Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos says he remains confident investigators will eventually solve the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of Today show co-host Savannah Guthrie. Despite months of searching, extensive forensic testing and widespread public attention, authorities have yet to publicly identify a suspect or explain exactly what happened to her.

In an interview featured on the October 9 episode of The Buckmaster Show, Nanos addressed the ongoing investigation and the challenges facing the team working to uncover the truth. His central message was clear: he believes the case can be solved, and he does not consider the investigation finished.

The sheriff’s confidence comes as investigators continue examining evidence, including DNA collected from Nancy’s home and a substantial amount of video footage. But he also acknowledged that the public does not know everything authorities have learned so far, explaining that some information must remain confidential to protect the investigation.

For Nancy’s family and the many people following the case, his comments offer a measure of reassurance. Yet they also underscore how much remains unknown in a disappearance that has become one of the most closely watched investigations in the country.

A DISAPPEARANCE THAT CONTINUES TO RAISE QUESTIONS
Nancy was last seen at her home in the Catalina Foothills area near Tucson, Arizona, on the evening of January 31, 2026. She was reported missing the following day, prompting a major response from the Pima County Sheriff’s Department and other law enforcement agencies.

Investigators quickly began examining the circumstances surrounding her disappearance. As the inquiry developed, authorities treated the case as an apparent abduction rather than an ordinary missing-person investigation.

The circumstances have raised urgent questions: Who took Nancy from her home? Was the disappearance planned? Did the person or people involved leave evidence that could eventually reveal their identities? And is there someone who knows what happened but has not yet come forward?

Despite the resources committed to the case, authorities have not publicly provided definitive answers to those questions.

The investigation has also attracted national attention because of Nancy’s daughter, Savannah Guthrie, who has used her public platform to appeal for information. The family’s anguish has become a major part of the story, with supporters hoping that someone with firsthand knowledge will finally provide a breakthrough.

SHERIFF NANOS SAYS HE BELIEVES THE CASE WILL BE SOLVED
During his discussion on The Buckmaster Show, Nanos expressed confidence in the investigators and forensic specialists working on Nancy’s disappearance.

He emphasized that the investigation must follow the evidence rather than public theories or assumptions. Although the case has generated extensive speculation online, investigators still need reliable information that can be tested and supported.

Nanos has made clear that authorities cannot simply announce a suspect because a particular theory attracts attention. Any conclusion must be grounded in evidence that can withstand scrutiny.

That approach can be frustrating for people who want immediate answers, especially when a missing-person investigation continues for months without an arrest. However, investigators often have to work through complicated forensic questions before they can establish who may have been involved.

The sheriff’s confidence should not be interpreted as confirmation that authorities have already identified the person responsible. Rather, it reflects his belief that the combined work of investigators, laboratory specialists and the public can eventually produce meaningful answers.

For now, the identity of any person responsible for Nancy’s disappearance remains unconfirmed publicly.

DNA EVIDENCE COULD BECOME A CRITICAL BREAKTHROUGH
One of the most important elements of the investigation is the DNA evidence recovered from Nancy’s home.

Investigators have continued working with forensic laboratories to examine biological material and determine whether it can be linked to a particular individual. Nanos has previously said that some of the DNA evidence may still be useful, giving investigators a reason to continue testing rather than abandon that line of inquiry.

DNA analysis can be particularly valuable when investigators have biological material but do not immediately know who it belongs to. Depending on the quality and quantity of a sample, specialists may be able to develop a profile and compare it with reference samples or information available through authorized investigative methods.

In some cases, forensic genealogy can help investigators identify possible relatives of an unknown person. That information may provide a lead, although additional investigative work is required before a potential match can be treated as evidence against a particular individual.

The process is not always straightforward. Samples may be limited, degraded or mixed with DNA from multiple people. Investigators must also determine whether a match is relevant to the suspected crime rather than simply evidence that someone was present at a location at another time.

Authorities have not publicly disclosed all the details of the DNA evidence in Nancy’s case. Keeping certain information confidential may allow investigators to assess future statements against details that have not been released to the public.

At this stage, there is no publicly confirmed DNA identification that establishes who took Nancy.

THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF VIDEO STILL REQUIRE ATTENTION
DNA is not the only investigative avenue that remains important. Nanos has also described the enormous volume of video material investigators have had to review.

Footage from homes, businesses and security cameras can help establish movements, identify vehicles and reconstruct events surrounding a disappearance. Even a short recording may become significant if it captures a person, vehicle or activity that investigators can connect with other evidence.

