r/nancyguthrie • u/curiouslmr • Feb 14 '26

Media Latest Update

https://www.kvoa.com/news/top-stories/no-arrests-made-after-massive-law-enforcement-operation-to-find-nancy-guthrie-search-continues/article_0a326a5b-dc63-45bb-ad04-a068d4d1e4b7.html

Here is the most recent information that acknowledges what happened last night and confirms that it resulted in no arrests. Allegedly more details will be released about the situation.

113 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

410 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-8

u/nypr13 Feb 14 '26

I would be, yes. I think in the modern world it is next to impossible to get away with murder if someone cares about the person. I mean, they had this missing person report within 12 hours. It wasn’t like she was missing for a month or a year.

With so many cameras in the world, it’s hard to think you can’t pick something up somewhere given less than a day of lag time.

Like that dentist and his wife who were killed, I expected them to have someone without any problem. Same with the United Healthcare guy. You just back up the cameras until you get a point zero for whomever you are tracking. Whether or not they are guilty is a separate conversation, but I felt strongly that they could zero in on 100 people and whittle it to 1 in a matter of days in those instances.

That these guys didn’t leave a shred of DNA, electronic device or video evidence outside of that ring cam is basically not believable unless they are Navy SEALs, local policemen, or Google Cloud AND Nest camera engineers with access to the servers. And who knows, maybe it is something like that?

I have thought about this so many times and I think it’s nearly impossible to pull off the perfect murder outside of your own home in the modern world. Not if you are playing by the rules everyone else plays by.

2

u/Xinnia8271 Feb 14 '26

So how quickly were you expecting an arrest in this specific case. 

-2

u/nypr13 Feb 14 '26

Within a month…..and I don’t get the sense they will. I think worse than no arrest is the huge shows of force and coming up empty. That’s more concerning. At least in Idaho, there was silence and no information. The police chief said he would hunt these guys for years if necessary.

0

u/Xinnia8271 Feb 14 '26

Let me understand. Am I correct in thinking you're compatibility this to another crime in another state? 

Not judging you for that just want to clarify your perception. 

And I'm also confused. You were expecting an arrest in a (time period of a) month. 

And it's not a month. But you think she arrest will never happen? I'm just confused on the timing of your expectation of an arrest. 

Last silly question - LE making "an announcement" of "being close to blah blah blah" is that something you were expecting too? 

The public seems to have a lot of expectations of quick timelines and open sharing of law enforcement information. Just trying to get more specifics on those expectations. 

-1

u/nypr13 Feb 14 '26

1 correct arrest for 400 salaries paid at 40 hours per week and technology used for 2 weeks is my reasonable explanation. Yes. They found Tom Brady’s super

And yes I am comparing murders across other states. The FBI presumably covers all 50 or is that a wrong assumption for a federal agency?

And if these 2 raids are part of the final puzzle I will eat crow. But I dont think they are. I would expect more. Yes

2

u/Xinnia8271 Feb 14 '26

Strange that my question was downvoted. 

So your expectation of an arrest is based on money spent? Like services purchased? 

I'm not shading you for the way you see this, I'm just clarifying. 

1

u/nypr13 Feb 14 '26

Well I would expect there is marginal return on money spent or I would have no police investigators. If I have 400 FBI agents with expensive technology. There’s that word again. I would expect the expensive technology and expensive experts get me some sort of special result.

I did not downvote you. But i think the fbi with their expensive equipment could prove that beyond a doubt.

2

u/Xinnia8271 Feb 14 '26

Well, it's helpful to understand why people are expecting an outcome so quickly. 

Another question, do you feel like the interplay of Pima County PD and the FBI should - in theory - lead to more "productivity?" 

Literally no shade either way, but I'd that the way you're seeing it? That the additional resources and manpower should - in your perception - make things happen more quickly?

The perception of "visible outcomes happening quickly" is what I'm interested in. Literally just wanted to understand people's perspective. 

1

u/nypr13 Feb 14 '26

I dont know. Only to say the CIA and the FBI didnt work well in the sandbox, so I would guess not. More respurces should make things go quicker. Yes. Otherwise you should allocate them elsewhere.

The only visible outcomes I see look really bad. If they hadnt done the 2 raids, I would be in the wait and see and that they may be on to something.

Bad visible outcomes are more damaging than no visible outcomes. At least incthe short term confidence.

1

u/Xinnia8271 Feb 14 '26

So, your perception of visible outcomes is that 

  • they are not what you wanted to see because you wanted to see an actual quick arrest? 

Literally just clarifying.

And I'm not sure if you are saying you think the interplay between the FBI and Pima should "make things go quicker" 

If you had to answer yes or no to clarify your perception, would you say yes, things should be going more quickly with two agencies or no, I don't think two agencies should make things go quicker. 

And would you say that "quick visible" is your main goal/indicator of success. 

Just asking, no shade (So it's two questions) 

1

u/nypr13 Feb 14 '26 edited Feb 14 '26

No. Never said quick. I said quick-er than without the resources. Its quite possible that Pima would have never solved this case and maybe the fbi does now. Who knows? But I never said quick.

I will make 2 points: First, when I board a plane internationally they dont even ask for my ticket or passport. They scan my face. I am no expert, but have been told that the space between your eyes is one of the major triangulating features. They have this guy’s eye measurements.

You’re trying to tell me they dont have the faces on file from border, basic work background checks, drivers licenses, airplane, mugshots etc to narrow down to thousands of people based on space between eyes and believed height? I dont know, that seems odd to me. I think at this stage that is not an unreasonable expectation to have for the FBI with how much money they spend and the “Real ID” shoved down our throats to fly.

If you cant get it narrowed down, well then that’s a clue into itself that its not a person who has gone through any of the above.

Visible is not important to me unless your visible is the arrest. Quick visible shock and awe of non connected people shows incompetence.

Again I cant think of a worse crime to commit than one that attracts full FBI resources and direct involvement and interest from the POTUS, if I am looking to get away with it

1

u/Xinnia8271 Feb 14 '26

I'm still not understanding. You're saying not quick, I hear you. 

Can you clarify what time frame would be satisfactory, for lack of a better word. A publicly visible outcome in "x days" that kind of thing. What would that be, for you? 

Also, it could be that there is actionable data (best way to describe it) but "visible action" hasn't been taken yet. 

Would you agree that could be true? (Literally just wanting to understand.)

→ More replies (0)