Nancy Guthrie Mystery: Will They Ever Find Her... Or Catch the Person Who Took Her?

Summary

Drop Dead Serious with Ashleigh Banfield

Episode: Nancy Guthrie Mystery: Will They Ever Find Her... Or Catch the Person Who Took Her?

Date: March 21, 2026
Host: Ashleigh Banfield
Featured Guest: Sergeant Aaron Cross (President, Pima County Deputies Organization)

---

Overview

In this episode, Ashleigh Banfield investigates the ongoing mystery of missing woman Nancy Guthrie. As the search drags past the 47-day mark, Banfield discusses the perceived hopelessness surrounding the case, law enforcement’s internal challenges, the handling of evidence, leadership criticism, and the prospects for finding Nancy or apprehending the perpetrator. A significant portion of the episode features an in-depth, candid interview with Sergeant Aaron Cross, who sheds light on the current mood within law enforcement, details of the investigation, and controversies impacting the case.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Emotional and Investigative "Rubicon"

• Day 48 since Nancy Guthrie's disappearance felt especially poignant for Banfield, evoking the 47 days it took to capture Bryan Kohberger in a famous case (03:01).
• Feelings of urgency, frustration, and hope are balanced as Banfield shares both public concerns and new inside perspectives intended to "give you hope" (03:40).

2. Status Inside Law Enforcement

• According to Cross, after the FBI-integrated task force moved to their own facility, information became tightly locked down—even among colleagues (05:48, 06:17).
• The task force comprises approximately five Pima County Sheriff's Office homicide investigators plus a (declared) unknown number of FBI agents (06:38).
• Outside the task force, law enforcement activity has largely returned to "business as usual" (04:30, 18:11).

3. "The Grind Phase" of Investigation

• Cross introduces the concept of the “grind phase” — a slow, methodical period where investigators sift through thousands of tips for actionable leads (07:06, 08:05).

• The department has received over 40,000 tips, much of it "noise." Significant time is needed to find the "signal"—anything truly relevant to the case (08:05, 08:43).

  "I call it the grind phase of any investigation… just grinding through the tips, combing through the evidence carefully, and then waiting on, of course, the DNA…" — Sgt. Aaron Cross [07:06]

• Public frustration is both palpable and manifesting as angry or fearful calls to tip lines (09:41, 10:29).

4. Departmental Frustrations & Leadership Critique

• Many deputies and detectives are disillusioned with Sheriff Nanos’ handling of the case—his contradictory statements and public persona have led to calls for a recall (04:00, 25:41).

  "Every time he gives a press conference, he contradicts himself… it was frankly embarrassing for all of us." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [21:40]

• Command decisions—including the early turnover of the crime scene and limited initial searches—are identified as the choices of upper leadership, not the investigators on the ground (26:45, 27:19).

5. Early Investigation Missteps

• The first week after Nancy's disappearance was marked by a narrow focus on family and close associates, including search warrants for family vehicles and property (20:27).

  "Of course you're going to want to rule out the last people that saw someone alive… That's just investigative 101." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [20:27]

• Decisions like the quick release of the scene and drastic reduction in search efforts continue to baffle both investigators and Banfield (28:14).

6. The Difficulties of Searching the Desert

• The Arizona desert’s vastness and harshness make recovery missions extremely challenging; there is precedent for bodies being found years later, often by chance (29:15, 30:06).

  "Bodies… we recover them years later… buried… next to a different little girl as well." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [30:11]

• Grassroots and outside offers (like the "Pian Navy") to join search efforts were rejected—possibly due to leadership’s desire for control (33:41, 34:52).

7. Surveillance Footage, Timeline, and Public Tips

• Banfield and Cross discuss the importance of releasing clear timelines and details—such as surveillance images from Jan. 11 and Jan. 24—to enable more targeted public tips (36:07).
• The perpetrator is believed to be moderately familiar with the neighborhood, possibly scouting locations prior to the crime (36:47).

8. Forensic Evidence and the Role of DNA

• Hopes are now heavily pinned on analysis of an "unknown male DNA" found in the home—possibly a partial sample being examined via cutting-edge methods at a Florida lab (48:10–53:03).

• The origins and context of this DNA (e.g., found in an intimate vs. a public area) remain undisclosed, leaving its value as evidence unclear (49:28, 50:26).