But reviewing video is time-consuming. Investigators may need to compare recordings from different locations, account for differences in timestamps and examine whether a vehicle seen in one clip appears in another.

They must also distinguish relevant activity from the ordinary movements of residents, delivery drivers, visitors and other people in the area.

The volume of footage associated with Nancy’s disappearance means that investigators have had to prioritize and organize a substantial amount of material. A potentially important detail might not become apparent until it is compared with other evidence or a new lead provides a reason to revisit an earlier recording.

The existence of a large video archive does not guarantee that it contains a clear image of a suspect. However, it gives investigators another avenue to pursue as they work to establish a timeline and identify people who may have information.

WHY AUTHORITIES ARE NOT RELEASING EVERY DETAIL
The lack of frequent public updates has contributed to frustration and speculation surrounding the case. Some people want authorities to release every available detail, believing that wider publicity could prompt someone to recognize a clue.

Nanos has explained that investigators cannot share everything they know. Certain details may need to remain confidential so that detectives can evaluate tips, verify statements and avoid compromising potential evidence.

For example, if investigators keep a specific detail about a crime scene private, they can later compare that information with a witness’s account. Someone who independently provides accurate, nonpublic details may offer investigators a lead worth examining.

Releasing every detail too early can make that process more difficult. It can also encourage people to repeat information they have seen online, complicating the task of separating firsthand knowledge from speculation.

At the same time, authorities need public cooperation. Investigators depend on people reporting suspicious activity, sharing recordings and coming forward with information that may initially seem unimportant.

The challenge is to encourage the public to help without exposing information that could weaken the investigation.

PUBLIC PRESSURE HAS GROWN AS THE CASE CONTINUES
The investigation has placed intense pressure on the sheriff’s department. Nancy’s connection to a prominent national television journalist has drawn widespread media coverage, while the absence of a publicly identified suspect has led to continued questions about the pace and direction of the inquiry.

Nanos has faced criticism over his handling of the case and the department’s public communications. He has defended the work of his investigators and emphasized that a great deal of investigative activity takes place outside public view.

The sheriff has also stressed that criticism directed at him should not be confused with the work being carried out by the team.

Public scrutiny is likely to continue for as long as Nancy remains missing and key questions remain unanswered. But pressure for a quick resolution cannot replace the careful examination of evidence required in a serious criminal investigation.

A premature accusation could harm an innocent person and undermine the case. Investigators must establish facts before drawing conclusions, even when the public is demanding immediate answers.

THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC TIPS
Although forensic testing and video analysis remain central to the investigation, information from the public could still prove decisive.

A person may know something about Nancy’s disappearance without realizing its importance. Someone may have noticed an unusual vehicle, heard a conversation, observed suspicious activity or received a message that seemed insignificant at the time.

Investigators have repeatedly encouraged people with credible information to come forward. A tip does not need to solve the entire case by itself; it may provide one piece of information that helps detectives connect evidence they already possess.

The sheriff’s confidence rests partly on the possibility that someone who knows more than they have disclosed will eventually speak up.

That person could be a witness who has not yet contacted authorities, someone who recognizes a detail in released evidence or an individual who has information about the people involved.

However, investigators have not publicly established that a particular person is withholding information. The possibility that a new tip could help is not proof that someone close to the case knows who took Nancy.

Anyone with relevant information should contact the Pima County Sheriff’s Department or the FBI rather than relying on online speculation.

WHERE THE INVESTIGATION STANDS
As of the October 9 interview, authorities continued to work through forensic evidence and video material while seeking credible leads. Nanos’s remarks reflected confidence that the investigation still had productive avenues to pursue, even though a public resolution had not yet been announced.

His statements do not establish that an arrest is imminent, and investigators have not publicly confirmed the identity of a suspect responsible for Nancy’s disappearance.

The next significant development could come from laboratory analysis, a newly discovered piece of video, a witness statement or information supplied by someone who has so far remained silent. It is also possible that investigators will need more time to establish whether a lead is reliable.

For Nancy’s loved ones, every unanswered question represents another day without knowing what happened to her. The family’s hope for answers remains tied to the work of investigators and the possibility that someone will provide information that changes the direction of the case.

Sheriff Nanos says he believes the case will be solved. Whether that confidence leads to a breakthrough will depend on what the evidence ultimately reveals.

For now, the investigation remains unresolved, and authorities continue to seek information that can bring clarity to Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance.

SOURCES
The Buckmaster Show — October 9, 2026: Guthrie Case Will Be Solved, Sheriff Nanos