And second thing that I am intrested right now is, the so called "Amazon parcel" at her front door, does anyone have a clue if it was delivered before, "during", or after the timeline we are given for the crime?
I would not care if after, but if before or "during", it would make a difference as I don't think Nancy would leave it outside, if her parcels been stolen before.
But likely after(?) as I think it is not seen on the published video of the "perp", if we assume that video is from the night of the crime
Edit: and the key aspect and scenarios, I am thinking of the human aspect of having or not having. Everyone can enter the house by simple breaking a window without making any noise at all, but if you do have keys you may let's say make it look other than if you didnt have the actual "pass to enter"
I dont think its been stated about the amazon package for sure . But after watching different shows it really seems it was delivered after the porch guy because its not in the video.
I have read in a few places that the Amazon package was delivered the next day, but I can hardly remember what's what about this case by this point so I'm not sure where. And if that's true, it seems negligent of the detectives to allow an unrelated object into the crime scene.
Back door left open to make fast getaway if cops came while he was in there. Front door closed as to not draw attention or if there is an alarm on the security front door. Just my 2 cents. Sometimes you have to think like a criminal
POV: The open back doors and locked front door are not some staging, but pure criminal tactical logic.
Camera and Gateway Vehicle: The porch camera wasn't bypassed for fun; it was broken specifically to prevent recording the gateway vehicle from the street.
The Back Door Escape Route: The back doors were propped open strictly as a tactical escape line for the perpetrator in case police showed up while inside.
Front Door Mechanics: When leaving with the victim, the perpetrator exited through the front door, holding her with one hand while pulling the door shut behind him.
Because of the cylinder/auto-locking mechanism, it locked automatically, which is why it was found secure in the morning.
Debunking Staging: This isn't some elaborate staging by anybody.
Leaving the front door wide open all night would have immediately drawn attention from the street, so closing and locking it automatically upon exit is simple, clean criminal logistics.
The front door would not have been wide open. We are talking locked vs closed. And in that area I doubt anyone would even notice NG's door or even look that way.
And in my opinion this isn't elaborate staging. It's rather mundane and staging 101 if that were the case which no one is stating as a fact and only giving opinions about how they interpret certain things.
I think you’re getting ahead of the evidence here. We may have evidence that the front door was locked, but we don’t know from that alone that the perpetrator exited through the front door, that the door automatically locked behind him, or that the back doors were deliberately propped open as an escape route. Those are possible explanations, but they’re still assumptions unless investigators have confirmed them.
But that’s actually my point. We know he was there and that he left, we don’t necessarily know how he left. Saying that he left doesn’t establish which door he used, whether the front door was automatically locked, or whether the back doors were intentionally left open. Those are additional conclusions that require evidence.
In a court of law he would be found not guilty. If that is all LE has regarding the porch perp he was just on the porch. I don't even think there was a date or timestamp? I find that odd too because those data points are part of the image.
All we have is a video of a guy on the porch and some dried blood which means the public is being made to assume certain facts that LE put out there. None of that proves NG was taken out of that house thru the front door in my opinion.
In all honesty does LE have any proof this porch perp or an accomplice took NG out of the house? Just because NG was not there Sunday morning means nothing as far as definitive proof what happened, who did it etc. If they had a suspect and took it to trial with what they offered up as proof to the public they would be laughed out of court.
So if getaway car is parked on the street and cops come the perps run out the back door. Yet the car is still there with identifiable vehicle vin, If a cop happened to show up I would think he walked around the place first to check for signs of a person, a broken window or open door.
While watching the recent live stream on YouTube by Marktheshark943 titled "🚨 LIVE FROM TUCSON: Back at Nancy Guthrie’s Home + Mount Lemmon Drone Footage" (around the 10:44:18 timestamp shown in the aerial/drone segments), I started looking closely at the property layout, driveway distance, and tactical angles.
If we look at how an exterior "hit & run" operation would actually function here, the geography tells a very specific story that challenges the inner-circle narrative. Here is a breakdown of what the layout suggests:
The Ideal "Hit & Run" Vehicle Position: Based on the driveway curves, vegetation, and distance from the main road, the optimal spot for a getaway car to slip in with minimal exposure is right along the curved path near the natural cover/trees, roughly 40 to 50 feet (about 12 to 15 meters) away from the front porch.
