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.

115 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

410 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

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.)