What Happened In Nolan Wells' Missing 90 Minutes?

**SPEAKER_1** (0:00)
This is The Big Breakdown, a long look back at some of the biggest stories we're covering for you at the Hidden Killers Podcast and True Crime Today. This is Hidden Killers Live with Tony Brueski and Robin Drake.

**Tony Brueski** (0:17)
The same day a park ranger pulled Nolan's body from the water, the sheriff was already telling the public no foul play was suspected before the autopsy, before toxology, before almost anything. Whatever trust this investigation had, it cracked right there. Two autopsies sit unreleased. An independent team is digging through his phone and a grand jury is waiting. And when investigators told Nolan's parents it was most likely an accidental drowning, his mother asked the same question.
You did. Why are we so quick to rush this? Yeah, I think what I wonder about with this case is half the problem occurring after the fact. People in places of power where words matter saying stupid shit. And I mean that seems to be where a lot of... It's already, you know, this is just Tinder waiting to be lit. And when you're in the pack of Tinder and you are potentially a match, you got to be careful with where you stick your head towards the sun or towards a source of heat. And when you say shit like no foul play expected out of the gate without an autopsy done, that might ignite the whole pile. Which I think it did. Now, does that mean when somebody says something stupid like that, that then the entire apparatus of people that would be part of that conversation, does that mean that that narrative is then immediately true? No, it means somebody said something really stupid that doesn't necessarily match up with reality and should be judged strictly on the person who said it, why they said it, how they said it. The answer might just be ignorance. What's your take on the Sheriff? Because obviously a lot of people are still making a big deal about that. The Sheriff hasn't continued seemingly to go down this road.
It seemed to be, I don't want to say deviation, but it wasn't like he continued to dig in the way Nanos has over in Guthrie.
It was like, okay, never addressed saying kind of stupid shit, but also didn't continue to stay stupid, say stupid shit either.

**Robin Drake** (2:23)
Yeah, even from day one, I did, anytime I do research on a case, I research everyone involved in a case, the victim, the victim's family, the friends around them, and as well as the investigators. And so when I, and I said this on day one and two and ever since, I did a deeper research, as much as you can online about the sheriff. He went to National Academy. He does not have a bad reputation. He's got, he's got a lot of good, well, non-nano's traits we'll say in him. And so then you always, then you got to look at, all right, so what's the intent of what he said? What's the impact of what he said? And how did he come to that conclusion? What, what inspired that person to say these things that, that, like you said, it lit a Tinder box. And I believe unintentionally, because people don't want things to get worse, because he made things more challenging for him and investigators by doing that. And so, what do I think the intent was? Behaviorally, based on his arc of his career, I think the intent was to calm nerves from the onset, because he's seen these things go sideways. Unintentionally, not knowing that he's going to make it worse by saying it that fast. Now, then what drew him to make a statement like that? Years of law enforcement, years of talking to people, doing interviews, seeing these types of things play out in the past. My guess, again, pure guess, pure conjecture, is that when he first talked to the people involved, the teenagers, everyone involved, his, I won't say gut instinct, because guts are just emotions, but I think his inclination, because of his experience, his first impression was that this is not foul play because of I didn't see all the things we've been talking about. He didn't see the data support of foul play.
Now, what did he should have done?
Hold that opinion and see if in the days doing the investigation, that theory of his personal theory would play out. I think he was quick to the gun because he's trying to calm the sentiment on this one, but wound up inflaming it by mistake. That's why he's not doubling down on it. He's just being silent. He's like, in my mind, there's nothing else he could say to make it right except shutting up. Again, in situations like this when, again, if you've never dealt with a situation this big, when it's not just a loss of life, but a lot of other factors in play, and your public relations person that you have in your department doesn't have experience at the level either. They train for this at National Academy, believe me.