Pitkin Judge Finds Probable Cause in Independence Pass Kidnapping Case

Gunnison —The air on Independence Pass in early July is thin and sharp, the kind of cold that bites through a jacket even when the sun is high. It’s a place where you expect to see hikers with poles or couples taking photos against the alpine backdrop, not a scene of violence unfolding on a paved road. That is where the story begins for one young woman, according to an affidavit filed in Pitkin County. She was allegedly kidnapped and physically assaulted there by her ex-boyfriend, Nathan Keen, and his co-defendant, Vanessa Leighton.

On Wednesday, District Court Judge Laura Makar made the legal machinery move forward. She found probable cause to proceed on two counts facing Keen, a decision that sends the case deeper into the criminal justice system. “The alleged acts are clearly unlawful,” Makar said, her voice steady in the courtroom as she reviewed the evidence presented by District Attorney Audrey Adgate.

This isn’t just a procedural step; it’s a validation of the victim’s account, at least in the eyes of the court. Adgate laid out a timeline that spans July 5 to 7, 2025. According to the affidavit, Keen and Leighton allegedly forcibly transported the victim to multiple locations across Colorado. They didn’t just drive her around; they held a gun at her, according to testimony from Pitkin County Detective Sergeant Brad Gibson, the lead investigator. Gibson told the court that Keen hit the victim’s car into guardrails several times, damage that was later established by investigators. The vehicle took a beating, and so did the person inside it.

If you look closely at the evidence Adgate presented, there’s a stark contrast between the chaos of the alleged assault and the mundane reality of their aftermath. Adgate played surveillance footage from a Verizon store in Gunnison on July 7, 2025. In the video, Keen, Leighton, and the victim are all visible. It’s a quiet moment captured by a camera that doesn’t know what it’s recording, but the people in the room did. Gibson testified that he spoke with a store employee who described it as “the most bizarre day.” The employee, seeing the victim’s demeanor, called 911 and stated that she appeared to “need help.”

There is a warmth to the absurdity of Keen’s own behavior, or perhaps it’s just a chill. During a search warrant execution on July 12, Gibson’s body camera captured Keen in his apartment. Gibson noted that Keen “appeared nervous” and that “his hands were shaking.” When pressed about his whereabouts between July 5 and 7, Keen’s answers danced around the truth.

“You didn’t go out of town with [the victim]?” Gibson asked. “Is something wrong?” Keen replied, repeatedly. “Did you see [the victim] on July 5?” Gibson questioned. “I have no idea. I can’t recall,” Keen said, later adding, “I haven’t talked to [the victim] in forever.”

The court lowered both defendants’ bonds after their arrests in late July and early August, releasing them under strict conditions that include GPS ankle monitoring and mandatory drug and alcohol testing. Keen still faces a stack of other charges, including felony counts of second-degree kidnapping, two counts of second-degree assault, false imprisonment, and menacing.

The judge’s ruling doesn’t end the story; it just moves the stage from the preliminary hearing to the next phase of trial preparation. But for now, the image that stays is the one from the body camera: a man with shaking hands, claiming he can’t recall seeing someone who was allegedly in his passenger seat just days earlier. The silence of that apartment, captured on video, hangs in the air long after the courtroom doors close.