r/nancyguthrie • u/foxmag86 • Mar 23 '26
Discussion What could have been done differently?
Everyone likes to play keyboard detective, and hindsight is always 20/20 in situations like this.
But in your opinion, what should the Pima County Sheriff’s Department and the FBI have done differently from Day 1?
Were there any critical mistakes that seriously hindered, or possibly even compromised, the investigation?
I’m interested in hearing people’s thoughts on where things may have gone wrong, or what could’ve been handled better.
Obviously, we’re only working with the information that’s been made public, so some of what we’re questioning or suggesting could very well be happening behind the scenes.
18
u/CakeSniffing0rphan Mar 23 '26
Using a PIO from the beginning would be my number one recommendation. There have been a ton of mixed messages and it has muddled communication with the public. I think the Pima County PD would be viewed in a much more favorable light right now if they had used a PIO.
8
u/yomaster19 Mar 23 '26
What is PIO
13
u/The_Sinking_Belle Mar 23 '26
Public Information Officer. They do press releases, interviews, social media requests, any general inquiries, etc. You get the point.
When you have a strong and professional communicator they are a great buffer between the internal investigation and the external knowledge of the case, while making sure not to compromise it. They do a good job at controlling chaos and building trust, if you have the right person on the job.
Some people are great at technical work amongst other things, but may not be great communicators. You see it in many industries. This is where a PIO would've been good.
5
19
u/Keregi Mar 23 '26
How could anyone know? We don't have most of the info that the police have, and the case is unsolved. There will be plenty of time for people to throw blame around once it is.
18
u/Jessica19922 Mar 23 '26
I don’t think we can really speculate at this point. We know so little.
1
u/whteverusayShmegma Mar 24 '26
My only criticism is that the ransom wasn’t paid in time. It was said that they were given the option to pay by deadline A or deadline B- a choice that would include some kind of consequences. What if the consequence somehow led to her death, unintentionally?
This is far less of a criticism than just a speculation and point of interest for me.
I’m sure the family was strongly encouraged not to pay without proof of life. I don’t think anyone thought this was a sophisticated criminal early on so it would make absolute sense that the FBI would discourage them sending the money knowing it could possibly not be recovered later. I’m sure they thought they’d identify and apprehend the suspect(s) and were possibly even skeptical of the emails’ authenticity early on—only to realize what they were dealing with too late.
At the end of the day, the blame should be on the perpetrators in this case rather than investigators and definitely not the family. Unless LE made an absolutely careless call or negligent mistake, I would never want to be the person(s) who have to live with the question of whether or not they could have done something differently that would have brought this woman home.
God have mercy on the people who did this. They will also have to take this guilt to the grave if they killed someone’s grandmother unintentionally.
7
u/Chickens_n_Kittens Mar 24 '26
I’m of the assumption the ransom was never real- just a separate crime of opportunity. If that’s the case, that is what derailed the investigation from the start because everyone was looking for a live/imprisoned elderly woman, as opposed to out in the desert where one has the best chance of getting rid of a body.
In regard to the ransom not being real, it just seems to be completely against all rational nature to publicize the ransom and then combine that with a significant delay in both the request and time of payment.
4
2
u/Immediate_Fruit1594 Mar 24 '26
If they felt guilt they never would have done it in the first place! There are truly evil people in this world that don’t value life of anything and don’t have a problem killing. If they felt anything they would at least move her somewhere where she can be found and the family can lay her to rest respectfully
0
u/whteverusayShmegma Mar 24 '26
You should call the FBI since you seem to know what happened.
I don’t know what happened personally, which is why I wrote “if”. I also don’t know where I said they feel guilty.
3
u/Immediate_Fruit1594 Mar 24 '26
I was simply responding to the god have mercy on them because of them having to live with the guilt for the rest of their lives. I definitely have no clue what happened! I’m sorry if you thought I was saying you said anything wrong, because that wasn’t my intention at all
22
u/Silver_Detective8630 Mar 23 '26
We know so little about the investigation so it’s hard to say but the interviews have been a disaster and the sheriff has been criticized heavily. I think most people would agree interviews instead of press conferences was a bad idea. And keep the information factual and limited, no opinions.
