TUCSON, Ariz. — A 42-year-old California man has pleaded guilty to sending fraudulent ransom demands to the family of Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of “Today” show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, who has been missing from her Tucson, Arizona, home since February 1, federal prosecutors announced Thursday.

Derrick Callella, of California, entered guilty pleas to two counts of harassment using a telecommunication device, admitting in court that he called and sent text messages to members of the Guthrie family on February 4, demanding a transfer of bitcoin in exchange for Nancy Guthrie’s return. He faces up to two years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000 at his sentencing, which has been scheduled for September.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona confirmed the plea and released details of what Callella admitted to in court.

“Callella acknowledged that he knew an earlier ransom demand had been made,” the prosecutor’s office said in its announcement. “Callella also admitted that his actions were meant to harass the family by seeking information about the investigation into the missing person’s disappearance.”

That framing, which describes Callella’s motivation as twofold, obtaining information and harassing the family, illustrates the particular cruelty of fake ransom demands in a case already defined by genuine anguish. By contacting the Guthrie family directly and demanding cryptocurrency within days of Nancy’s disappearance, Callella added a layer of false urgency and false hope to a family already under extraordinary strain, while simultaneously seeking to extract details about an active federal investigation.

Callella is not the only person arrested in connection with fraudulent communications in the case. Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos confirmed that multiple individuals had been taken into custody following fake ransom note submissions, speaking publicly about the problem during a radio appearance on Tucson’s 1030 KVOI AM.

“I think the FBI has done a number of arrests for false or fake ransom notes,” Nanos told host Bill Buckmaster. “It is a shame that these types of events occur. People have great interest and that’s good because it helps us but then it gets really abused. People who call in fake ransom notes, people who claim for the sake of media and the family, they get out and disturb, in this case, an entire neighbourhood.”

The Callella plea represents the first confirmed criminal conviction arising from the wave of fraudulent communications that has complicated the Guthrie investigation since its earliest days. Callella had initially pleaded not guilty to the charges following his arrest in early February, shortly after FBI special agent Heith Janke disclosed at a February 5 news conference that someone had been taken into custody for sending what Janke described as an “imposter ransom demand.” The guilty plea this week resolves that case ahead of a September sentencing hearing.

The plea comes at a moment of significant confusion about the broader landscape of ransom communications in the Guthrie case. An anonymous FBI official told Reuters earlier this week that all three of the most widely reported ransom notes had been assessed as not credible, a characterization that prompted swift pushback from other law enforcement sources. The FBI’s Phoenix field office then issued a clarifying statement acknowledging that some communications had been dismissed as fraudulent while others remained under active investigation.

“The FBI and its task force partners have received several ransom notes over the course of this investigation,” the Phoenix FBI office said in a social media statement. “Some have been deemed to be extortion attempts without legitimacy. Other ransom demands may potentially be legitimate and are still being investigated as such. This case continues to be investigated as a kidnapping for ransom case.”

That clarification, which maintained the investigation’s characterization as a kidnapping for ransom case while distinguishing between fake notes and potentially genuine ones, added nuance to what had briefly appeared to be a complete dismissal of all ransom communications. Callella’s guilty plea fits squarely into the category the FBI described as an extortion attempt without legitimacy, a deliberate fraud by someone seeking to exploit a family’s anguish rather than someone with genuine knowledge of Nancy Guthrie’s whereabouts.

Savannah Guthrie had addressed the problem of fake ransom notes publicly months ago, speaking on “Today” before her return to full-time presenting duties after a period of leave following her mother’s disappearance. Her comments at the time struck a careful balance between acknowledging the harm such notes cause and maintaining hope about communications she believed were genuine.

“There are a lot of different notes, I think, that came,” Savannah Guthrie said on air in March. “I think most of them, it’s my understanding, are not real. I didn’t see them. But the person that would send a fake ransom note really has to look deeply at themselves to a family in pain.”

She added a distinction that the FBI’s subsequent investigation has helped clarify: “But I believe the two notes that we received that we responded to, I tend to believe those are real.”

The Callella case underscores how high-profile missing persons investigations, particularly those involving well-known public figures, can attract opportunistic individuals who either seek to profit from the situation or simply exploit it for information or attention. Federal authorities have made clear they are treating any fraudulent interference in the Guthrie investigation seriously, and Thursday’s guilty plea signals that such conduct carries real criminal consequences rather than merely drawing a brief investigation.

The Pima County Sheriff’s Department, which is leading the broader investigation of Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance alongside the FBI, has confirmed that every tip and lead continues to be taken seriously and forwarded to detectives working the case. No suspects or persons of interest have been publicly named in connection with her actual disappearance, which now stretches more than five months without a confirmed resolution. The FBI’s reward of $100,000 for information leading to Guthrie’s location or to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for her disappearance remains active, as does the Guthrie family’s own separately offered reward of $1 million.