• Investigative genetic genealogy is likely playing a role, similar to the methods used in the Kohberger case (51:19).

  "They're trying to use [a new technology] now… for this case." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [53:03]

9. Polygraphs and Family Clearance

• Rumors persist that family members were cleared using polygraph tests and voluntary electronic device surrenders—highly unusual practice in this department (53:29, 54:21).
• Cross expresses skepticism over reliance on polygraphs as decisive investigative tools due to their inadmissibility in court (55:24).

10. Theories on Perpetrator(s) and Motive

• Debate endures over whether the suspect acted alone or had an accomplice—Cross notes it's harder to keep secrets with more people involved, raising the hope a large reward might motivate someone with information to come forward (56:21–57:07).

• The crime did not appear to be "professional," but the perpetrator demonstrated some planning and adaptability (12:40, 39:24).

  "He looked somewhat prepared, as though he had somewhat scouted the location—but not perfectly. He wasn't some pro." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [12:40]

11. Detective Experience and Internal Culture

• The case was initially assigned to a homicide investigator with only two years’ experience—an illustration of depleted expertise attributed to department mismanagement (61:17–63:40).

  "This case was assigned to someone with 2 years experience… The public is starting to see what we've been screaming about for years now." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [63:11, 63:18]

• Culture of retaliation reportedly stifles honest internal criticism and open collaboration (66:41).

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On public mood:

  "A lot of calls were angry people who were angry at, you know, things that were coming out in the press about the sheriff and the contradictions… there's a lot of anger." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [10:29]

• On not giving up:

  "We have a cold case unit for a reason, is sometimes it takes a long time to catch these guys… You never know what technology, what DNA breakthroughs are going to come through that will solve a case that had been cold for a while." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [14:03]

• On the desert’s challenge:

  "Digging graves out here is very difficult work… these shallow graves eventually with the elements will reveal themselves." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [30:40, 30:55]

• On department morale:

  "There's a very real sense of… a culture of retaliation inside the department, and so everybody understands what would happen to you if you angered command staff by expressing doubt and concerns…" — Sgt. Aaron Cross [66:41]

• On the investigation’s state:

  "Right now, it's just like I said, it's in the grind phase, and they have so many tips that they have to comb through and eliminate. It's going to take a very long time… while they wait for the results back from the DNA." — Sgt. Aaron Cross [67:29]

---

Important Timestamps

| Time | Segment / Topic | |---------|--------------------------------------------------------------| | 03:01 | Banfield frames significance of Day 47/48 in case | | 04:30 | Department returning to "business as usual" | | 05:48 | Cross discusses task force composition and info lockdown | | 07:06 | The "grind phase" explained | | 08:43 | Sorting the flood of public tips | | 14:03 | Hope and persistence in long investigations | | 18:57 | Criticism of sheriff’s contradictions | | 21:40 | Impact of public leadership missteps | | 29:15 | Challenges and precedents in desert searches | | 34:52 | Pian Navy and leadership’s need for control | | 36:07 | Importance of date/time on surveillance images | | 48:10 | Unknown male DNA: hope and uncertainty | | 53:03 | Cutting-edge DNA analysis via Florida lab | | 54:21 | Polygraph controversy in clearing family | | 56:21 | Question of lone perpetrator vs. accomplice | | 61:17 | Inexperienced detective assignment; department issues | | 66:41 | Fear and culture of retaliation in agency | | 67:29 | Investigation in "grind phase," awaiting DNA results |

---

Recurring Themes and Tone

• Transparency vs. Secrecy: Frustration abounds due to limited official information and leadership’s contradictory public statements.
• Hope Amid Hopelessness: Despite setbacks, key law enforcement insiders remain confident the crime will eventually be solved, primarily due to the fallibility of perpetrators and emerging technological aid.
• Candid Reflection: Both Banfield and Cross provide a frank, sometimes irreverent but deeply informed examination of investigative process, departmental culture, and missed opportunities.
• Community Outrage and Fear: The public is angry and fearful, inundating law enforcement with tips, concerns, and sometimes venting about perceived incompetence and poor communication.

