E (3:11)

Wow.

D (3:12)

You really have to slow it down to see it, Dave Mack. Should I believe nanos or my lying eyes? That looks like a cell phone display, Dave.

E (3:23)

Looks like one to me too, Nancy. And yeah, you got to slow it down, but you can see something clearly there. It's rectangular, you know, looks like a. Like a phone, which this is something we've been pointing to all along. That there's got to be help here. And check that out. Look, you're seeing it right there on the edge of the screen. Boom. That is not the guy covering up the lens. That is somebody else with that camera or phone, rather.

D (3:48)

Okay, straight out to all of our guests. Scott Eicher joining me, digital forensics expert, founding member and I can't say this enough, of the FBI FBI Cellular Analysis Survey Team cast the anachronism. Currently at Precision Cellular Analysis. He also was in homicide in the Norfolk, Virginia pd. Scott, thank you for being with us. Why are we we having to slow this down and find it ourselves? Wouldn't this have been helpful for Nano's to put out there on day one? As soon as Google and the FBI managed to dig it up for him? He said it didn't exist. Recall.

B (4:26)

I do recall that initially they thought they couldn't get any video, but this is what the cast team does. Whether we saw a camera in the video or not, or suspect that to be a camera cast, the FBI's cast team is going to be work looking at all the cell phones in the area. No. So it's going to take a lot of time. We've got dumps from the all the major cell phone companies in that area. And now we just have to weed through all those phone numbers to figure out which ones are pertinent to the case and which ones are not.

D (4:57)

Okay. Scott Eichor, have you ever been on the witness stand?

B (5:02)

Well, I've testified as an expert over 120 times.

D (5:07)

Okay, so I take that simply as a yes. Okay. Have you ever had a lawyer jump up in the middle of your testimony and state. Your Honor, I object. That is non responsive to my question.

B (5:18)

Yes, ma'. Am.

D (5:19)

You ever heard that?

B (5:20)

Yes, ma'. Am.

D (5:21)

Okay, because you just told me about a. Do I look like I just fell off the turnip truck? Let's establish that first. Do I not.

B (5:30)

Not today.

D (5:31)

Okay, I'm gonna ignore that, Barb. To suggest that I did look like I turned fell off the turnip truck on an earlier occasion and move forward Scott, I respect you. You have a pristine reputation and expertise beyond anyone else I know when it comes to digital data. But I asked you not about the cell phone data dump in the area. We've already established that cast did that. I'm talking to you about the video that we keep showing on the screen. Lookie, lookie. You can see a cell phone light up in the background. And I'm very surprised that's happening and we're finding out about it right? Right now. Okay, look, hold on. While you look at that, let me go to Colesrude. Joining me now, veteran trial lawyer Josh Colesrude from this jurisdiction, currently criminal defense attorney, former federal prosecutor, founder of Colesrude Law Offices. Josh, I actually don't need an esteemed founder of Cellular Analysis Survey Team to tell me what I'm seeing. Do you see that, Josh?

F (6:36)

Yes, ma'. Am. It looks like there is something protruding out of somebody's pocket that resembles a phone. And this could be the smoking gun that we're all waiting for. I mean, the cellular phone, as we all know, has so much data that if that phone is on, it's only a matter of time before the FBI gets a hold of the information. Hopefully, we're able to identify a suspect soon.

D (7:02)

Only a matter of time. Okay, you know what, Iker, I think you are a step ahead of me. So you're saying, and I'm giving you the huge benefit of the doubt here, I think you're saying that that cell phone, if it exists, would have been picked up in the data dump.

B (7:21)

That's correct.

D (7:22)

Is that what you're saying?

B (7:23)

Yes, ma'.

E (7:23)

Am.

D (7:25)

Okay. What I don't get is, okay, let's just keep seeing it. The viewers have seen the guests. I want to look at that picture. I want to look at that in slo mo. I want to look at that in ISO. Scott Eicher, based on the shape of it, based on where we're seeing it. Thank you for circling it. That's perfect. Thank you. Control room. How could it be anything else?