The shares of Hindustan Zinc jumped more than 3% on Friday, extending sharp gains for the second consecutive session and adding around Rs 6,815 crore to its market value as soaring silver prices, weaker dollar, and Q1 business update boosted market sentiment.

Hindustan Zinc shares jumped over 3% to trade at Rs 544.80 apiece on NSE on Friday morning. This is the highest level seen by the stock in more than a week.

Dollar tumbles

The US dollar slipped towards what may be its biggest weekly loss since April on Friday after weaker-than-expected nonfarm payrolls and private payrolls data tempered concerns around inflation and higher-for-longer interest rates. The dollar index, which measures the greenback against a basket of currencies including the yen and the euro, was roughly 0.2% lower at 100.70 after a 0.5% dip on Thursday. It is now down 0.6% for the week, the biggest weekly drop since early April.

A weaker dollar supports metal prices, boosting metal stocks. As a result, the sharp surge in Hindustan Zinc’s share price today comes amid an overall uptrend in metal stocks, tracking the drop in the dollar’s strength. The Nifty Metal index gained around 1% to 12,605.80, as seen at around 11 am.

Silver prices soar

As a result of the cooling expectations of the Fed’s rate hike, silver prices surged. Silver futures with September expiry on the Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) jumped nearly Rs 5,000 per kilogram (over 2%) to cross Rs 2.38 lakh per kilogram.

Silver futures with December expiry meanwhile gained 2.5% to Rs 2,44,678 per kg. Hindustan Zinc is India’s largest producer of zinc, lead, and silver. The company operates fully integrated mining and smelting facilities across Rajasthan and Uttarakhand. It accounts for nearly 80% of India’s primary zinc production and is among the world’s top 10 silver producers. The company’s operations include underground mines, captive power plants, and smelting facilities, ensuring self-sufficiency in raw materials and energy.

Hindustan Zinc’s Q1 business update

Hindustan Zinc on Thursday released its provisional business update for the April-June quarter of FY27. The Vedanta Group company reported its highest-ever first quarter mined metal production for the fifth consecutive year at 268 kt, driven mainly by better grades.

Its saleable metal output increased 4% to 260 kilo tonnes, while refined zinc output increased 6% to 213 kt during the quarter under review.

Also Read | Technology to be central to Hindustan Zinc’s next phase of growth
Hindustan Zinc’s silver output, however, declined 0.4% to 149 tonnes during the first quarter of FY27. Wind power meanwhile fell 1% to 133 million units during the quarter.

Hindustan Zinc share price

Hindustan Zinc shares have gained more than 4% in one week but declined around 12% in one month. The stock has overall gained 21% in one year.In the longer term, the shares of Hindustan Zinc have delivered 74% returns over three years and 59% in five years. The company currently has a market capitalisation of nearly Rs 2.28 lakh crore.

Also Read | Govt lines up PSU stake sales to cushion budget hit from oil; LIC, Hindustan Zinc among 8 companies in focus

(With inputs from agencies)

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)

This article was written by

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of XOM either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This article was written by

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

The shares of Sumitomo Chemical India rallied sharply by around 11% on Friday, with the stock on track to record its biggest single-day surge since September 2024, following a key partnership by its parent company’s Korean subsidiary and heavy trading volumes.

The shares of the company, which is associated with agrochemicals, biopesticides, feed activities, household insecticides and animal nutrition sectors, soared to Rs 488.65 apiece on the NSE on Friday.

Why are Sumitomo Chemical India shares up today?

The sharp surge in Sumitomo Chemical India shares comes after its Japanese parent, Sumitomo Chemical, said that its Korean subsidiary, Dongwoo Fine-Chem, has signed a joint venture agreement with Samsung Electro-Mechanics to establish a joint venture company to engage in the business of glass core substrates for advanced semiconductor packages.

“In recent years, driven by the growing adoption of generative AI, expanding data centre investments, and rising demand for high-performance computing, semiconductors have been required to achieve even greater integration and lower power consumption. As a result, semiconductor package substrates are also needed to support further increases in size and density. This has led to glass core substrates garnering attention as a technology that supports next-generation semiconductor packages,” the company said in a press release.

Also read: Gujarat accelerates semiconductor ambitions as Sumitomo Chemical weighs deeper investment

Glass core substrates are next-generation semiconductor package substrates which are characterised by excellent rigidity, dimensional stability, low warpage and low thermal expansion, which contribute to larger package sizes, improved reliability and higher-density wiring, the company said. “In particular, AI-related semiconductors are expected to see even greater package enlargement and higher density going forward, and glass core substrates, which are a promising option well suited to these requirements, are expected to experience a full-scale market launch,” it added.
Sumitomo Chemical said that the new company to be developed as part of the joint venture is scheduled to establish a supply system by the second half of the fiscal year 2027 with a share capital of KRW 482,100 million.