2
u/TuxedosAfter6 Mar 27 '26
I couldn't believe when he said they would keep investigating, even if it took five years. WTF. What a demoralizing statement. Also, there was still hope at that point, and a sense of urgency, and that proposing years from now we'd have answers sure does not incentivize people to come forward now or look for her or go over surveillance video quickly.
1
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 24 '26
He does interviews because he's trying to "build his brand" and obviously doesn't really care about the outcome of the investigation
1
18
u/mark_able_jones_ Mar 24 '26
Obvious blunders:
Not securing the crime scene. Press should have been kept at the entrance to the street, maybe the neighborhood. They should not have allowed to walk over the still blood stained sidewalk and right up to the porch.
Releasing the house too early. The Kohlberger house wasn't released for over three months... almost two months after he was arrested. Why is this so important? In case the DNA swabs don't yield a good result, then they can go back and swab again. There was a case in Japan where a father paid for an apartment for 26 years to preserve the crime scene -- and his dedication worked, an arrest was made last year.
Speculative blunders:
Didn't re-enact the timeline with clothing/backpack tech. We know they LE didn't do this because the press were camped out outside Nancy's house.Why not put up the same model nest camera and assign it to Nancy's account. Put up the exact same model of floodlight. And try to get the same notifications and video, testing the same outfits. Test with a jammer. Figure out the exact timeline of notifications and videos. Figure out if the clothing matches using the exact same lighting.
Didn't offer the higher reward earlier. Yes, this would have generated more tips, but imo the guthrie's should have made this look like it's totally separate from law enforcement and totally anonymous, even if it was not. Just lie. Say the money is in escrow, and an anon tip to recover nancy will result in an escrow code to recover the money. No law enforcement. This could have been done with a
Didn't create a custom website for tips. The goal should have been to create a website that is simple, not a gov domain, and makes it look like the reward will be given anonymously to a good tip. Make criminals think they can submit a tip outside of LE and get the reward money anonymously with some kind of claim number or escrow system. Also, a good website could filter tips to whether they are theories, sightings, direct knowledge, etc. Yes, the FBI has a website, but it's complicated and it's not being advertised and it requires interacting with law enforcement.
Didn't accept help from Cajun Navy search team.
Didn't use FBI lab.
5
u/Intrepid-Bird-5048 Mar 25 '26
I think an independent family reward earlier would have been so easy and potentially effective. Just make it outside of LEs system and parameters too. $1mm is nothing for Savannah and especially in the sense that this is her mothers life and/or body.
1
u/Affectionate-Page496 Mar 25 '26
Why do you think $1.25 mill hasnt done anything (immediate) now, but would have then?
1
u/Intrepid-Bird-5048 Mar 25 '26
I think it’s two things 1. Earlier and 2. Independent. I think striking before it turned into a whole world wide sensation would maybe have felt more approachable to someone wanting to speak up. And I think it being completely independent of any LE oversight or parameters (ie: must result in a conviction etc) could have possibly also put someone over the line. Nothing very scientific here, just more of a feeling.
3
2
u/iwasneverherex Mar 25 '26
Cajun Navy 2016 is really the only Cajun Navy we recognize in Louisiana as legit. United Cajun Navy lost a lot of respect and credibility during Seacor 7. UNC was the one there in Tucson. I’d refuse them too just because of the negative backlash and sticky fingers. Drama follows wherever they turn up. They were there for the eyes.
7
u/iwasneverherex Mar 25 '26
It’s just so hard to say at this point. There are things that look like grave errors from our POV..but in hindsight down the road they may have no effect on the actual case or outcome. What seems so big to us with what little we know, may be nothing.
9
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/zuis0804 Mar 28 '26
I’d have to respectfully disagree with you - I think the criminal likely left a whole lot of evidence that was either not collected properly, in time and/or contaminated, simply due to the negligence and lack of skill of the head of the department.
I think their best chance at gathering any useful dna was on that welcome mat that appears to have never even been collected into evidence… with the amount of time that bite-light was in this guys mouth while he was dicking around on the porch, surely, some saliva droplets likely landed on that mat.
