Podcast Summary: Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield

Episode: Disturbing Blood Discovery Inside Nancy Guthrie’s Home | Nancy Guthrie Missing Update

Date: February 22, 2026
Host: Ashleigh Banfield
Guest: CeCe Moore (Chief Genetic Genealogist, Parabon Nanolabs)

Episode Overview

In this intense true crime episode, veteran journalist Ashleigh Banfield provides critical updates on the Nancy Guthrie missing person case, three weeks after her disappearance. Banfield breaks exclusive news about new forensic findings inside Nancy’s home, discusses conflicting law enforcement statements, and dives deep into the complexities of DNA evidence with genealogist CeCe Moore. The conversation reveals the investigative challenges, the techniques used to analyze DNA, and frustrations with the investigation's transparency.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Major Investigation Update: Blood Pattern Discovery

• [03:35] Banfield reveals information from a trusted law enforcement source:

  • Blood droplets are not only found outside Nancy Guthrie's front door but continue inside the house.
  • The blood pattern (vertical, unsmeared droplets) is consistent both inside and outside, suggesting no sign of struggle.
  • Critical details still unknown, such as the exact location within the house.

  Quote:
  “The pattern of that blood inside the house matches the pattern outside the house, outside Nancy's front door…they fall straight up and down, 90 degrees. There’s no smears, there’s no stepping in it, there’s no struggle…It is exactly the same inside the house.”
  — Ashleigh Banfield [04:30]

  Additional scene details:

  • Back door was found wide open.
  • Front security camera was removed or disrupted.
  • Law enforcement at first treated it as a missing elderly person case.

2. Mixed Message From Law Enforcement & DNA Analysis Issues

• [06:00] Contradictory public statements by the sheriff regarding the list of suspects/names and DNA found.

• [07:15] Frustration arises because the sheriff states that the DNA lab is struggling to separate an unknown male DNA profile from mixed DNA samples.

  Quote:
  "What’s interesting is Michael Ruiz from Fox says, this runs completely counter to what we’ve been told…There are names that have been taken and photographs to various gun shops all around Tucson…so maybe it’s semantics, but there were names.”
  — Ashleigh Banfield [06:45]

  • The DNA lab in Florida (DNA Labs International) is having trouble analyzing the mixed DNA, while other samples (like those from gloves found two miles away) were processed quickly.
  • The DNA found does not match Nancy Guthrie or her close circle.

3. Deep Dive Into DNA Complexities with CeCe Moore

• [09:35] Guest CeCe Moore is introduced to explain DNA analysis challenges:

  • If Nancy's DNA was mixed with a suspect's and the proportion was significant, separation should be doable.
  • More likely, the mixture contains DNA from two or more unknown people, or low proportions from the suspect.

  Quote:
  "If it was Nancy’s with an unknown male…that would be more straightforward. But if it’s two or more unknown people’s DNA, that’s not so straightforward…it really does make it difficult.”
  — CeCe Moore [09:45]

• Mixed DNA samples could come from blood, saliva, sweat, or transfer/touch DNA.

• Describes how suspect’s efforts (wearing gloves, covering up) reduce viable DNA left behind.

  Quote:
  “We know he had gloves…he was definitely making an effort to not leave any biological material behind.”
  — CeCe Moore [15:01]

• Single-source samples (e.g., spit on a flashlight/bite light) would be easier to analyze, but there’s no evidence that's the case.

4. The DNA Profiling Process Explained

• [21:46]–[30:59]
  Key DNA Methods:

  • STR (Short Tandem Repeat): Used for direct matches in CODIS or state databases.
  • Familial Searching: Looks for immediate biological relatives.
  • SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism): Enables broad genealogical searches (e.g., for distant cousins).

  Quote:
  “STR is the standard thing that most people are used to hearing about. But SNP, how does that differ? …It’s a completely different type of genetic marker…If you want to identify someone, you need to look at the portions of the DNA that mutate more quickly.”
  — CeCe Moore [26:06]

• CODIS only allows law enforcement to use exact matches or immediate familial searching.