Sumitomo Chemical India stock performance

The sharp surge in Sumitomo Chemical India’s share price also comes amid heavy volumes. More than 123 lakh shares of the company worth around Rs 589 crore have already been traded, as per data on the NSE at 12.45 pm.
The stock has gained around 10% over the past week but is down nearly 1% over the past month. It is up about 2% so far in 2026. Over the longer term, it has fallen 9% in the past year, while rising 10% over three years and 24% over five years. The company’s current market capitalisation is nearly Rs 23,747 crore.

Also read: Hitachi Energy, GE Vernova, Siemens Energy, other power equipment stocks crash up to 10%. Here’s why

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)

For too long, Welsh economic policy has been dominated by the politics of representation rather than the discipline of delivery

In the musical Hamilton, Lin-Manuel Miranda gives Aaron Burr a whole song built on a single frustration: that the bargains that shape a nation are struck not in public but behind closed doors, and among a handful of people who have been granted a seat at the table.

Burr’s complaint is being left outside, desperate to be in the “room where it happens” and it is one of the oldest truths in politics, namely that influence flows to whoever is in that room, and that everyone else can only guess at what was decided on their behalf. But the more interesting question is rarely who is in the room but whether the right people are in it at all.

For 27 years, Wales has had devolution, its own economic strategies, advisory groups, and endless consultations. Yet throughout that period, one remarkably consistent feature of Welsh economic policy has been that the same familiar business organisations have been invited into the same rooms as ministers to offer broadly similar views on the same persistent problems.

A range of business membership bodies, employer groups and professional networks have all played a part in that process, and it would be unfair to suggest that they have not done useful work, because many of them represent genuine concerns, and act as a bridge between ministers, officials and the business community at times when government needs to hear directly from those operating in the real economy.

But after more than a quarter of a century of devolved economic policy, and after repeated strategies promising stronger growth, better productivity and a more resilient private sector, we have a right to ask some uncomfortable questions about the system that has been created and the voices we have allowed to dominate it.

This is not a criticism of any one organisation, nor is it an argument that representative bodies have no place in policymaking, as they clearly do. The issue is more fundamental, as representation is not the same as leadership and being present in the machinery of government is not the same as changing the economy’s performance outside it.

The danger for Wales is that we have spent too long assuming that, because business organisations have been invited to sit on a panel to comment on economic policy, business itself has therefore been properly involved in reshaping the country’s future.

The truth is far more complicated, and many representative organisations are, by their nature, cautious institutions as they must reflect a wide range of interests, avoid alienating too many of their members, and usually gravitate towards the lowest common denominator rather than the sharpest edge of economic change.

Indeed, the very characteristics that make these organisations acceptable to government can also make them insufficient for the task now facing Wales.

They are respectable, familiar, structured and consultative, but those are not always the qualities needed to challenge the economic challenges facing Wales, and it is likely that most of the same bodies that have supported the Labour Government for more than a quarter of a century will be sitting down with the new Plaid Cymru Enterprise Minister over the next few weeks to say much of the same things they did to his predecessor.

Some will argue that this is the realpolitik of doing business in Wales, but what has it achieved? Where are the organisations prepared to push harder, speak more directly, and challenge the comfortable assumptions that have underpinned economic policy for too long?

Where are those who, after decades of public investment in skills, infrastructure, innovation and enterprise support, question why we still do not have enough firms capable of competing seriously in the UK and global markets?

Indeed, the question is not whether business should continue to have a voice – of course it should – but it is less likely to represent the founders still outside the system, especially the disruptive entrepreneurs who should be at the heart of any serious economic development strategy.

And yet it is precisely those people and those businesses that Wales needs far more of, and the next phase of Welsh economic development cannot be built solely around organisations whose primary function is to explain the business concerns of a small number of firms to government.

For too long, Welsh economic policy has been dominated by the politics of representation rather than the discipline of delivery, and it seems very few people have been asking serious questions about why Wales still produces too few high-growth firms, why ambitious founders often look outside Wales for finance and networks, and why public investment still too often fails to generate lasting private-sector momentum.

This is not an argument for excluding existing organisations from the debate but one for rebalancing it, because whilst the established representative bodies have knowledge, members and experience, Wales also needs those business voices that are constructive but uncomfortable, collaborative but demanding, practical but ambitious.

So here is a simple test of whether anything has genuinely changed under a new government. Rather than just having talks with the usual bodies, the minister could, within his first hundred days, bring together the founders and chief executives of Wales’s most 100 innovative and entrepreneurial companies for a summit built around one question: what would it take to double the number of Welsh businesses scaling past £10m over the next four years? Not a consultation but a working session of the people building real growth, many of whom have never once been invited into the room.

Given the way that the civil service in Wales seems terrified of anyone with a radical idea, I expect the comfortable consensus to continue as it always has, with the same familiar faces sitting around the same table, but I would be delighted to be proved wrong, and it would be a truly new start for devolution in Wales if those in power were willing to fill the room where it happens with the incredible businesses that are building the country’s future.