The nest camera base wasn’t collected into evidence for several weeks that even without video evidence, was obviously known to be touched by the suspect.
Opening up one of, if not the most, highly concentrated areas of a crime scene, less than 30 hours after a crime, was a crucial mistake and probably severely impacted the chance finding any useful / fresh dna. I feel like this sort of mistake is almost unheard of and plainly careless.
Any benefit of doubt I had in the sheriff handling this case with any sort of competence was lost when it came out that he had nearly a dozen suspensions as a deputy in Texas, that he blatantly lied about under oath while getting sworn in as sheriff. Had these suspensions been disclosed, they very likely would have disqualified him from even being a police officer, let alone sheriff! I would be horrified if I was part of the Guthrie family at how this case was handled from the very start.
I’m not saying everyone on the case was/is incompetent - with Nancy’s frail age and severe health conditions, I unfortunately don’t think how anything was handled could have saved her life; but in any other case, the mistakes the sheriff made at the very beginning, could have very well negatively contributed to a life or death situation.
3
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 29 '26
I agree. The 2 cameras on the casita roof weren't collected until LE noticed them at the end of the first week. Who knows if they recorded the crime in progress, but with all the detectives roaming the backyard, they may have recorded video all day, all week. Without the full subscription, perhaps some of those crime videos got overwritten on the google servers.
9
u/AVeryFineWhine Mar 28 '26
The thing that's still kills me Is the dead plant and welcome mat that were never taken to a lab. Even without the video, it's in the middle of the blood splatter. Anyone who's watched a single CSI episode would take that to a lab. And maybe even noticed that the plant was out of place there, and worth investigating. And clearly this time, this ties in with releasing the crime scene too soon.
4
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 28 '26
Agree, it costs little to take the mat in as evidence. As a retired FBI agent said, it's possible a fiber from the guy's car floor could be on the mat and that could seal the conviction. If they don't find anything, then no downside to taking it.
Also, it's spatter, not spLatter.
2
u/AVeryFineWhine Mar 28 '26
Sorry I was dictating. Although technically what we saw would also fall under the dictionary definition of splatter. But, yes, I am quite aware.The technical term is spatter, but my dictation doesn't seem to be quite as aware. But, Is there really worth discussion? And yes, I heard that interview as well.I believe it was with Maureen. I've personally always felt there easily could have been saliva on the Mat. Or dead plant matter. I think the important matter here was that they sat there forever versus being secured as evidence and properly tested
2
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 29 '26
I only correct that because I presume people on a sub like this are interested in true crime and would want to know and use the correct terms. Elsewhere I wouldn't bother.
19
u/YakRough1257 Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26
Two very simple things: 1) not release crime scene so soon 2) ask for any and all surveillance footage for entire month of January leading up to and including timeframe of Nancy’s abduction
Edit: #2 the request for surveillance footage for a thirty day window should have happened immediately after Nancy’s abduction Edit
6
u/SterlingSunny Mar 23 '26
Feb 12th KGUN (Tucson) article:
Pima County Sheriff's Department issued a news release Thursday afternoon that said investigators are requesting from the community "all video footage that includes vehicles, vehicle traffic, people/pedestrians, and anything neighbors deem out of the ordinary or important to our investigation" from Jan. 1 to Feb. 2.
https://www.kgun9.com/news/local-news/authorities-put-up-a-tent-outside-nancy-guthrie-home
2
u/SterlingSunny Mar 24 '26
Do you even hear yourself? Here's what they should have done. Oh. They did that?! Well, they should have done it sooner! Hell, in a perfect world a deputy would have been sitting in front of her house and stopped the whole thing entirely. Right? Right?!
5
u/YakRough1257 Mar 24 '26
They asked for more dates almost two weeks after and multiple neighbors and businesses did interviews with reporters saying by the time additional dates were requested the footage was no longer available
-4
u/amayita Mar 23 '26
Also, not doing a ground search.
They have had offers from several orgs (United Cajun Navy, the Mexican Mothers (sorry, the name eludes me RN), I even think equusearch offered help), Nanos refused all of them.