---

Conclusion

Ashleigh Banfield’s episode provides a granular and unsparing look at the status of the Nancy Guthrie investigation at a critical, anxiety-laden juncture. Through a long, revealing dialogue with Sergeant Aaron Cross, listeners gain insight into investigative realities, department dysfunction, the brutal difficulty of desert searches, the hopes pinned on forensic breakthroughs, and the impact of leadership missteps. If the search for Nancy Guthrie and her abductor continues, the truth may hinge on a blend of experienced detective work, a technological miracle, or simply a single informant’s tip—the grind continues, but so does the hope.

Transcript

[Hallmarkies Podcast Host]

Do you love romcoms? Do you wish you could talk about Christmas movies year round? Then we have the perfect podcast for you. Hallmarkies Podcast. Throughout the year we cover all things romance, holiday and Hallmark, including recaps of every Hallmark show like When Calls, the Heart and the Way Home. You can also get loads of bonus content covering shows like Bridgerton, Sweet Magnolias and and just like that. We are an all female group of friends who are passionate for these shows and movies and give our honest opinions as well as gush over what we love so much. But that's not all. Every Monday there are interviews with all your favorite actors, writers, directors and more. Check out Hallmarkies Podcast on all your podcast providers and on YouTube. That's Hallmarky's podcast. Wherever you listen to podcasts.

[Alex Kanchwitz]

Hi, this is Alex Kanchwitz. I'm the host of Big Technology Podcast, a longtime reporter and an on air contributor to cnbc. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, in meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology Podcast wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hey everyone, I'm Ashley Banfield. This is drop dead serious. Thank you so much for being here. Also, if you haven't yet subscribed, could you do me a solid please? It's free and it's easy, it's fun and it's really nice. I appreciate it. Also, thank you so much for being members. And do not forget we've got a member Q and A coming up on Sunday, March 22, 6:30pm Eastern. If you want to ask me anything, just join up on the membership and you can join our our member Q and A. I do these every so often. It's actually a lot of fun and I love the questions. I absolutely love the questions. Y' all are so invested and know so much about the true crime cases, particularly the Nancy Guthrie case. I gotta tell you, the reason I'm coming to you tonight is because I'm on day 48 today. It's the one day after the day 47, which for me was such a such a Rubicon. Day 47 was when we caught Bryan Kohberger. It's when they arrested him and all up until day 47 in this Guthrie case, I'd been saying, just have patience. Just have patience. It took 47 days to catch Bryan Kohberger, and we just went over that. So I wanted to talk a little bit about hopelessness, and I wanted to talk about whether this case has stalled because there's been a lot of talk from the department that they got nothing. You know, they're out of leads, and they're just, you know, running down every lead, but haven't got enough information even to scrape together enough for probable cause for a warrant. Don't expect raids. I mean, that's been kind of the word, which is very, very upsetting, and it leads to hopelessness. But I've got information for you tonight that I think will make you feel different and will give you hope. Right. Taking the tenor of this department, it's not hopeless. It isn't. Yes, it is a struggle, and, yes, we're at day 48 as I record this. But the words, we will find him, and we have a good chance of finding her. Those are quotes. That's all stuff that makes me feel better. Right. And you're about to hear all the reasons why those things are how the department feels, Especially when you think about the desert topography and just how cruel the desert can be to try to find, God forbid, a body. But if Nancy Guthrie is no longer with us, that is still a task at hand, finding her. So there's some interesting stuff that's coming from the department. They're not happy, many of them, and you've heard this before, they're not happy with their sheriff. Lately, we've been hearing about a recall campaign that's afoot and people upset that he's going to the gym in his sports car and maybe not taking the cases seriously. This is coming from folks in the department who are just not happy about the way things are going. They also say that but for the task force, which is less than half dozen folks from the homicide division and then a number of folks from the FBI working out of the FBI field office in Tucson, people have really returned to fighting crime the way they used to before Nancy Guthrie disappeared. So the rest of the. The department is kind of back to business as usual. I mean, what was it? Back to normal. So I will say this. A lot of folks are calling those tip lines pissed off, like, a lot of angry callers, A lot of frightened people who are afraid of what sheriff nanos said last week, which was he could strike again. Yeah. So there's been a lot of. A lot of calls that have Changed the nature of the work that the folks in the department are doing. But I want you to hear what I called Sergeant Aaron Cross, because he's the president of the Pima County Deputies organization, that's basically the union. He's got his finger on the pulse of just how things are going within, you know, the members and how they feel about this. And that's where I've sort of wanted to take the pulse of the hope if there's. If there's really hopelessness as we go into week eight in trying to find Nancy Guthrie and this perpetrator. And my. My conversation with him. With him was very wide ranging and really informative and very interesting. And I. I have to be honest with you, I came out of it feeling better about solving the case. Have a listen. The first thing I wanted to ask you. Has anything changed? Is there anything really new in the case lately?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Not that we've been able to see outside the task force. The task force, once it was created, now that they've moved out of our building into the FBI building in Tucson, it's made information even more secure than it already was. And they did a pretty good job even before they moved. So what they're doing over at the FBI building in Tucson is really only privy to the people in the task force and I imagine our chain of command.