B (7:56)

That's tough to. I do see the kind of rectangular flash of possibly a cell phone. Is it reflection from something? El? Is it? You know, I have no idea what it is. I give you the benefit of the doubt that that could be a cell phone. And we're assuming that they're going to have a cell phone anyway. It really doesn't matter whether we see it in the camera, we're going to assume they have one.

D (8:21)

No, but this is a second person. It's not the person Struggling with the foliage. Scott, it's a second person with a cell phone. I need to see it again, please, in slow mo, if you can, because some people suggest maybe it's the reflective backpack. I don't see how that's possible. Right there at that juncture, Dave Mack, what do you think about the possibility it's the reflection on the backpack? Because it seems to show up and then go away, and that wouldn't be so if it were the backpack?

E (8:52)

I think it really is. When you look at where the suspect is standing. Okay. And where he's moving his hand, the backpack is going to be more towards the center of the screen. So, you know, because he's using his left hand on the shrubbery there to try to cover the lens. So to me, it looks like this is something clearly being moved by someone else on the other side of the. Of the suspect here. It doesn't, you know, that's what I'm seeing anyway.

D (9:18)

Okay. Coles, Root, have you looked at this? And what if. So tell me your analysis.

F (9:23)

You know, I. My first thought is this couldn't be the backpack because it would be obstructed by the body. I mean, the backpack is on the back. And when you look at this, it just. It resembles what any layman would say is a cell phone. And it needs to be investigated one way or the other.

D (9:44)

Well, the reason. Okay, remember, Josh, and also with me, of course, Scott, Iker. John Bueller has. Do we have John Satellite up control room? Yes.

E (9:58)

No.

D (9:58)

Maybe. Okay, let me know when Bueller joins. The reason. I don't think it's the backpack, Josh. If you look at the backpack, there's also reflective strips right here in the front. So I think that that is what some people are talking about. But the issue is. Play it again, please. When you see it pop up, it's disjointed from the actor, is disjointed from him. It darts in as he's already acting. See what I mean? It's not connected to his movements, which makes me think it's not the backpack. Okay, here's my question. How has this gone unnoticed this far? Scott Eichert, we're this late into the game. We're day 23 and online sleuths and our staff are having to find this information.

B (10:52)

I don't think it's gone unnoticed. I just think they just haven't pointed it out. Once we get this type videos, there's a ton of people analyzing it. The analysts from the FBI and the sheriff's department and we're going to make some assumptions. Some assumptions. Is that, is there a compliment or not? We've got to look at that. What are the clothing that he's wearing? We've got to look at that. We're assuming they're going to use cell phones because everybody has a cell phone now. Is there a walkie talkie? Those are all things that we're going to have to jump into and try to look through and investigate.

D (11:23)

Speaking of a walkie talkie,

A (11:32)

Weight Watchers now offers access to affordable GLP1s. It works for members like I'm Haley and I've lost 100 pounds. Weight Watchers has everything I need from weight loss medications to nutrition support and help with my side effects. It's all in one place. Weight Watchers handles the insurance for you and offers affordable cash pay options. With our program, our members are losing more weight with expert nutrition and side effects support.

B (11:57)

I'm Mike and I've lost 135 pounds. Weight Watchers prescribing GLP1 medications.

C (12:02)

It's been life changing.

D (12:03)

I'm Sharia and I lost 80 pounds on Weight Watchers. I realized that it would take more than a prescription to lose weight and feel good on a GLP1.

A (12:12)

Better results, expert support, lose more weight, make it last.

B (12:16)

I can't imagine doing a GLP one without Weight Watchers.

A (12:20)

Get started for as low as $25@weightwatchers.com GLP for over 60 years we've helped millions of members find what works for them. Now it's your turn. Weight Watchers Watch it work.

D (12:33)

Crime stories with Nancy Grace. I want to talk to you about cellular signals such as Nancy Guthrie's pacemaker. Such as, let's just say an iPad that has it connected such as uconnect or car wi fi. You know, a lot of cars have it built in. It doesn't show up with cellular analysis survey team. We'll just call it the FBI. It doesn't show up with FBI the way a cell phone would, but it's still emitting a WI fi signal. Here's my question to you. Would a walkie talkie emit such a signal? Scott Eicher I don't believe so.