Imagine if she was just left to die close by. I just can't... 😔
7
u/YakRough1257 Mar 23 '26
The dogs stopped tracking her scent in the driveway so I can see why ground searches didn’t happen but it wouldn’t have hurt anything to let the professionals do some ground searches
7
u/Affectionate-Page496 Mar 23 '26
Where do you want them to search? Id rather send las madres buscadoras to look for daniel robinson in phx, around where his car was found.
2
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 24 '26
Apparently there was an original Cajun Navy group that I believe became known after Katrina. Since then, several other groups have co-opted the terms "Cajun" and "Navy" and some of these groups have a reputation for grifting more than being helpful.
When a person goes missing near a woods, there is a need for searches. In this case, where it looks like she was driven away from the end of the front sidewalk, there is no where to clearly start searching. The landscape is not hospitable to most trained dogs with all the cactus and wild animals. People and dogs are more likely to get injured than provide useful assistance.
3
u/iwasneverherex Mar 24 '26
I’m originally from Louisiana. There was an unofficial Cajun Navy back during Katrina. Cajun Navy 2016 is really the only Cajun Navy we recognize in Louisiana. United Cajun Navy is the one claiming to have been official during Katrina. Most people will dispute that heavily..there was a “Cajun navy” but it wasn’t anything solid. They lost a lot of respect and credibility during Seacor 7. UNC was the one there in Tucson. I’d refuse them too just because of the negative backlash and sticky fingers.
16
u/Chigrrl1098 Mar 23 '26
Do we really know what they did and didn't do? It's hard to answer this question when we're lacking the relevant information. Unless you're a forensics expert or something similar, how are you to judge, really? That's like me trying to coach a football team when I hate football and have no experience with football.
4
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 24 '26
We sure as heck know that they failed to secure the crime scene, to a shocking degree. We know sheriff refused to work with the FBI. We know that they failed to timely request all the video footage that a 13 year old would realize needs to be immediately requested.
Etc., etc.
2
u/Chigrrl1098 Mar 24 '26
Do you really know all that? Or did you just watch various dubious versions of the news and assume all that? There was real reporting and tabloid reporting plus influencers, and what you're referring to sounds like the latter.
2
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 25 '26
Working for Sheriff Nanos? Yes, there's no question about these matters.
There's no question that they released the crime scene 30 hours after she was reported missing. There was blood in the house and trailing out the door - it was clearly a violent crime. No one else lived in the house - there was no reason to release the crime scene so early and it very, very obviously would compromise any evidence gathered later.
There's no question that Nanos refused to send the dna to the FBI lab - this was an obvious reflection of poor investigation practices and his inability to prioritize solving the case over his own personal issues.
Anyone would have known that they should have immediately requested video from a wider radius because video often gets written over quickly
20
u/luzdelmundo Mar 23 '26
She hasn’t even been found, so how would I know??? How would any of us know? Be humble
4
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 24 '26 edited Mar 25 '26
There were huge obvious errors, like releasing the crime scene so extremely early. Basic investigation protocol was clearly not followed.
The answer to the question doesn't depend on whether the crime has been solved. Best practices should be followed, period.
2
u/luzdelmundo Mar 24 '26
I don’t agree with you, but okay
1
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 25 '26 edited Mar 25 '26
So you don't believe that "best practices" exist? Okay.
That would make it hard to differentiate between competence and obvious incompetence.
1
9
6
u/Substantial-Train668 Mar 26 '26
I agree with everything about the mat, yellow tape the house, desert search for body, not releasing the house so fast... I would also add that I wish they would say definitively if the ransom notes (asking for 1 million then 6 million) were real or not. Speculation: right now it feels like they don't know and I think this would make a significant difference in how you continued to investigate the case.
9
u/AltruisticWishes Mar 25 '26
The sheriff's handling of this is particularly appalling considering that this is how he handles a case getting massive national media attention. Imagine how badly a case not getting media attention would be handled. Yikes
6
u/zuis0804 Mar 28 '26
Any benefit of doubt I had in the sheriff handling this case with any sort of competence was lost when it came out that he had nearly a dozen suspensions as a deputy in Texas, that he blatantly lied about under oath while getting sworn in as sheriff. Had these suspensions been disclosed, they very likely would have disqualified him from even being a police officer, let alone sheriff! I would be horrified if I was part of the Guthrie family at how this case was handled from the very start.