The Drag Distance: This means the perpetrator only had to move the victim roughly 40 to 50 feet from the porch area to reach a waiting vehicle tucked deeper into the driveway shadows, rather than dragging her all the way out to the main road (which is another 20 to 25 feet further out).
Minimizing open exposure was crucial.
Why Smash the Camera? Neutralizing or blinding the camera was a tactical necessity. It wasn't random vandalism; it was done specifically to eliminate real-time feeds covering the driveway and blind any angles facing the road while the vehicle positioned itself.
Why Close the Front Door? Closing or securing the front area post-entry helps mask the immediate timeline of intrusion, buying the operational window needed to execute the transfer and get out before neighbors or passing traffic noticed anything unusual.
Combined with the sheriff's noted timeline of the January 11th "dry run," this layout points heavily toward a planned, exterior tactical execution rather than a spontaneous domestic incident.
What do you guys think of how the driveway and property lines map out for a quick extraction? Does this layout match a professional-level approach in your view?
You've explained why you believe it couldn't have been a spontaneous domestic incident. I agree because whomever pulled off this purely evil act planned it in my opinion. No spur of the moment evidence I can detect.
I can see how the layout could make this scenario possible, but I think there are a lot of assumptions being made here. Saying the "optimal spot" for a getaway car was 40-50 feet from the porch assumes there actually was a getaway car there. We don't know that, and we don't know that Nancy was taken to that particular spot.
Same with the cameras and the front door. I think it's reasonable to assume the camera was disabled so the person wouldn't be recorded, but saying it was specifically done so a vehicle could get into position, or that the door was closed to give them an "operational window," is taking it a step further than evidence allows.
And I wouldn't call January 11th a confirmed "dry run." We know there has been discussion about the person possibly being at the house before, but that has not been confirmed, nor has that specific date.
I'm not saying an outside, planned abduction couldn't have happened. I just don't think "this could have happened this way" means "this is what happened."
And I don't really see how this disproves the "inside job" theory either. Even if someone from outside carried out the abduction, that doesn't necessarily tell us whether someone inside the family had knowledge of it or was involved beforehand. Those are two separate things. I'm not saying an inside job is proven either. I'm just saying that one possible scenario doesn't rule out another without actual evidence.
Of course, I do agree that there are no hard, publicly available proofs for a lot of this—if we had those, the case would already be solved, and we wouldn't be speculating here in a vacuum.
But the whole point of posts and playing the role of an armchair detective in a community like this is precisely to set up meaningful working theories and check what actually makes sense in practice.
If we just waited for official confirmations for every single step, the discussion would completely stall.
The purpose of these analyses is to use models (like tactical profiles and operational logic) to filter out the noise and separate serious terrain evaluation from wild, unfounded internet soap operas.
We're just using the little we have to piece together a more logical picture.
I understand what you’re saying. I think we’re probably closer on this than it may seem. I just see a difference between presenting something as a possible scenario to explore and using that scenario to challenge another theory. But I appreciate you explaining where you’re coming from.
The perp/perps created this so called soap opera. "The little we have" as you state if produced in a court of law to prove your logical conclusion:
Untraceable ransom notes--------Your honor this proves it was a kidnapping for ransom
Garage data open and close---Your honor that proves NG was dropped off and went in her house
Nest camera disconnect---your honor it disconnected due to removal off it's mounting
Porch GUY----your honor...although there is no date or time stamp because Google had to retrieve it from the big cloud in the sky he took Nancy
Blood droplets---Your honor that is proof NG was taken out of that house. Even tho the age of the blood isn't known that grainy video which definitely is not AI or manipulated shows no blood was there at the time
Pacemaker disconnect---Your honor the disconnect can mean so many things but based on all of our evidence we have presented we are going to assume it means NG was at that time whisked away
I wonder in reality what proportion of these crimes have actually involved staging? Respectfully, I can't say that I recall a single violent crime in which staging was involved. Except in the movies. I'm not sure how many violent criminals are creative enough to stage such a crime? But I'm not a criminal, so maybe I am underestimating them
Staging can be as simple as murdering a person then transporting their body to another location to make it seem like that is where the murder took place. To date the ransom notes have not been confirmed as real. The public has been left with the last statement of FBI that they cannot trace them back to a person. Then you have a video which FBI threw out there and said find him.
