A forensic psychologist has cast serious doubt on two purported ransom letters in the Nancy Guthrie kidnapping case, even as investigators release the notes publicly in hopes someone recognizes the writer.
Dr. Kris Mohandie, a forensic psychologist who reviewed the letters tied to the disappearance of the 84-year-old Tucson, Arizona, woman, told Fox News Digital he believes neither letter is genuine. Guthrie, the mother of "Today" show co-host Savannah Guthrie, vanished from her home at the beginning of February, and the case has produced more questions than answers in the six months since.
The Pima County Sheriff's Department released the grammar and punctuation of the two notes on Friday, July 31, asking the public to study the writing patterns and help identify the author. But Mohandie's assessment points in a grimmer direction: he suspects the entire kidnapping narrative is a cover story for something far less elaborate.
Two letters, four days apart, tell contradictory stories
The first note surfaced on February 2, sent to Tucson CBS affiliate KOLD-TV. It demanded that Savannah Guthrie pay a ransom in bitcoin by February 9 or her mother would be killed. The letter claimed Nancy Guthrie was alive and safe, and it listed a demand of "$4 million USD." It referenced email as the preferred method of communication and included details about Guthrie's Apple Watch and a broken floodlight near her property.
Four days later, on February 6, a second letter arrived, this time sent directly to the Guthrie family. Its tone had shifted entirely. The writer now claimed Nancy had "perished shortly after she was taken," blaming her death on pre-existing health conditions the abductors had failed to anticipate. The letter included what the Washington Examiner described as a claim that she was "buried in nature."
The second note also contained an apology. A passage read: "We did not fully grasp the seriousness of her physical condition. We never intended to hurt her, that was not our intention. She perished shortly after she was taken."
That whiplash, from a $4 million ransom demand to a confession of accidental death in under a week, is part of what raised red flags for Mohandie.
Mohandie flags pronoun shifts and a suspicious audience
Mohandie zeroed in on specific problems with the first letter. The author used the pronoun "we" before shifting to "I," a pattern Mohandie found telling. And the note was sent to a news outlet rather than directly to the family, an unusual choice for someone genuinely holding a hostage and seeking payment.
He told Fox News Digital:
"I certainly question the legitimacy of the so-called ransom note in which the individual is sending it to a news outlet, saying this will be a ransom, so on and so forth, talks about 'we' and then breaks into 'I' in terms of pronouns. There are a lot of things wrong with that ransom note, and it raised a lot of questions for me of veracity."
The letters did contain details that were not widely known to the public, the Apple Watch reference and the broken floodlight. Investigators had noted that those non-public details initially renewed their focus on the letters as potentially authentic. But Mohandie was not persuaded.
"I don't make much out of those two details," he said. "They seem to be details that inadvertently could have gotten to somebody, and so that's not enough for me to say, this is something only the killer would know."
That assessment cuts against the possibility that only someone directly involved in the crime could have written the notes. If the details leaked, through first responders, neighbors, or early media coverage, then an opportunist could have assembled a convincing-sounding letter without any real connection to the disappearance.
One imposter already pleaded guilty
The case has already produced at least one confirmed fraud. Derrick Callella sent imposter ransom demands to the Guthrie family in early February and has since pleaded guilty. A judge ordered Callella into inpatient treatment before sentencing. That episode demonstrated how quickly bad actors can exploit a high-profile disappearance, and how easily false leads can consume investigative resources.
Callella's scheme was separate from the two letters now under scrutiny. But the fact that one person already fabricated ransom demands in this case makes Mohandie's skepticism about the remaining letters harder to dismiss.
Federal law enforcement sources have themselves been divided. Last month, some investigators told Fox News they were confident the ransom demands were bogus. Others remained cautious, unwilling to rule them out entirely. That internal disagreement within the bureau has been a persistent feature of the investigation.
Mohandie's theory: a burglary, not a kidnapping
Mohandie offered a blunt hypothesis about what happened to Nancy Guthrie. He does not believe she was abducted for ransom. He believes she was the victim of a crime that spiraled beyond the perpetrator's control.
"Unfortunately, I think this case is a simple matter of a burglary gone wrong and then attempts to cover things up," he said. "But that's a hypothesis and good investigators are investigating all hypotheses and following leads, and I think they're doing their job here."
If Mohandie is right, the ransom letters are not evidence of a kidnapping ring. They are a distraction, either from an opportunist or from the perpetrator trying to muddy the trail. Either way, the letters pulled attention and resources toward a kidnapping framework that may never have applied.
The only known suspect in the case remains an unidentified man captured on Nest doorbell video near Guthrie's home. The FBI described him as approximately 5 feet 9 to 5 feet 10 inches tall, with an average build, carrying a black Ozark Trail backpack. Six months later, he has not been identified. More than $1.2 million in reward money remains unclaimed.
Why investigators released the notes anyway
Even as he doubted the letters' authenticity, Mohandie supported the Pima County Sheriff's Department's decision to release them. He pointed to historical precedent.
"I understand why law enforcement needs to investigate these as potential leads, and it is a strategy that has worked," he said. "You look at Ted Kaczynski and putting that out there on the Unabomber case is what led to it being resolved. So they need to put that out there. Maybe somebody does recognize something unique in these writings."
The Pima County Sheriff's Department framed the release in similar terms. The department said it believed the "distinctive linguistic characteristics may be recognizable to someone who knows or has interacted with the notes' writer," Just The News reported.
KOLD-TV, the Tucson CBS affiliate that received the first note, had withheld its contents at the FBI's direction for months. Jessica Bobula, the station's news director, told the AP that the station "notified authorities and has shared only what the FBI has released about the notes." That deliberate suppression was designed to preserve the FBI's ability to authenticate any future communications from the same source.
Early in the case, then-special agent in charge Heith Janke of the FBI's Phoenix field office sat down with Guthrie's adult children, including Savannah Guthrie, to record a video response to the first ransom note. Savannah Guthrie's recorded plea was direct: "We received your message and we understand. We beg you now to return our mother to us.... This is very valuable to us, and we will pay."
That response reflected a moment when investigators were still treating the kidnapping-for-ransom scenario as a live possibility. Savannah Guthrie's emotional plea now reads differently in light of Mohandie's assessment, and in light of the second letter's claim that her mother was already dead before the family even recorded it.
Six months, no answers, and a $1.2 million reward no one has claimed
Nancy Guthrie has been missing since the beginning of February. Investigators have pursued digital trails, doorbell footage, ransom letters, and at least one confirmed imposter. The sheriff's department has pointed to DNA evidence as a potential breakthrough. None of it has produced an arrest or a recovery.
Mohandie summed up his approach simply: "A good investigation keeps an open mind. It really does."
Open minds are fine. But six months into a case with a $1.2 million reward, a guilty imposter, an unidentified suspect on camera, and two letters that may be pure fiction, what this family needs is not more open-mindedness, it is results.