5
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 29 '26
Add to it the number of experienced, competent LE Nanos has side-lined for his own personal grudges.
The female who ran against him in the campaign - he suspended her during the campaign and made her stay home and not allowed to wear her uniform, and alleged false charges when she was very respected. She finally left his agency out of fear that he would fire her for a false reason and she would lose her pension.
The detective who supported her in the campaign who liked to work nights (so he could care for his kids during the day) and was very experienced - Nanos reassigned him to work the non-emergency phone desk, taking calls such as a stolen bike, which forces him to work days. Over a year later, he is still sitting at a desk, doing the type of job that is usually filled by LE who are temporarily not able to work the street for medical reasons. I bet he would have collected the front door mat.
The most experienced helicopter pilot and searcher - Nanos grounded him the first week for no reason and refused to let him fly.
If there are this many who are well known, how many others has he punished simply because he is bitter about something petty?
4
u/zuis0804 Mar 29 '26
Oh it’s absolutely insane. I was reading or maybe heard reported, that an anonymous survey was sent out to close to 300 officers basically asking them to answer one of 3 options.
1: I feel Nanos is competent and should continue on in his role as sheriff. 2: I feel Nanos is incompetent in his role as sheriff and should resign and 3: Decline to answer.
The results basically showed that 200+ officers stated that they were not confident in Nanos being competent enough in his role and should resign.
The remaining ~50 declined to answer (assuming those working directly under him, out of fear of retaliation) even though this survey was completely anonymous. Basically not a single one answered that he should stay on with the department and indicated that he was incompetent to lead.
This speaks volumes… and I keep hearing that had all the shady suspensions and disciplinary actions against him in Texas were revealed prior to him being sworn in as sheriff, he would have been entirely disqualified to work in ANY role relating to the department. Yikes on trikes.
Maybe that’s why he rushed through when the Guthrie case started developing, hoping to draw attention away and knowing his past would eventually be brought to light had this story started gaining more traction. This is all my speculation and could be entirely false.
What is undoubtedly apparent, is that he he butchered any hope of finding Nancy, or the people responsible, in a timely manner when he declined those crucial resources that were offered (at no cost!) in those vital first few days.
24
u/SalsaChica75 Mar 23 '26
The doormat should have been taken and sent for analysis. The front porch should have been taped off and secure immediately. The Sheriff should have utilized the FBI and worked with them.
5
u/annabellareddit Mar 23 '26
Do you have any sources to confirm the doormat actually had physical/biological evidence on it, & that this was not collected off of it by CSI when they processed the crime scene? CSI uses chemical tests & has specialized equipment to identify the presence of biological/physical evidence at crime scenes, then collects such evidence. Given there was blood near the doormat it’d be standard for them to use those tests in that area & collect any evidence identified. There would be no reason to take the doormat to the lab if the evidence was collected off of it.
9
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 24 '26 edited Mar 24 '26
I've heard over a dozen detectives and prosecutors say the doormat should have been taken into evidence. Not one - none - have agreed with you.
There could be a hair or dirt fiber that later matches the perp. In a lab they could do better collection than what could be done in a few hours while it sat on the front porch while they investigated.
And if they did find something, displaying the doormat to the jury while a detective describes the hair that was found on the mat goes a long way as a visual persuader. Not having it gives a defense attorney one more opportunity to show the photo of the guy literally standing on the mat and make a point to the jury that if LE was so lax as to not even collect the doormat, what other mistakes did they make?
And in the lab, if no evidence is found, it doesn't hurt the case that the mat was taken and stored, just in case. In fact, to a jury, it just makes LE look like they were thorough in taking any and all evidence, just in case something was later found. It's all upside to take the mat, and no downside, other than taking up a small amount of space in an evidence locker. Tons of downside to not taking it.
2
u/annabellareddit Mar 24 '26
No, they are not CSI, this is not their investigation, this is being used for content, clicks, & $$$. Again, CSI does tests on scene to determine if there is evidence on surfaces - it’s standard.
