There's nothing unusual about the early tweet from the Pima County Sheriff's Office, IMO. The X user named Olivia misinterpreted it because she either didn't read beyond the heading or misinterpreted what PCSO posted.
The PCSO statement was NG was last seen "on the evening of January 31 at her residence
in the area of East Skyline Drive and North Campbell Avenue." They didn't state NG lives on or was last seen on East Skyline Dr. The sheriff's office deliberately and responsibly omitted NG's exact address. They're notifying the public that she is missing and providing the area where residents are most likely to have relevant information or footage. The time in the heading is when the period they'd like relevant information from begins.
Misreading by people on social media is how misinformation spreads. When LE knocks down the misinformation, social media users then allege LE is incompetent, walking back, or correcting its misstatements. This instance is one example of a straightforward, accurate statement from PCSO being misconstrued because a user didn't read the statement fully or misinterpreted it. IMO.
Much of the misinformation blamed on LE could be avoided if social media participants read statements fully or had better reading comprehension, IMO. So much of public discussion is driven by headlines, which are written to grab attention, and not content.
I appreciate your link to the source
@ab01.

Jennifer Coffindaffer's expertise appears to lend legitimacy to X user Olivia's retweet. But JC does not question the location or time in the heading or content. The image reinforces how simple misreading or not reading fully fuels speculation that is not warranted. MOO.