The sheriff leading the investigation into 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie's abduction says no one, including two men already detained and released, is permanently ruled out, even as one of those men prepares to sue for $3.25 million.
Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos sat down with Fox News Digital on Thursday to defend the warrants his department executed and the detentions that followed Nancy Guthrie's disappearance from her Tucson, Arizona, home. Nanos acknowledged that current evidence, DNA, video, interviews, has moved investigators past the two men his department previously held. But he would not close the door on revisiting them or anyone else.
That posture matters now more than it did a few weeks ago. Carlos Palazuelos, a delivery driver from Rio Rico, a town about 60 miles south of Tucson, recently filed a $3.25 million notice of claim against the Pima County Sheriff's Department. The filing, first reported by ABC 15 Arizona, is a legal precursor to a full lawsuit. Palazuelos and his in-laws allege he was targeted without probable cause, arrested without explanation, held for hours, and released without charges, while police damaged the home they all share during the search.
Nanos did not flinch from the decisions his department made. He told Fox News Digital that investigators brought evidence before a judge who signed off on the search warrants, a step that, by definition, required a showing of probable cause.
"We had information that made us believe that there's a potential that Nancy's there, or there's a potential the bad guy's there. That evidence is presented to the judge that says, 'Yep, go get him.'"
When investigators arrived, Nancy Guthrie was not at the location. Nanos said his team spoke with the individuals they detained, evaluated alibis, and decided there was not enough to file charges.
"We go in, oh, now we look at it and go, 'all right, she's not here.' That was evident. That was No. 1. And we've talked to these individuals, and they've given us an alibi, if you will, or whatever, to say, 'Hey. We feel comfortable in letting them go and not charging them.'"
Palazuelos was the first person publicly identified as detained in the case. He was stopped during a traffic stop in Tucson on Feb. 13, 2026, connected to a federal search warrant served at a home near Nancy Guthrie's residence. Days later, a second man, Luke Daly, who was already facing unrelated drug charges, was also detained and released. Neither man was arrested or charged in connection with the abduction.
The investigation has stretched for months without an arrest. The sheriff has previously said he remains positive the case will be solved, even as the evidence review has dragged on.
The notice of claim filed by Palazuelos and his in-laws goes further than complaining about rough treatment. It alleges the warrant naming Palazuelos was obtained using "false or baseless evidence." The filing also points to a tweet from the Pima County Sheriff's Department that described a "suspect" as having been detained, language that, if accurate, would have publicly branded Palazuelos before any charges existed.
Nanos did not directly address the tweet or the specific allegations in the claim during his Fox News Digital interview. He focused instead on the broader investigative posture: that clearing someone today does not mean clearing them forever.
"From what we have in front of us, the evidence, the DNA, the whatever, the videos. Yeah, I think you can eliminate them. And so that elimination happens. But it's like any [criminal case], because you're eliminated doesn't mean you didn't do it. It doesn't mean that we can't get more information."
That framing cuts two ways. For Nanos, it preserves investigative flexibility. For Palazuelos, it means the sheriff's department is unwilling to say plainly that it got the wrong man, even after releasing him without charges and watching him file a multimillion-dollar claim.
The FBI has previously raised concerns about the pace of the sheriff's early response, adding another layer of scrutiny to how the department has handled the case from the start.
Nanos extended his "no one is permanently cleared" stance beyond the two detained men. He told Fox News Digital that even the Guthrie family itself is not exempt from future scrutiny if new information surfaces.
"I think I early on said, 'Look, there is no suspects. The family is not suspects. They're not. Now, does that mean that ends it forever? No. What happens if next week somebody calls and says, 'Hey, a family member did this, and here's how I know it'? You know that always opens a door."
Nancy Guthrie, 84, was abducted from her Tucson home on Feb. 1. She depends on heart medication. Her daughter, "Today" co-host Savannah Guthrie, has been publicly involved in the search. Savannah Guthrie has pleaded directly with her mother's kidnapper in an emotional video appeal during the long ordeal.
Nanos invoked Savannah Guthrie by name when making his public appeal for tips.
"We believe, just as the family does, just as Savannah does, somebody knows something. We need that person to call us."
The family has urged the public to call 1-800-CALL-FBI with any information. An anonymous tip line, 520-88-CRIME, also remains active, with a reward available for information leading to an arrest.
Meanwhile, the FBI determined that all three ransom notes connected to the disappearance were fraudulent, eliminating one line of inquiry and deepening the mystery around what actually happened to Nancy Guthrie.
Nanos insisted the investigation still has life. "We're not even close to these leads being dried up," he said. "We'll continue to work them." DNA from a crime scene hair sample could not be profiled, and video evidence remains under analysis.
But the picture that emerges from the timeline is not flattering. An 84-year-old woman vanished from her home in early February. The department detained two men, one branded a "suspect" on social media, and released both without charges. No arrest has followed. The search warrant used to detain one of them has not been made public. And now that man is seeking $3.25 million, alleging the warrant rested on fabricated evidence.
The Guthrie family went silent with the sheriff's department more than 100 days after Nancy vanished, a sign of the fractured relationship between the people most desperate for answers and the agency responsible for finding them.
Nanos may be right that no one should be permanently ruled out. That is standard investigative doctrine. But doctrine is cold comfort to an elderly woman's family, to a delivery driver facing public suspicion without charges, and to a community watching an investigation that has produced warrants, detentions, a social media post calling someone a "suspect," and zero accountability for the person who actually took Nancy Guthrie.
Somebody does know something. The question is whether the Pima County Sheriff's Department can find that person before its own missteps become the bigger story.