B (13:17)

Most of the walkie talkies are a point to point transmission. That's why they're very short range. They would not connect with the cell phone tower itself. So we're not going to see any record of that unless it's a, you know, they're using a walkie talkie feature on a cell Phone, which is a little bit different. Nextel used to have that, where you could do push to talk, and then you could. You're basically, you know, making a quick call to another phone. But that was still using a cell phone tower. But if you're thinking of a walkie talkie that you might use while you're hunting with a. Just to keep track of each other, that's not going to use a cell phone tower, and we're not going to be able to track it.

D (13:57)

Okay, I've made a list of devices that I think would show up. Some of them I've already mentioned, like your car, WI fi, an iPad, trying to connect a smartwatch, many devices. And I want to circle back to you on smartwatch, Scott Eichor, but I want you to see this. Everybody on the panel, take a look at this. It looks as if a walkie talkie. I'll just call it an antenna, for lack of a better word, is protruding from the porch. Guys, right pocket. Look at that. I. Okay, that looks. Yeah, that's his left pocket. Look at that. Left pocket. Can we. Can we zoom in on that again? And if you could give me a steel and enlarge. Looks like the antenna of a walkie talkie, which further signifies an accomplice. Okay, straight back out to veteran trial lawyer joining us tonight, Josh Colesrud. He's in this jurisdiction, good or bad that there is an accomplice. I say good because it's easier to find two people than it is to find one person. Plus, the more people that are involved, the more likely somebody's going to blab. Or the more likely. Isn't it always the way, Josh? It's the girlfriend, the wife, the mother, the ex, the little old lady that lives next door to blurt out, hey, wait a minute, I saw. Fill in the blank. The more people you have involved, the more likely the case is going to be solved. So if there's a walkie talkie and play, that tells me there is somebody else.

F (15:35)

Exactly. And you know, there's an old saying, loose lips sink ships. And the more people you have involved, the more likely somebody is going to open their mouth, they're going to brag about it to their girlfriend, they're going to feel maybe they're left out and they want money. Who knows? The more people involved, the greater the likelihood that this conspiracy is going to be exposed.

D (16:02)

Coming up, Back to you, Iker. What about the possibility that a walkie talkie. That is a walkie talkie protruding from his pocket. What does that mean to you evidentiarily?

B (16:15)

Well, it's obviously a little more pre planned and more complicated than we thought initially. When we see the, you know, the perpetrators actually planning this a little bit better if they're planning to have walkie talkies, even though the guy kind of looked fumbling around on the front porch. Maybe these guys are a little more sophisticated than we thought. Using walkie talkies to communicate for, you know, security for themselves to say, hey, there's someone walking down the street, get out of there, or something like that. It means to me that if that is a walkie talkie that we're gonna, you know, have to be a little more concerned that these are guys are more professional than we thought.

D (16:56)

Okay, I'm thinking through what you just said. Also, I want to find out, Dave Mack, isn't it true that you can get these at Walmart too? I mean, I'm telling you, Walmart is kidnap central. We've got the backpack can be bought at Walmart. Now Nanos, tell me about what Nano's just said. Dave Mac, didn't he say that they are currently closing in on tracking down all of the clothing, not just the backpack at Walmart? Because I mean, a million people buy that backpack, but if one person comes in and buys the backpack, buys the shirt, buys the pants, buys the shoes, buys the walkie talkie, buys that polyester holster that we know is sold at two Tucson Walmarts, that's going to make it a lot easier to find if you see more than one of those articles on a receipt or more than one of those articles on an Amazon search or purchase, which is another thing. Iker, don't let me forget to ask you about how we can bring Amazon into this search. So what did you learn? Are these sold at Walmart also daymac. And what did Nano say about identifying all the clothes?

