Kash Patel Renews Criticism Of Sheriff Nanos In Nancy Guthrie Case

The Nancy Guthrie case continues to indicate growing tension between FBI Director Kash Patel and Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos. For the second time since Nancy’s disappearance, Patel talked about the way Nanos handled the case.

A Second Round Of Criticism

On the Hang Out with Sean Hannity podcast on Friday, Patel responded to the Pima County Sheriff who recently gave an interview to Wyatt Sharpe on The Sharpe Exchange. In that interview, Chris Nanos had pushed back against the FBI director’s earlier criticism.

Podcast host Sean Hannity asked again if Sheriff Nanos tried to keep the FBI out in the early stages of the missing person case. As a reminder, Hannity told his viewers that local officers sent DNA to a private lab instead of Quantico.

How The FBI Fits In

Patel confirmed what he’d previously said about that, reiterating, “the FBI, the world’s premier law enforcement agency is here to help in every missing persons case.”

But he pointed out that states lead these cases because they have the law on their side. He said his team offered help “from day one,” with the proviso that the sheriff “has a right to conduct his investigation and the right to own it as well.”

The FBI director said using a private lab took six long weeks and that using the resources at Quantico would have been faster.

What Owning the Case Means

Patel did not explain exactly what he meant by saying Nanos could “own” the investigation, leaving room for different interpretations.

When Patel said that Nanos has the right to “own it,” was he hinting at his right to investigate the Nancy Guthrie case in his own way? Or was he drawing a line on accountability?

First up is the fact that Sheriff Nanos is an elected official in Pima County and he is answerable to the locals who voted for him.

The difference is that the FBI director is an appointed official. Nanos can’t be overruled by the FBI in most cases, so Nanos had the right to make his own decision.

Is There A Blame Game?

But is there a blame game going on? In the corporate world, often saying “owning” something can mean taking the credit. But when things go wrong, then someone might also take the fall for it.

Patel’s repeated emphasis that the FBI offered assistance from the beginning also reinforces the bureau’s position that it was prepared to help if requested. Clearly, Patel wants the public to know the FBI stood ready to help and they tried to help.

More On The Ransom Notes

The bad blood between the FBI and the Sheriff obviously makes people wonder how the missing person case is moving forward. Ashleigh Banfield discussed that on her Drop Dead Serious podcast ahead of the weekend.

While there seems to be some bickering over the initial handling of the case, she found it interesting that around the same time, the contents of the two main ransom notes were released in full.

The first note said someone would kill Nancy Guthrie if they did not get paid. The second note said she was already dead.

Banfield wondered why this information arrived out of the blue, almost simultaneously with Nanos and Patel criticizing each other.

With two top personalities involved in the investigation making statements on podcasts, the underlying problem is that Nancy Guthrie is still missing.

Patel takes credit for working with Google to get the doorbell images of the intruder. And right now, it doesn’t seem that Nanos has anything else to deliver.

Going Full Circle

What Ashleigh did note is that based on Nanos’ latest comments, he is now not ruling out anyone from the investigation. And that circles back to her podcast back in March, where she suggested someone in Nancy’s close circle might have been involved in the disappearance.

Your thoughts? Join the discussion and come back here for all your true crime news and updates. We also have coverage that you can follow on our crime channel on TikTok.