:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(742x168:744x170):format(webp)/sheriff-chris-nanos-nancy-savannah-guthrie-020426-b7973399eae740ca8e1d4a39169879c0.jpg)
TUCSON / CATALINA FOOTHILLS, ARIZ. — As Feb. 28, 2026, officials have not announced any arrests and have not publicly named a suspect in the suspected abduction of Nancy Guthrie, 84. Investigators continue to treat the case as active, urging the public to share credible tips, neighborhood video, and any sightings tied to the early-morning window of Feb. 1.
Below is a day-by-day article-style recap of what was reported from Feb. 28 back through Feb. 20—with emphasis on what changed each day, what officials clarified, and what the public learned.
Feb. 28, 2026 — “Still active, still digging”
By Feb. 28, coverage remained focused on two big realities: (1) investigators are still reviewing surveillance and community-submitted footage, and (2) there is still no public breakthrough (no arrest, no confirmed suspect identity). In practical terms, this day was about processing and prioritizing leads rather than announcing new ones—especially after the reward-driven tip surge earlier in the week.
What mattered most for the public: authorities and major outlets kept repeating that tips and video remain the most actionable help—especially footage from routes that allow a vehicle to leave the area without major intersections.
Feb. 27, 2026 — “Refocusing resources” + new camera angles
This was the most consequential “strategy shift” day in the Feb. 20–28 window.
1) Sheriff’s Department: “Refocusing resources.”
The Pima County Sheriff’s Department said it was refocusing resources to detectives assigned to the case, while maintaining a patrol presence in the neighborhood. This was framed as a tactical reallocation as leads are developed and resolved—not as a step back from the investigation.
2) New Ring footage enters the conversation.
A key development in public reporting was newly surfaced Ring camera footage from roughly 2.5 miles away showing a car speeding down a back road around the time window investigators believe is critical. Authorities were reported to be aware of it, but it was not confirmed publicly as “the” getaway vehicle—just a piece now being reviewed.
3) Reward mechanics get spelled out.
Savannah Guthrie and/or outlets circulating her message emphasized that tips can be anonymous and that the reward can be collected without creating a public spectacle—designed to reduce fear of coming forward.
Feb. 26, 2026 — Parking crackdown after neighborhood “chaos”
Feb. 26 was the day the story broadened from investigation details to the impact on the community around the home.
Temporary “No Parking Zone” takes effect (or is formally rolled out).
Pima County announced a temporary no-parking zone around streets near the Guthrie residence, citing public safety and neighborhood access issues (trash service, emergency vehicles, congestion). Violators faced enforcement and fines, and the order was explicitly tied to heavy media / streamer presence.
This mattered because it signaled: the scene around the home had become so crowded that the county needed traffic controls—even while the investigation remained active.
Feb. 25, 2026 — Tip surge becomes measurable
Feb. 25 reporting was dominated by what the reward changed: volume.
Reward-driven tip spike (1,000+ to ~1,500+ tips).
Multiple reports said the family’s reward announcement helped generate more than 1,000 tips, with the FBI tip line total reported around 1,500 in some coverage by this point.
In other words: Feb. 25 wasn’t about a single new clue becoming public—it was about investigators being flooded with new information that then needed triage and verification.
Feb. 24, 2026 — The $1,000,000 reward announcement changes the case’s tempo
This is the “before and after” day.
Savannah Guthrie announces a family reward up to $1M.
Savannah publicly shared a new appeal and the reward up to $1 million for information leading to Nancy’s recovery (and/or an arrest, depending on outlet wording). The goal was straightforward: generate a new wave of tips from anyone who has been hesitating.
Why it mattered: it immediately shifted coverage from “search continues” into “how do we unlock the next lead?”—and it set up the measurable tip surge reported the next day.
Feb. 23, 2026 — Officials push back on “different nights” speculation
Feb. 23 became a major myth-busting / clarification day.
Sheriff’s office message: no timestamps on released images → don’t over-interpret.
As online theories spread claiming doorbell images proved the suspect visited on multiple nights, reporting highlighted that officials said there’s no date/time stamp associated with the released stills, making “different nights” claims speculative.
This was important for the public because it clarified a key point: images without timestamps can fuel viral narratives that don’t help investigators and can misdirect public attention.
Feb. 22, 2026 — Investigators not ruling out multiple people
Feb. 22 updates emphasized scope.
Officials: not ruling out multiple people involved.
ABC7’s live updates summarized that officials were not ruling out the possibility of more than one person being involved in the abduction. This was not a confirmation—more a statement of investigative openness given the limited publicly confirmed facts.
Feb. 21, 2026 — The case stays steady; investigators keep collecting video
Feb. 21 coverage largely reinforced that the investigation remained active and that officials still believed Nancy was taken against her will. Video and tips were still the lifeblood of the case, with many hours of footage needing review and cataloging.
Feb. 20, 2026 — Day 20: “Thousands of tips, still no sign”
Feb. 20 reporting marked a milestone: 20 days into the search period being tracked in daily coverage.
1) Tip volume highlighted.
FOX 10 Phoenix reported it was Day 20 and investigators were working through a massive flow of information—reported as about 20,000 tips in that day’s live-update coverage.
2) Surveillance review continues.
This day’s broader media framing emphasized that investigators were still chasing surveillance leads—collecting, reviewing, and trying to align footage with the known early-morning timeline elements (doorbell camera disruption; later pacemaker disconnect timeline frequently referenced in reporting).