E (18:06)

Well, let's start with the walkie talkies, Nancy. We had a shot of it a minute ago. The producers in New York actually went on Walmart and pulled up the walkie talkie that appears to be the right size that would go in that pocket with an antenna sticking up. There it is right there on the screen. And that is sold at Walmart. Now what Nanos is talking about, about identifying the rest of the clothing. I feel like he should pick up the phone and call our producers in New York because the day we had the video, they, Angelica and the team there were blowing it up with all of the things they saw. The backpack, the, the possible clothing, the guys, the person is wearing from the. The pullover hat, you know, the. The with the three holes in it. They were breaking down all of the clothing. Nanos is now saying, we're close to identifying all of the clothing that is seen. I'm thinking, well, so is everybody else. It's not like this is that big of a deal. Now, here's the kick, Nancy. You pointed out that the. The really nasty little holster, you know, that carried in the front, that doesn't even fit the. The gun that's only sold at two Tucson area Walmarts. The one thing I tend to agree with Nanos is that this is a Tucson person. So that's where they got the list they took. The investigators took a list of potential people with pictures to local gun shops. These were people they found in the stores at Walmart.

D (19:28)

Dave, we here on this panel, probably these guests right here, established the guy's a Tucson area resident on day one because he picked out two local stations to send his ransom note to. Of course, that is taking into account, is the ransom note really even connected to her disappearance, which I've got a whole theory that it's not because they never produced proof of life. That's a whole nother can of worms. Back to the walkie talkie. Let's button that down before we move to the next topic. Go ahead, Dave.

E (19:59)

Yep. The walkie talkies are sold at Walmart. Clearly, we had the photo of it right there online. And it is available. Those walkie talkies are available in Tucson at Walmart. There's 13 Walmarts.

D (20:11)

Okay, back to Eicher. Scott Eichor joining us, former homicide with Norfolk PD. Norfolk PD. Also FBI. Now, precision cellular analysis dot com. How could we possibly track a walkie talkie in 2026? There's got to be a way. But if it's not emitting WI fi, it's not connected to a cell phone. Have we been outsmarted?

B (20:42)

I don't think we're outsmarted. You know, some of the newer walkie talkies have a lot of other aspects to them, just other than being a walkie talkie. They're also GPS enabled. So there might be other ways that we can get different indications that walkie talkies are in the area. But in my mind, that's. That's kind of a tough thing to do. We. We assume they had cell phones. Walkie talkies might be a way that they have kind of outsmarted the technology. We'll have to dig it further into it.

D (21:15)

So are you telling me there's no way to trace a walkie talkie.

B (21:18)

I don't think there is. I mean, if you had the walkie talkie itself, you could backtrack it to where it was bought, stuff like that. But I don't think it's going to show up in any databases that it was in that area at the time that, you know, she went missing.

D (21:33)

Okay, let me see the picture one more time. I remember when my son, John David was obsessed with everything spy related and we all had to have walkie talkies, and then we had to have a new set of walkie talkies, and then somebody would lose. When we get a new set, how many people can be on a walkie talkie? How many parties Iker can join in on one frequency?

B (21:56)

Numerous can. You'll see families up on the ski slopes using three or four different walkie talkies, all on the same frequency. So they can keep in touch with each other and meet at the bottom at a specific time. So that's a good example of several people being on the walkie talkie at the same time. But there's limited frequencies. So a lot of times you get bleed over between different frequencies that are close to each other. But, you know, you can put several different, probably five or six different people on the same frequency at the same time.

D (22:27)

It's really hard for me to believe that we can put a woman up in the. In space, circling the moon. On the moon, but we can't trace multiple walkie talkies being used at the same time on the same frequency at the scene of a kidnap. But you're firm in your analysis that cannot be traced, is that right, Iker?

B (22:50)

That's. You're going to put me in a position where I'm going to say, I don't think so. But technology changes every day. So can they do it? Is there another way to do it that I might think of?

D (23:02)

That's just what the defense team would love and what the kidnapper loves. He is getting all of his information, anything he needs to know from Nanos,

C (23:13)

he needs to shut his hole and stop. Because he's not helping the investigation.