[Ashley Banfield]

And so, as I understand it, and I'm not sure if this is still the case, about a week or two ago, the task force was sort of solidified, it seemed, with about four or five people from the Pima county sheriff's office homicide unit, and then the collection of FBI representatives. Is that still the case?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's how I understand it, yes, ma'. Am. The five that we have, plus a sergeant, I believe, and then unknown how many FBI agents are tasked with it from there.

[Ashley Banfield]

That was my next question. How many FBI agents do you think are still on the case?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, it's hard to say. I haven't heard any number.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, so for so many people who've been following every single day of this case, it feels stalled. Is it wrong to feel that way out here?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I don't think so. We kind of get that sense, too. I don't know if stalled is the way that we inside the department would view it. I think we just kind of. I call it the grind phase of any investigation. You know, some investigations, in my experience, they. They break quick and easy. Most bad guys are not that intelligent, so we're able to solve them fairly quickly. This one appeared to put some preparation into it obviously, and so it wasn't going to be solved quickly unless we, you know, narrowed down some mistake. But I think now that they're just grinding through the tips, going quick, you know, combing through the evidence carefully, and then waiting on, of course, the DNA, I believe, coming back from the labs in Florida to see if they get any. Any break in the case.

[Ashley Banfield]

I'm going to talk to you about DNA in a second, but I want to go back to what you just said, the grind phase. I don't think I've ever heard that term before. Can you. Can you pull on that thread a little and talk to me a little bit more about what that means and what it really effectively is for you all?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Sure. We received thousands and thousands of tips. And I mean, frankly, a lot of them were people in their theories calling in. A lot of it is. Is noise. But you have to comb through that to get to the signal to something that may be related to the case. It could be something very small. And each of them requires effort to go through, to look at it, to examine how relevant it is to the case and run it down if it does seem relevant. And all that takes time. And again, as I mentioned, you're talking thousands of tips.

[Ashley Banfield]

You know, Sergeant Cross, last we heard, and this is probably two weeks ago, was like 40,000. How much of that roughly percentage is noise and junk and theories?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

A fair amount, I believe.

[Ashley Banfield]

I was actually 50%, 75%.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

How much I'm reluctant to put a number on sounded high. I was in the call center. That's where I work, my day job, my current position. And I could overhear a lot of these tips coming in. One of them, just as an example, was make sure the investigators check around the house for her, said, thank you for that tip, and moved on to the next one. But that tip is cataloged and moved on. So that's the kind of stuff that you have to get through. That kind of stuff can obviously be quickly dismissed. But some of the other things take a little time probably to make sure that you're doing your job and looking into it appropriately.

[Ashley Banfield]

You know, I can imagine some of the calls were angry people who were angry at, you know, things that were coming out in the press about the sheriff and the contradictions. Like how much of it do you think was the public calling in, just saying, for God's sake, get a grip.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, there is a lot of frustration, particularly in our community. You know, I take a lot of calls and I speak with people in our community making reports, and usually A couple times a day, I catch an earful about the performance and some of the. Some of the issues that even the public's able to identify that were troublesome towards the beginning of this, this whole investigation.