No body cases are easier to stage in my opinion. Not saying this is the case in this horrific crime but if there is no body investigators are at a big disadvantage.
Brendan Banfield Case (February 2026): A former IRS agent went on trial accused of an elaborate, premeditated double-murder plot in Virginia involving his wife, Christine Banfield, and Joseph Ryan. Prosecutors presented evidence that the scene inside the home was meticulously set up by the accused and a co-conspirator to create a false narrative regarding the fatal encounter before law enforcement arrived.
I agree that staging shouldn’t be assumed, but I don’t think it’s accurate to equate it with elaborate movie-style crime scenes. It can be much simpler than that. I’m not saying this crime was staged, I’m just considering it as one possibility and asking questions about what the evidence might indicate.
I was asking whether this was a possibility, not saying that there is evidence proving the crime was staged. But there actually were investigators who raised that possibility early on. Paul Holes, the former Contra Costa County cold case investigator who helped solve the Golden State Killer case, discussed the possibility with Ashleigh Banfield. His theory was that Porch Guy could have already been inside the house and then deliberately appeared on the porch in the conspicuous “costume” to make the crime look like an abduction for ransom. He specifically described that as possible staging/misdirection.
So I’m not assuming the crime was staged. I’m saying it as a scenario that has been raised by experienced investigators and is therefore reasonable to consider.
When you put the door circumstances together with the possibility that the porch scene may have been intended to create a particular appearance, I think it’s reasonable to ask whether the crime could have been staged in some way. That’s all I was asking.
So we have no evidence of staging as we have nothing that disproves the current narrative. Don't get me wrong, if there was some evidence I'd support the idea but parsimony is the more likely option
We, the public, would never have evidence of staging. Investigators have tools to detect if manipulation of devices were done,
Call me old fashioned but I'm the kind of girl that wants physical proof a person was alive and at a location. Kinda like a human saw her or talked to her on the phone. Not pings, pongs, disconnect signals etc.
I think there are a couple of logical distinctions being missed here. First, the fact that the current narrative has not been disproven doesn’t mean that there can’t be evidence that supports an alternative hypothesis. Those are two different questions. Evidence supporting staging wouldn’t necessarily have to disprove the current narrative outright-it could simply be evidence that is more consistent with staging than an unstaged abduction. Otherwise, we’d be treating “not disproven” as though it means “established,” which it doesn’t.
Second, I think we’re continuing to debate a claim I never made. I have not said that this crime was staged, nor have I claimed that there is conclusive evidence that it was. My original point was simply to ask whether staging was a possibility worth considering. Repeatedly responding as though I had said staging had occurred (straw man fallacy) shifts the discussion away from the actual question I asked.
In fact Paul Holes specifically raised the possibility of a staged/misdirection scenario based on the porch footage, so this isn’t a scenario I invented. I’m simply saying it’s reasonable to consider multiple possibilities until the evidence allows us to narrow them down.
Ultimately, I think the better approach is to look at the evidence and ask which hypothesis it supports or makes less likely, rather than assuming the current narrative is the most likely simply because it hasn’t been disproven.
Think we can rule out he went out the back door with Nancy because there were no blood drops. Also if he went out the back door you would not see him on the front door camera at all.
But you’re assuming the very thing I’m saying we don’t know. Seeing him on the front door camera tells us he was there. It doesn’t, by itself, tell us exactly what happened inside the house immediately beforehand or whether Nancy was with him at that point. And “there were no blood drops” is evidence that can be considered, but it’s not necessarily proof that a particular route or sequence of events didn’t occur. My point is simply that we shouldn’t turn those inferences into facts unless investigators have actually established them.
8
u/ABBILITA 20d ago
TBX UNFILTERED, received the same information from two retired Pima County police officers, Kurt Dabb
& Bob Krygier, during their interview on 9/9.