D (23:17)

No, he's not. Day 23 where is Nancy Guthrie, Savannah Guthrie's mother? Still missing. And the scene is shambolic. A pizza guy. A pizza guy drives right up to the house, the crime scene, and goes up to the door to deliver pizza. In the midst of this investigation, why is it still not blocked off? If and when this case ever does go to trial, there's going to be hell to pay H E double L, hell to pay on ice skates because you've got a pool cleaning team coming through. You have pizza delivery. You've got people sneaking up to the front porch taking pictures of Nancy Guthrie's blood, for Pete's sake. I would flip if someone was taking pictures of my mom's blood on the front porch. You've got the first team coming in failing. You've got the FBI finally joining in after being blocked by nanos. They come in. You know what this means, evidentiarily, is that every single person that went into that scene is going to have to be ruled out of DNA. Over the weekend. Nanose announces again, I just wait for the next bomb to drop that the DNA found in the home is mixed. Mixed? That is not the end of the world. DNA is often mixed at multiple crime scenes. It's rare that you find pristine DNA. For instance, let's just talk about a rape. You're going to have the victim's DNA and the perp's DNA. That's mixed DNA. It's isolated. It's hard sometimes for lay people and myself to understand. Even though I've directed experts on the stand, I've cross examined them on the stand. I've been to the crime lab a million times, but how they do it remains a mystery to me. They look under a microscope and they can actually isolate the DNA. Of course, it's much more complicated than that, but they can isolate the DNA strands. Then once they isolate it, they begin to try and identify it. That is why I have to pray to my Lord in heaven that nanos sent the DNA inside the home to a DNA expert that specializes in mixed, degraded, old minuscule amounts of DNA such as Christine Mittleman and Othram Labs. They cracked the Bryan Kohberger case with an incredible statistic. They cracked the Rachel Morin case when an illegal alien came into this country running from a murder charge in El Salvador. He murdered somebody there. He comes through LA sex, assaults a minor in her own home with her family there. Leaves caught on camera. And then he makes his way to find Rachel Moran where he horribly assaults her and murders her on the Ma and PA trail that was cracked by Othram. Now we need them on this. We know there is multiple DNA, but before I go down the DNA avenue, we need to finish each topic. Don't you agree, Colesrud? Isn't that the rule? Direct and cross examination. You finish one topic, pause so the jury can absorb what has just happened and then you move to the next topic. If you have to circle back. You have to circle back. But it's just good trial practice to finish one topic before you go to the next topic. Agree or disagree.

F (27:12)

And, you know, within that, you also want to incorporate the idea of primacy and recency, where you put the most memorable facts up front and in the back and kind of your. Your neutral to bad facts in the middle. Because jurors, like any human, has a proclivity to remember what they hear first and what they hear last. Now, you know, one thing I don't like about the DNA that you're talking about is that it was discovered apparently two or three weeks after the initial observation of the crime scene. And this brings up, you know, for a defense attorney to argue that the DNA was planted there, that it was contaminated by somebody at the scene of the crime. Almost like the O.J. simpson case and the bloody glove.

D (28:03)

Okay, Colesrude, I'm gonna take you back to school. We've already discussed that. This is what we came up with. I hear what you're saying, and it would be a wonderful avenue for the defense to trip down. But in order to do that, they would have to have the DNA of the suspect. Let's just use O.J. simpson as the poster child for this. He argued that the victim's DNA was planted on his socks and elsewhere because he says, which is not true, he had already been identified wrongfully as the killer, the double killer of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. So it was feasible. It was a lie, but it was feasible. In this case, we don't have a perp yet. We have not identified a suspect, so it would be impossible to put their DNA at the crime scene. Do you follow?

F (29:05)

I do, but I disagree. I. You know, the reason why, and that is if the FBI or law enforcement has a target in mind, a defense attorney could argue that they put that person's DNA at the crime scene in order to, you know, frame that person. Now, I'm not saying that this is going to be a winning argument, but, you know, in front, when you go in front of a jury, you never know what's going to stick or not stick. And this just gives a defense attorney ammunition going forward because they didn't discover the DNA in a timely fashion once they got to the crime scene.

D (29:44)

Okay, I hear you. I agree and disagree. I agree that because the DNA inside the home, the additional DNA that we now are learning over the weekend was mixed, was found two weeks later. Yeah, there'll always be an avenue for the defense to argue, but I think the Other argument will prevail. But you know what? If you get one juror that is receptive to that kind of argument, you may be absolutely correct. Especially jurors that question or are suspicious of police. Okay, before we go further down the DNA rabbit hole, I want to go back to the walkie talkie. I want to go back to the other items found to be on his person, and I want to look at what we believe to be a lululemon marking. Okay, any of you out there that has a high school girl, or forget high school, junior high, maybe even elementary. Lululemon is really expensive, but a lululemon insignia. Could I see that control room? That's what we're talking about right now. So let's see the lululemon insignia. There you go. See that right there? For those of you that don't have a teen girl or just a girl period, Lululemon. That's their insignia. You didn't get that at Walmart? Absolutely not. So we're learning more and more now. That's one thing Nano's got right? Over the weekend, he said we're learning more and more about the clothing the person is wearing. The porch guy. Okay, where is the Lululemon insignia?