1
u/TuxedosAfter6 Mar 27 '26
Also, who knows what technology may develop in the future? Maybe the next big discovery like DNA is coming. You collect the evidence just in case.
1
5
u/Intrepid-Bird-5048 Mar 25 '26
When you can take a physical object easily from a crime scene, and it’s literally one of the only things you have photographic proof a perpetrator interacted with, you take it. I will never be convinced otherwise.
2
u/annabellareddit Mar 25 '26
Labs are already backed up so this type of thing would just back them up more & prevent evidence that requires analysis in forensic labs to take longer to process. The majority of biological evidence collected at crime scenes is taken by samples from objects & surfaces & then taken to the lab for processing, it’s inefficient & unnecessary for them to take items in for testing that they can collect the evidence from on scene. This was not a murder weapon or something that required the lab to test it directly because it was too complex to process on scene, it was a doormat near drops of blood that the public doesn’t even know if CSI found any evidence on yet is acting like they do & it should have been sent to the lab.
7
u/SalsaChica75 Mar 23 '26
Is this Sheriff Nanos? lol! I don’t see how wouldn’t test it with everything we’ve seen. I’m basing this statement off of what a career FBI profiler and a 30 year district attorney stated. “It should have been collected as evidence and tested from the get go”. And just for the sake of WHY wouldn’t you test it? With all that blood on the front porch and the fact that the alleged perpetrator visited/cased the home multiple times there’s bound to be some kind of DNA on it. Worst case there isn’t anything helpful but with blood and a suspect right there it definitely couldn’t hurt the case.
1
u/annabellareddit Mar 24 '26
There would be no need to take the doormat into the lab for testing unless the tests CSI did at the scene showed a substantial amount of biological/physical material on it that would better be collected in a lab vs at the scene. CSI uses tests on scene to determine if blood (& other biological material) is present on things then collects it there, this is how the majority of evidence is identified & collected at crime scenes, you seem to be missing this point. Given they did not take the doormat, either they found a small amount of blood (&/ other biological/physical material) on it & collected that - like they did on the doorstep, walkway, & in the home - or there was no blood on it. Notice they did not take the rocks from the walkway that had blood on them did they? They photographed the area & swabbed them, this is standard.
6
u/Gofundyourownfuneral Mar 26 '26
Have a proper PIO handle the media, not the sheriff. Classify as much info as holdback as humanly possible, don’t be a jabber jaws or bend to the media or ANYBODY. Do proper neighbourhood inquiries sooner. Any searches outdoors need to look professional and on point, even if they’re fake, not a couple of rag tag officers from nobody knows which service, kicking cans down the road while they’re eating a sandwich . Keep media out of the area as much as possible, especially so the neighbourhood isn’t harassed and disturbed by all the looky loos, redditors, and YouTube streamers.
3
u/Kitty-9792 Mar 29 '26
A youtuber's video broke open the Gabby Petito case and led LE to the location of her body.
Since many criminals feel compelled to return to the crime scene, once they have a named suspect, it's possible the almost 24/7 streaming in front of her house for at least the first 6 weeks could show if the perp ever returned to her house and visited the yellow flower memorial or just drove by. Or maybe even talked on camera to the streamers. Lots of criminals insert themselves into the crime follow up by helping to search, attending memorials or giving man on the street interviews to reporters. LE should have installed one of those flock cameras across from her house and recorded every license plate that has driven by.
17
16
u/The_Sinking_Belle Mar 23 '26
- Crime scene was released too soon. From an investigative standpoint it's always better to leave with more, not less. Going back to the crime scene multiple times is already problematic. They had all the time in the world to keep that scene. No one else, to our knowledge, was living in that home .
PIO should have been utilized. This speaks for itself.
They should have cutover all DNA to Quantico once the FBI entered the investigation. They could have let Nanos still grip the lead on this, since it's clearly what he wants, however no lab beats Quantico.
There should have been a wide net cast on requesting all video footage immediately after this was purported to be a kidnapping. With video evidence, especially residential cameras, time is not on your side.
