Dan Abrams Questions Ashleigh Banfield About Her Reporting That Nancy Guthrie’s Son-in-Law Is a “Suspect”

Ashleigh Banfield doubled down on her controversial reporting about how Nancy Guthrie’s son-in-law, Tommaso Cioni, was allegedly a “prime suspect” in Guthrie’s disappearance on Thursday, going so far as to say that she is being told Cioni is still a suspect in a stunning moment during an interview with Mediaite founder Dan Abrams.

Banfield suggested that authorities were suspicious of Cioni last week, citing a “trusted law enforcement source,” but the Pima County Sheriff’s Department quickly disputed the claim in a statement asserting that investigators had “not identified a suspect or person of interest in this case,” and firing the following brushback pitch by Banfield’s ear: “While we appreciate the public’s concern, the sharing of unverified accusations or false information is irresponsible and does not assist the investigation.”

On Thursday’s edition of Abrams’s SiriusXM show, he followed up with Banfield:

ABRAMS: Ashleigh, about a week and a half ago or so, you had reported that Nancy Guthrie’s son-in-law, the brother-in law, Annie’s husband, was a possible suspect here. Any more information about that?

BANFIELD: I can tell you that my source every day since has stood by that reporting. And that is the thinking as of the day after Mrs. Guthrie was reported missing. There were a couple of things I reported in that, Dan, if we go back to Tuesday of last week. Number one, that Annie Guthrie’s car was towed and is in evidence. That’s borne out. The sheriff did confirm that the car was towed as per warrant and is being processed. That’s what the sheriff said.

The other thing my source said was that the cameras were smashed. Now we’ve seen the person coming up and trying to, as the sheriff now uses language, tamper and disconnect. But Michael Ruiz is reporting that there are small glass fragments seen underneath the camera in that front entrance, which would suggest that if he couldn’t grab it with his hands, Or grab it with those shrubs-, I don’t believe he’s trying to cover the camera with the shrubs, by the way. You don’t get dangling flowers to cover a camera. I believe that he was actually trying to-, if see his fist, his fist is really tightly around that shrub. I believe he was trying to get it between the Nest cam and its bracket to pull it off. That’s what I believe he was actually doing. One of the commenters said that they saw that he seemed to be testing the strength of the shrubbery right after he pulled it. That would be very interesting. I can also tell you that there is a very, very tiny, tiny little space between a bracket and a Nest mount bracket, and the Nest camera itself — barely enough to get a key between. So to get your fingers between to pull it off is next-, it’s impossible. You would need something, a tool, maybe a strong vine, to try to pull it off — and short of any of that, smash it. So I stand by the fact that my source said this, the cameras, plural, were smashed. And now Michael Ruiz is saying that there were small glass fragments seen underneath that camera mount.

He also said, back door was wide open. Sheriff was asked about that, said “I will not confirm that.” Didn’t say he denied it. And also said there was blood in the house and said that at this time, and again, this is within about 24 hours after the crime was committed, the brother-in-law may be the prime suspect in this case. And as you and I know, you said. These are dynamic. Investigations are dynamic, they reserve the right to change their minds. And sometimes they do and often they do. They get some evidence or information, and it may preclude them from their original thoughts. But I see the amount of activity in Annie Guthrie’s house, photographing for three hours in the nighttime, wearing gloves, carrying out evidence bags, and stuff. That’s the kind of thing where it stands to reason that they certainly are looking at investigating that household.

ABRAMS: So your source still indicating that he is a suspect?

BANFIELD: Nothing’s changed. Nothing’s changed. But I will say this: the day after I did that report, my source said, “things have really tightened up.” The folks in the Sheriff’s Department are worried about retaliation because of the leak. And I thought to myself, “Well, if it’s not true, there wouldn’t be any worry,” you know? And then on the third day he said, “What I can tell you is: when they take shots at you, you’re standing on the target.”

Investigators reportedly conducted a second search of Cioni and Annie Guthrie’s home last Saturday.

Abrams went on to ask Banfield about the blowback and reports that the Guthrie family is exploring legal action against her.

“You’ve gotten a lot of heat over this and including suggestions, ‘Oh, there are going to be lawsuits, or this or that,'” Abrams said. “Have you heard from anyone directly?”

“No,” Banfield replied. She added, “And by the way, the truth is the best defense. And I have this on top authority. This is not untrue. And I will say this, Dan. I answer to one boss, and that is the truth.”

Watch above via Dan Abrams on YouTube.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!