[Ashley Banfield]

I know I don't want to ask you to count, but if you had to give it a. A rough estimate, how many calls do you think you've had of people who are just mad?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I've heard probably about a dozen, and I let them vent, and then I have to redirect them back to the. The matter at hand, what they're actually calling about. But there is. There's a lot of. A lot of anger, and I speak. We have a lot of seniors in our. In our town, and there's some. Some fear I'm able to hear asking me for tips on things they can do to. To improve their security. There's a lot of that. And so I've been able to. Fortunately, I had a long career, so I'm able to give them some information to hopefully help them.

[Ashley Banfield]

If you, if you got 12, there are lots of other people working the phones, too. How many in total do you think might have come in that are either

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

angry or fearful with all the deputies out there taking calls each day and all the contacts they have with the members of the public? I can only speculate, but I imagine it's a lot.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hundreds, probably.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's fair.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, that's a hard job for you because you all are trying to solve a very, very vexing crime. And to that end, do you think we're going to find Nancy?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I think so, eventually. You know, I said on another podcast that the odds are usually in law enforcement's favor just because it is extremely difficult to pull off the perfect crime. There's almost always a mistake, and sometimes those mistakes are easy. Most crimes and mistakes are easy to see, and that's why we're able to solve them fairly quickly. But sometimes when they plan and are somewhat meticulous, it takes a little bit time to identify the mistakes they made. And that's where the grind phase of this investigation, I believe, is. Is important, where you just carefully go through everything you're able to get and see where that mistake was. It's very hard to pull off a perfect crime.

[Ashley Banfield]

Do you guys all talk the way I talk with my colleagues? And that is this guy looked like a buffoon on the front doorstep. Like, he just looked like an idiot who wasn't planned. He was winging it. He was MacGyvering it. And that's the kind of guy who's easy to catch. And yet is it possible he just got really, really lucky in that sinful, sinister way because it was just a confluence of things that went in his favor?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. Yeah, he looked. I mean, based on my estimation, he looked somewhat prepared, as though he is just my opinion, it looked as though he had somewhat scouted the location, but not perfectly. And it didn't look like he was some pro. You know, I work the south side of Tucson, and I've seen plenty of professional home invasions, Usually drug rips. And they are quick. They. They travel in groups, and they know exactly what they're doing. This. This did not look like that. So there was some preparation in. Involved, just in my opinion, which. Which makes it a little more difficult, I think, to solve it quickly. But I don't think he was. I don't think this was a perfect crime. So I believe she's. She will be found eventually. It's just a matter of time. And I think he will be caught. He's probably paying attention to all the media. He could be watching this, you know, as it's broadcast, just to see, are they on to me? You know, and so he just needs to make one mistake in law enforcement, you know, we just need to get lucky once to catch him.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, you got to get lucky once. But we're coming up on week eight, and is there a mood in the department as the time drags on that maybe this isn't going to happen? Maybe we won't find him, maybe we won't find her.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I think the mood is just how long will it take? I think we will find him. Everybody thinks that we will find him. That's why we have a cold case unit for a reason, is sometimes it takes a long time to catch these guys. I know we had a recent cold case break, and that one, I believe he told me, was a couple decades old. So you never know. And you never know what technology, what DNA breakthroughs are going to come through that. That will solve a case that had been cold for a while. I mean, we hope that doesn't happen. You know, we hope for the Guthrie family that we're able to solve this quickly and recover their mother. I can't imagine this happening to. To my mother and. And the emotions I would be feeling. And so it's. It's captured the attention, obviously, of Pima county and the nation and possibly the world. And I think we're up to the task. It's just a matter of how long. And we're grateful for the FBI's help.

[Ashley Banfield]

Are people digging in, though, for weeks, months, years? I mean, when you mention the word cold, I say, whoa, hold on. Cold is a long way away. Cold is when you've gone through every tip. There aren't any more tips. There's no more work to do because nothing's coming in. You're not close to cold. But is there a fear that it could be going there?

[Alex Kanchwitz]

Hi, this is Alex Kanchowitz. I'm the host of Big Technology Podcast, a longtime reporter and an on air contributor to cnbc. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, in meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology Podcast.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Wherever you get your podcasts, Quick reset, something practical.

[Hallmarkies Podcast Host]

TikTok is packed with free workout plans,

[Ashley Banfield]

home training, fat loss routines, muscle tips.

[Hallmarkies Podcast Host]

No coach fee, no gym contract. Just follow and move. Download TikTok now.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Carvana is so easy. Just a click and we've got ourselves a car. See so many cars.