E (31:22)

It is on the left cuff of the suspect that is facing the nest camera. Left cuff on the outside, as you can see, right there.

D (31:33)

I can't the outside. I mean, I hate to cross examine my own witness, but the left cuff of. What are you talking about? His arm?

E (31:43)

That's what I'm trying to explain. I don't. I'm not exactly sure what in particular that is on. It appears to be on the left cuff of the jacket that the suspect is wearing.

D (31:55)

So the jacket, and that is from Chillinoise on X. That's where I first saw it. Trolling through X Twitter. And I saw this that some eagle eye observer found. Okay. Once again, apparently beating out Nanos. I find it really hard to believe it beat out the FBI too, but let's analyze it. Okay. Nano said over the weekend we're getting closer to identifying all of the defendant's clothes, the porch guys, clothes. Now, Scott Eicher, what can you tell me about the FBI clothing data bank?

B (32:31)

Well, they don't have a specific database on clothing, but they have several systems to help them identify clothing. Now, they can use, you know, the Internet. They can use what the databases they've had built over the years to on specific older clothing to help them go to the manufacturers, figure out where they're purchased, and help us track down who might be wearing that clothing.

D (32:57)

Okay, I'm not understanding. You had mentioned in the past the FBI clothing data bank. What is that? Is it a conglomeration of all the research they've done in the past? What is the FBI clothing data bank?

B (33:11)

Well, I wouldn't call it a clothing data bank. I would call it a database data bank. Database, excuse me, that. That has different items in it to deal with clothing, fabrics like carpets. So that's what we're looking at in historically, Keeping track of what was available and kind of logging that information. As you've seen, it's used not for clothing but also for carpet fibers. It's kind of a fiber clothing slash database.

D (33:45)

Got it. Got it. Okay. Will that help solve the mystery? Will these items be pieced together and help us catch the so called porch guy and find Nancy Guthrie? Google is working fast and furious to recover even more video, possibly audio. Good thing that he disabled the door cam, because now we know it kept recording. Two more developments in the last hours. A bloody glove has been found about a mile from Nancy Guthrie's home and a backpack discarded. Dave Mack, what do you know, Nancy?

E (34:23)

Starting with the bloody glove, when it was recovered, it was seen by two citizens that were just out and about in Tucson about a mile from Nancy Guthrie's home. They see the glove and they immediately don't touch it. They call first they call the FBI. FBI says, well, don't know when we can get out there to get it. Then they call the sheriff's office. We'll be there in a little while. Finally they call 91 1. That's when deputies then showed up about 15 minutes later for this bloody glove. Now moving on to the backpack. This is a shocking turn of events, Nancy. I would think that when you have the power of the FBI, the sheriff's department, 400 detectives, every area within two miles would have been searched by now. But apparently there's an area about a mile and a half from Nancy Guthrie's home that has a homeless encampment. And it's one of these, like a culvert that has like the big metal tube where water can wash through it. And it is used by homeless people where they stay for the night. Looking in the area, a citizen found a black backpack. Now these citizens are gathering at a local store in the parking lot and doing their own searches, trying to help. And this woman was part of that search crew. She's searching an area. There were a couple of homeless people in this pipe and the she saw this discarded backpack. It's a black backpack and she was able to pick it up with a stick. She didn't touch it. She then notified authorities who came out and picked up the backpack. So those two recoveries being made by volunteers, not by law enforcement, not from official searches, but from unofficial searches by people volunteering their time to try to help.