• Commercial databases like Ancestry or 23andMe are currently closed to law enforcement (no surreptitious matches without a warrant), though GEDmatch, Family Tree DNA, and DNA Justice accept uploads for law enforcement use.

5. Legal and Ethical Debates in DNA Usage

• [31:21]–[41:47]

  • Public misconception: Law enforcement cannot currently access Ancestry/23andMe profiles unless major policy/warrant changes.
  • CeCe predicts the FBI may soon pursue warrants to break into these databases (possibly for the first time, prompted by unsolved major cases like Nancy Guthrie’s).

  Quote:
  “If not this case, it’s going to happen in another case very, very soon. I think they are ready to go…And the problem with that is once that happens, the dam is going to be open.”
  — CeCe Moore [40:33]

• Ethical concerns about privacy, democratic consent, and public support for using genealogy databases to solve violent crimes.

6. New Criticism and Tension in the Investigation

• [41:47] New York Post criticizes Sheriff Chris Nanos for “locking down” the investigation, making all decisions with only two senior officers, and allegedly sidelining the FBI.

  Quote:
  “It’s limited to the thought process of three men…they keep everything from the FBI. They just aren’t sharing. It’s a pretty strident accusation.”
  — Ashleigh Banfield [41:58]

• Banfield notes the chaos around the scene (media swarm, traffic changes), and the sheriff’s resistance to private search parties.

  Quote:
  “The desert is a big place. Why not enlist the help of others?...Private search parties come in, people that are well established with law enforcement…”
  — Ashleigh Banfield [49:10]

• Ongoing frustration with inconsistent and restrictive public communication from local law enforcement.

7. Call to Action & Case Reminders

• [50:00] Banfield urges the public to report substantive tips (not theories or complaints) to 1-800-CALL-FBI, focusing on abnormal behavior or schedule changes around February 1st, especially in the Tucson area.

  Quote:
  “That is a tip because whoever did this to Nancy Guthrie didn’t have a normal routine that next day or the day after…Those are good tips. 1-800-CALL-FBI.”
  — Ashleigh Banfield [50:38]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Vertical, Unsmeared Blood Discovery:
  “There’s no smears, there’s no stepping in it, there’s no struggle…It is exactly the same inside the house.” — Ashleigh Banfield [04:30]

• DNA Lab Frustration:
  “Trying to…separate this unknown male DNA from a mixture. So again, you know, clear as mud in the messaging…” — Ashleigh Banfield [49:10]

• DNA Lab Excellence:
  “DNA Labs International, no joke. They are good and they have solved…really tricky crimes to solve. If they can’t do it, is there anybody else who could?” — Ashleigh Banfield [21:55]

• CeCe Moore on privacy and law enforcement access:
  “Despite the fact there are over 50 million people who have taken direct to consumer DNA tests, law enforcement is barred from using the vast majority of those profiles…If they would do that, that would be a good middle ground.” — CeCe Moore [31:21]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [03:35] — New findings: blood pattern discovery and implications.
• [06:00] — Contradictory law enforcement communications and suspect list confusion.
• [09:35] — Introduction of CeCe Moore; deep dive into DNA analysis challenges.
• [21:46] — Technical explanation of DNA profiling, lab capabilities.
• [31:21] — Legal use of genealogy databases and public consent.
• [41:47] — Criticism of local law enforcement’s secrecy and command structure.
• [49:10] — Sheriff’s stance on private search parties and public search efforts.
• [50:00] — Banfield’s call to action for viable tips from the public.

Summary Conclusion

This episode takes listeners right into the heart of the Nancy Guthrie case as crucial forensic details emerge. Banfield, using her deep reporter credentials, challenges official narratives and explores the technical and ethical labyrinth of DNA analysis with expert CeCe Moore. Listeners are left with a fuller understanding of both investigative science and the messiness of real-world cases: sharp new clues, bureaucratic stumbling blocks, and the ever-present hope that the right tip, the right match, or an unavoidable legal precedent will finally crack the case.