Six months after Nancy Guthrie, mother of "Today" show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, was reported missing, a new report from The Wall Street Journal is casting a critical light on the Pima County Sheriff’s Department’s handling of the ongoing investigation. The report, which draws on interviews with former and current county and federal officials, as well as individuals close to the case, details a series of alleged missteps and questionable decisions by Sheriff Chris Nanos and his lead investigators that may have hampered the search for Ms. Guthrie and contributed to the lack of arrests and her continued absence.
A Lingering Mystery and Mounting Scrutiny
Nancy Guthrie was reported missing on February 1st, and as of August 2nd, her whereabouts remain unknown, with no arrests made in connection with her disappearance. The Pima County Sheriff’s Department, under Sheriff Nanos, has been the primary agency leading the investigation. However, the WSJ report suggests that the department’s internal dynamics and leadership decisions may have created significant obstacles from the outset.
Concerns Raised Over Leadership Appointments and Past Performance
A central focus of the WSJ‘s reporting is the appointment of Sergeant David Stivers to head the homicide division responsible for Ms. Guthrie’s case. According to personnel records obtained by the newspaper, Sergeant Stivers had been reprimanded just two months prior to Ms. Guthrie’s kidnapping for "poor judgment." This prior disciplinary action stemmed from alleged delays in securing evidence at a separate homicide scene, a case that ultimately saw its charges dropped due to insufficient evidence.
The report further details concerns regarding Stivers’ and his detectives’ initial response to Ms. Guthrie’s property on February 1st. Sources familiar with the investigation stated that dried blood discovered on the front porch was initially disregarded for several hours, with investigators reportedly suspecting it was from an unrelated incident. Crucially, the property was allegedly not cordoned off with police tape, allowing unauthorized individuals, including reporters, livestreamers, and delivery personnel, access to the porch area. Subsequent DNA analysis confirmed the blood to be Ms. Guthrie’s, and it is now believed to be a critical piece of evidence linked to her abduction.
Allegations of Politically Motivated Personnel Decisions
The WSJ report also delves into allegations of politically motivated personnel decisions within the Sheriff’s Department, which critics suggest may have impacted the investigation’s effectiveness. Lieutenant Heather Lappin, who ran against Sheriff Nanos in the November 2024 election, had previously told The Hollywood Reporter in February that Nanos had removed some of the department’s most skilled detectives because they supported her campaign. "A lot of the Guthrie case is just consequences of his really bad decision-making, the years of decimating his units," Lappin stated at the time, adding that three of the best homicide detectives in Southern Arizona were reassigned from Homicide due to their political allegiances.
Furthermore, individuals familiar with the matter informed The Journal that Sheriff Nanos placed Lappin on administrative leave just weeks before Election Day and sidelined other deputies who had supported her after his reelection. The department’s senior pilot, who had also backed Nanos’ challenger, was reportedly demoted to patrol duty days before Ms. Guthrie’s kidnapping following a workplace complaint.
Impact on Initial Search Efforts
These alleged internal disruptions may have had tangible consequences for the initial stages of the investigation. On February 1st, the department reportedly struggled for hours to find a qualified flight deputy to operate its $1.7 million Cessna surveillance aircraft, equipped with advanced infrared and zoom-lens cameras. Flight data reviewed by The Journal indicated that by the time the plane was airborne and commencing its search, the diminishing daylight had rendered its zoom-lens cameras ineffective.
Sheriff Nanos’ Defense and Counterclaims
Sheriff Nanos has publicly disputed the findings presented in The Wall Street Journal report. "I can assure everybody that we are working hard every day with all of our partners," Nanos stated, highlighting collaborations with "corporate America" and the assistance of "some of the brightest minds in this country." He emphasized, "This case is not cold."
The Pima County Sheriff’s Department has also been a subject of scrutiny regarding its transparency and cooperation with federal agencies. In March, Nanos faced accusations of concealing an extensive disciplinary record. Additionally, FBI Director Kash Patel has publicly criticized the Sheriff’s Department’s handling of the case. Patel, in a May interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News, alleged that the FBI was "kept out of the investigation" for four days in the initial stages. Sheriff Nanos has countered these claims, asserting there were no delays and stating, "If [Patel] really believes that we tried to block them or keep them out of this or not share things, I, 100 percent, want him to call me because that’s the furthest from the truth." The Journal also reported that Nanos claims he has never spoken directly with Director Patel.
The Guthrie Family’s Plea for Information
Throughout the agonizing six-month period, Savannah Guthrie has consistently used social media to implore the public for any information that could lead to her mother’s safe return. Following the Pima County Sheriff’s Department’s release of a pair of ransom notes in February, Ms. Guthrie shared a heartfelt plea on Instagram: "We are begging for help. We are desperate. We need someone to come forward. Someone knows something. Someone suspects something. Someone recognizes the writing in the ransom demand notes. Someone has noticed something different, strange, troubling or just unusual — perhaps with someone they deeply love. Perhaps they are afraid to come forward. Perhaps they are conflicted. Perhaps they are angry or upset for being in this situation. There is a way out — to tell what you know. You can do so anonymously. The reward is available."
The ransom notes, purportedly written by the kidnappers, were initially sent to the CBS affiliate in Tucson, Arizona. The second note, dated February 6th, chillingly stated that Nancy Guthrie "perished shortly after she was taken. We believe it was heart related. She is buried in nature now." Authorities released these notes publicly in the hope that individuals might recognize "distinctive patterns of word choice, syntax and phraseology that reflect the writer’s unique linguistic style," which could provide a crucial lead.
Broader Implications and the Path Forward
The ongoing investigation into Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, compounded by the revelations from The Wall Street Journal report, raises significant questions about leadership, departmental operations, and inter-agency cooperation in critical criminal cases. The allegations of politically motivated personnel decisions and the alleged mishandling of initial evidence could have profound implications for public trust in law enforcement and the effectiveness of investigative procedures.
As the Pima County Sheriff’s Department continues its efforts, the family’s desperate pleas and the mounting external scrutiny underscore the urgency of resolving this deeply troubling case. The success of the investigation may depend not only on new leads but also on addressing the systemic issues that the WSJ report suggests may have hindered progress from the outset. The stakes remain incredibly high, with a family still yearning for answers and a community hoping for justice and the safe recovery of Nancy Guthrie. The coming weeks and months will likely see continued focus on the Sheriff’s Department’s actions and the pursuit of any and all avenues that could bring clarity to this prolonged mystery.