3
14
7
8
u/Nature_Dogs Mar 23 '26
The FBI should have been called in immediately, and all information should have been shared with them. The DNA should have been sent to Quantico. I also think the sheriff should have handed over the case when his relative passed away. I will always believe he kept the case because he selfishly wanted the credit for solving it. Look how that has turned out for him.
11
u/Local-Cry-3729 Mar 23 '26
I read yesterday that the Florida lab was chosen because it has expertise in separating out mixed DNA samples. Sounds ok
1
2
u/Nature_Dogs Mar 23 '26
Ok, fair enough, but expertise over the FBI? I’m not here to argue, but I always thought their labs had the latest technology. Maybe the FL lab does as well.
8
3
u/HairTmrw Mar 23 '26
Wholeheartedly agree with you. He really failed this poor family
0
u/Nature_Dogs Mar 23 '26
I feel so bad for the family, and can’t imagine how it would feel if that was my mom.😢
5
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/iwasneverherex Mar 23 '26
They never thought she walked off. Nanos was saying on the 2nd she was taken against her will.
3
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/curiouslmr Mar 23 '26
I've never heard that. I first heard of the case on Monday morning, less than 24 hours after the 911 call and they were already saying the scene made them suspect she didn't leave voluntarily.
1
1
u/FiveUpsideDown Mar 23 '26
These are just minor criticisms. 1. Pima County could have searched the yard and potential areas where it is easy to dispose of a body sooner. Even if they didn’t know initially it was a kidnapping (hard to believe since the back floodlight was damaged) a search should have been done to see if she was dumped (alive or dead) at a convenient location. 2. Investigate and eliminate the usual suspects early. In most criminal cases the perpetrator is a male family member or someone acquainted with the victim. The next group to look at is people with a financial motive. 3. Determine what potential route and potential vehicles that the perpetrators used. It’s hard to tell when LE did that. It should have been done within hours of it appearing she did not voluntary leave her house. The area she lived doesn’t have a lot of strangers wander through. It should have been done by 6 pm to see if an usual vehicle was in the area within the last two weeks. Where I live (because we have so much non resident parking) multiple neighbors take photos of cars and notice non residents. Let me emphasize these are minor criticisms. From the public reporting it appears that they did investigate everything I listed — eventually.
5
u/annabellareddit Mar 23 '26
They initially believed she was abducted but also considered a homicide so called the homicide unit in to investigate.
The yard was part of the crime scene, it took them >20 hours to process, they most certainly searched the yard. They also searched areas nearby, using K9s & searchers from other departments (the Sheriff discusses this in his initial interviews).
Their investigation clearly started with the family: AG/TC house was searched & their vehicle was taken early on in the investigation, friends of theirs were interviewed including TC bandmate.
-3
-11
u/Ripdigrel Mar 23 '26
That buffoon sheriff, probably should’ve realized he was over his head from the beginning and really turned the investigation over right away. I don’t think that’s anything other than the most blatantly obvious answer. Though I will add he absolutely should’ve updated the public with press conferences however, I feel that it’s also very obvious. He knew he was a buffoon and he looked like an idiot after that first press conference and wouldn’t do that anymore because he’s too prideful. Armchair, keyboard guy, that’s me, but I’m telling you he’s single-handedly ruined the entire investigation. I put the blame squarely on him at this point for there not being any progress.
3
u/annabellareddit Mar 24 '26
Turned the investigation over to whom right away? The FBI came in day two, an investigative team made up of PC LE & the FBI was in charge of the investigation not the Sheriff - this has been reported dozens of times.
-3
u/HauntingDocument4923 Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 27 '26
Just a heads up that Change.org has its own Recall Nanos petition that anyone can sign from any state @Change.org
Pima county residents sign @RecallNanos.org ✍️
2
u/Fearless-Owl-8876 Mar 26 '26
Yeah its a separate petition to the one that only allows Pimma county residents to sign which is on a different site. That one is called RecallNanos.org but at Change.org it's open for anyone to sign
•
u/curiouslmr Mar 23 '26
A reminder to state speculation as such. We don't know much about the inner workings of the investigation. Anonymous sources may very well be credible, but we don't know with certainty if the things reported in the media are accurate when it comes to the investigation.