A (36:27)

Weight Watchers now offers access to affordable GLP1s. It works for members like I'm Hailey and I've lost 100 pounds. Weight Watchers has everything I need from weight loss medications to nutrition support and help with my side effects. It's all in one place. Weight Watchers handles the insurance for you and offers affordable cash pay options. With our program, our members are losing more weight with expert nutrition and side effect support.

B (36:51)

I'm Mike and I've lost 135 pounds. Weight Watchers prescribing GLP1 medications.

C (36:56)

It's been life changing.

D (36:57)

I'm Sharia and I lost 80 pounds on Weight Watchers. I realized that it would take more than a prescription to lose weight and feel good on a GLP1.

A (37:06)

Better results, expert support, lose more weight, make it last.

B (37:11)

I can't imagine doing a GLP1 without Weight Watchers.

A (37:14)

Get started for as low as $25@weightwatchers.com for over 60 years we've helped millions of members find what works for them. Now it's your turn. Weight Watchers Watch it work.

D (37:27)

Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Joining me now, special guest John Bueller, former detective Modesto PD California, 31 years and homicide robbery, 31 years of expertise. He shot to fame in the Scott Peterson investigation. John Bueller, thank you for being with us. What do you make of what we are learning now? First of all, I don't want to spend a lot of time on it because it doesn't advance the investigation at all. But what is nanos problem with bringing in the feds? Number one and late breaking developments are better than no developments at all. And yes, it's easier. It's more simple when a police law enforcement finds evidence. But that's not the way of the world. Witnesses find evidence all the time. It's just another hurdle to jump over when you're trying to introduce it at trial. So what do you make of all this, John?

C (38:35)

Well, Nancy, good morning. I'm always good to be with you and your guests and everything like that. A couple of things. Breaking it down into two segments with the sheriff and the FBI. This is not totally uncommon. It shouldn't happen at all. But it does happen once in a while. With management staff, egos and, and things like that, where they want to maintain control of the case. But the thing is, is the, the scope of this case and the size of it and the things that are going on with it, it doesn't do anybody any good for just the sheriff's office to hold on to it. The FBI can't really be brought in unless they're requested to come in on a domestic operation, which they do frequently. I don't see any federal crime here, but the resources they have are ones that you certainly want to use to the best of your ability without any, any accounting for who gets credit or anything like that. I don't know really too much about the sheriff. Haven't spent any time with them. But there, there could be some rivalry. There has been. I've seen that in the past. Generally the detectives and the agents can get past it without any problem because they end up being a lot of good friendships between them. Now, when it comes to the evidence that people are finding out there, one of the things that there's an issue this is when it comes to three weeks since Nancy disappeared, now you're finding evidence that might not have been on the ground two, three weeks ago and might have been just discarded maybe a day ago or 10 days ago. So it's hard to categorize whether or not evidence or, you know, backpacks, gloves or anything like that that's found by people that are having, have a good heart and they want to help, hard to necessarily lock that into the investigation. But you can't ignore it because if you ignore evidence like that, even if it's brought up by neighbor or some passerby and you blow it off as an investigator, there is where the reasonable doubt is created by the defense with their fairly small hurdle to get over when it comes to creating reasonable doubt. So when it comes to this stuff with that one person that made the 911 call to have the deputies come out right away and collect that stuff. Good call on that part. The delay on these things. Well, you know, I can understand if they're over overworked and understaffed, but you certainly don't want to leave that stuff laying around out there.

D (40:44)

I'm glad you defended them right there at the end when you said overworked and understaffed. I mean, there are a lot of agents, federal agents and sheriffs on this, but apparently, Dave Mack, correct me if I'm wrong, the last count was around 50,000 tips. And now the people manning the tip line are saying, please do not Call us with your opinion, your theories, your questions and please not your psychic premonitions. Don't. But they still have 50,000 tips that we know of at the last count. Isn't that true, Dave Mack?

E (41:25)

Absolutely. You've got 50,000 tips that are being called in. And a lot of them, they've got to be worked. And as you said, you know, they are saying, please, we don't want your opinion or your thoughts or whatever. We just need the tips. And so they're still, they being law enforcement, still asking for legitimate tips, but with the volume, come on, 50,000 tips, how are you going to get to that many? It's a needle in a haystack or a needle in a needle stack, actually.