[Ashley Banfield]

That's a clicktastic inventory.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

And check out the financing options, payments to fit our budget. I mean, that's Clickonomics 101 delivery to our door.

[Ashley Banfield]

Just a hop, skip and a click away and bought. No better feeling than when everything just clicks. Buy your car today on Carvana, delivery fees may apply.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

We always have to reconcile that possibility. And when I say the cold case unit, I think what I mean to convey to people, to the list of listening audiences is that we just don't give up on these cases, you know, oh, it's been a certain amount of time. We don't have anything to chase down, so let's just pack it away and forget about it. So we'll continue to work it and I'm optimistic, you know, eventually I hope it's solved tomorrow. I hope we may rest them tomorrow and recover. Nancy, get some answers for the Guthrie family.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, is there an energy that starts going through the department? I know people in their silos are keeping things going quiet, but if, if people are getting close, is there an energy that all of a sudden happens? Like, are you going to know it?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Usually there's a buzz because when there's some sort of hot lead, you have to bring in additional Assets. Unless they're. They're tasking just the. The FBI task force and the FBI, you know, hostage rescue team. Eventually they're going to need other assets inside the department, like our SWAT team, usually patrol assets. So there gets a buzz pretty quickly. Usually there's no certainties, only probabilities. And I think usually the probability is high that it kind of leaks out and you get a buzz inside the department and phones start blowing up.

[Ashley Banfield]

Aaron Cross. I don't sense that's happening now. Like, all I'm hearing from everybody is that it's quiet and there are no leads. And there's just. It's just one of those things where we're just waiting for. For something to happen. Is that accurate?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. Outside the task force, it's business as usual for the most part. Patrol is completely back to normal. Cid, our regular detectives are back to normal. So the only question is, what are the task force guys doing and what are they working on? What leads are they running down currently? So that's it. And the fact that they've moved outside the building makes it even more quieter here.

[Ashley Banfield]

One thing I can't wrap my head around, and there are lots of things in this place that I can't, but one that's really bothering me is something that the sheriff said, I think a week ago, or maybe not even a week ago, and that was, we know why he was here, and we've known since day one. Aaron Cross. Is that true?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I don't. I can. I can only speculate what goes on in the sheriff's head. There's so many contradictions. And the story that comes out. Yeah, the story that comes out varies day by day. You know, the family was. No one was cleared. Then the next day, the family was cleared. We gave up the scene too early. Then. We didn't give up the scene too early. You could go down. Every time he gives a press conference, he contradicts himself, it seems so. It's hour by hour, day by day on what he says.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, listen, all those. Those things are all frustrating, but to have come through this horrible odyssey since day one, and we're in, you know, like I said, we're about to enter week eight. The first thing we heard on day two was that there's no concern. No one needs to be fearful out in the community. But now we're hearing he could strike again. Lock the doors. But we've known since day one those two things are divergent, and they both can't be true. So can you tell me at least this My sources told me on day one there was an absolute focus and I think you know where I'm going. Inside the department, the focus was on the family and on the brother in law and that's where they were going by towing the car, searching their house and investigating around their properties, et cetera. Then they're cleared. The car took 40 some odd days to be returned to that family. And now there is this other boogeyman and the sheriff has known since day one. I don't understand. Just tell me if it just changed. Yes, that was the focus on day one and it changed.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, I, I don't have any specific information as to what was going on the unit, you know, that first week. However, of course you're going to want to rule out the last people that saw someone alive or were in good shape. That's just investigative 101. So of course you're going to look at the family and ask the, the, the questions of okay, who was the last person to see her? Check out their story and eliminate them as a suspect. That's, that's not controversial at all.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, but you don't usually tow their car under a warrant.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Right. And I don't know what they were able to write in the affidavit to get the probable cause, you know, to get that search warrant. I believe they're all sealed, but there must have been something there. I can only speculate as to what it was. But yeah, I, I, I think that it's not controversial at all to eliminate the family. And then once you've done that to a certain degree, you can move on to other theories. And again, I don't know what they saw inside the house to drive their theories. But yeah, it's not controversial to go looking into the family to make sure that they weren't involved.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, but then for the sheriff to say now, but I've known since day one and yet it's not the family. But on day one we were doing all this to the family.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It's not helpful. Just speak the facts that you can relate to the public and make sure you're not contradicting yourself. And the thing is, as a law enforcement leader, you want to instill confidence in your community that you are capable, professional, you have poise and you're kind of the emotional rock when they're going through something difficult and this community is, and you want to be very clear the information that you're giving out. And when you contradict yourself, it just undermines public trust in the agency and people start Wondering, okay, what about this investigation? Is it being handled appropriately? And I. My opinion. The opinion of many of my members, because I'm the president of the union, we were calling ourselves the next day after those press conferences and just asking ourselves, what was that about? It was frankly embarrassing for all of us. And we wish that he probably would have been better suited to hand that off to someone else, like a PIO or an investigator who was more familiar with the case.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, I think a lot of us out here, you know, in the receiving end of all of this, have said a lot of the same things, you know, especially. We've known since day one why he was here. And I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but we know why he was here is a very simple, strong comment. Do they know what the motive was? Among those within the walls of where you work, is there a lot of talk of, like, yeah, we. We do know what went on in there?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, not. Not that I've heard. And he. He walked that back in. His very next statement was, we believe we know why he was there. We believe.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hey, listen, same thing. We believe we know why he was there. So was it robbery? Was it sex assault? Was it mistaken identity? Was it ransom? Like, those are all very, very divergent, and they require very, very different evidence. Does he have something to tell us? Why?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Not that I have heard. Again, if they have it inside, they've kept a very tight lid on it inside the unit. We have not heard any of those cases.