D (41:49)

So I hear what John Bueller saying. We're already getting a lot of resistance online. Like why didn't they show up immediately to get the bloody glove? You know what, I've got a feeling, a very strong belief that they're going as fast as they can. So a bloody glove, it's been taken into evidence. A backpack found. Dave Mack brought up the fact that there are homeless living near a culvert there. Is it from them? Don't know. Dave Mack, how far away from the home was the bloody glove?

E (42:20)

About a mile. Mile and a half? Yeah, not far.

D (42:23)

It's amazing to me that we're still finding evidence on the side of the road after all this time. And it was disturbing, very disturbing as far as evidentiary wise, that a lot of the many of the 16 gloves that were found belonged to searchers. Bueller, wouldn't you think they would tell the searchers, don't take off your art, your clothing items and throw them on the ground. But they did. And now we've got that whole line of defense. Colesrey would have a field day with this. If a glove is found to have evidence on it, he could argue the it was planted just like all the other 16 were. It means nothing. A field day. Why would people take off their gloves searching and throw them down on the ground?

C (43:11)

Well, Nancy, you know, hard to get into the mind of people that would do something like that. I know there's a lot of people out there that have good intentions and they have a good heart and everything like that and they want to help and kudos to them. But there's also going to be that fringe, those people that, you know, either want to get involved in this that don't have anything to do with it because it's the biggest thing going on or the second reason is Maybe they just want to, you know, screw with the investigators and screw with the case. Evil walks amongst us. We see it all the time, and it's in the news all the time. So you have that. The one thing that is really interesting to me is I was down there last week. You may know. And when you're at Nancy's house or any of the houses in that neighborhood, if you try to walk from your patio to the neighbor's patio by going across the yards, you're going to have a hard time doing it because there is cactus, more cactus I've ever seen in my life. You essentially have to go down your driveway to the road, walk to your neighbor's place, go up their driveway, and that. So the thought of whoever these abductor or abductors are, that if they took Nancy and they went out the back slider and then they went across to the next yard over or something like that, I find that hard to believe. For somebody who's probably got limited mobility, is not in good health, to have to think that they're going to abduct her and walk her through that area at night without illumination, with everything wanting to stick into you when you walk through there. It's a big stretch for me. I think it's more likely they had a car nearby out of camera range, maybe out of hammered view, because the field of view wasn't wide enough. And they were able to put her in there and then get out of there. And that was one of the reasons that I think I'm certain that they got to be doing it, because I'm not the only one to ever come up with this. But looking for vehicles that come into the area that don't belong there, as I think you guys should probably have talked before. Most cars, new cars now, of course, are downloaded through the little shark fin on the back to AT&T. I think AT&T has like 90% of the downloads. Even if you don't enable it, it's still there. And so if they do a search on that to see what cars belong in the neighborhood, yeah, you're going to get ones that come back registered to neighbors, but foreign cars that don't belong there. Maybe a week or two earlier, they're scouting the neighborhood. But certainly on the day of the abduction, I'd be looking for that. Those are things that just kind of random thoughts that come out of my head. But as far as the gloves and things like that, really difficult to link those to our victim. Kind of like when we were talking here, a while back about Lacy when things were found with her when she came up on shore. It's difficult to link debris that might not even be connected to her as being involved in the crime. And same thing with debris that's being found now. How do you connect that? Now it's going to back up the lab quite a bit if you got to check for DNA in every discarded glove.

D (45:50)

The search for Nancy Guthrie goes on. Yes, the searchers are weary. Yes, law enforcement is trying everything. But now is not the time for weakness. Now is the time to dig in. Will the FBI be able to piece together the puzzle? Specifically, the clothing we now know comes from different stores. Was it online? Was it in person? What kind of gun was used? Is there an accomplice? If you know or think you know anything about the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, please dial toll free 800-225-5324. Or if you wish to remain anonymous, 520-882-7463. There is a $202,000 reward. We remember American hero Trooper Michael Diego, Florida highway patrol. Just 28 after serving four years. He leaves behind a grieving fiance, American hero Trooper Michael Diego. Thank you to our guests, but especially to you for being with us tonight and continuing in the faith. We will find Nancy Guthrie. Nancy Grace signing off. Goodbye, friend.