[Ashley Banfield]

That ain't the case. Not. Not after I learned what I learned on day three. It hasn't been kept tight, so that's frustrating. So was it just. I guess, was he just making this up as he's going along?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

The sheriff likes to shoot from the hip when he's speaking. He's not a strong public speaker, and he says things that later on have to get cleaned up. And that's why we wish that there had been some prepared statements. We have capable people that were there ready to help him, and we all wish that he had enlisted so of the raid.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, well, a lot of the stuff that I learned on day three, he, you know, really tried to diminish it in the first few press conferences, only for us to learn. Yeah, these were nest cams. Yeah, they are gone. The only thing I, you know, he. He won't confirm. There is blood inside the house, according to two law enforcement officers I've spoken to. I don't know if you know that, do you?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No. And I've purposely avoided Avoided speaking with the homicide team directly just because I didn't want to risk compromising them or getting them jammed up or myself, frankly.

[Ashley Banfield]

Did you hear word in the department that the back door was wide open?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I'd heard some of that, but it was not confirmed.

[Ashley Banfield]

But you'd heard it. Not just. You didn't hear it from me, is what I'm saying correct? Not my circles correct.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

But again, unknown where they, where they heard that from. They could have heard that from you and repeating that to, to me. So it's hard to say, you know how rubber mills go.

[Ashley Banfield]

Sure. Well, I think, you know, here we are, you know, we're going. We passed day 47, which was a big metric for me. Right. It was the Rubicon of when Brian Coburger was caught. Because all the way up until that time I kept telling my audience, be patient. It took till day 47 to catch Bryan Coburger. And that was, you know, we passed it. And so as I look at this, there's news coming out about a recall effort now. And do you think that's gaining a lot of momentum or is that just bluster?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It is. I mean, there's a very real desire inside the community to have change leadership. The problem is that, of course, politicians don't make it very easy to recall themselves. So the process to actually get those signatures, it's 122,000. The process is so onerous that it's almost impossible to meet. But there's, it's hard to find a defender of the sheriff currently in Pima County.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, we'll, we'll keep watching it because like it's, I've seen it happen in other communities. Certainly I've covered one in California. I want to ask you about the searching for, for Nancy Guthrie on day two, which was Monday, February 2nd. I recall watching the sheriff saying, we are drawing back all our assets. We've been busy, busy overnight. We threw everything at this. But now we're, we're focusing more on a crime scene scene rather than a missing person. I thought, well, that doesn't mean you draw back the search. Any idea why there wasn't sort of a shoulder to soldier grid search that was done say within a mile radius or a 2 mile radius? I've seen it in so many other missing persons cases.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. I have no explanation. I, I can tell people that all those decisions, and it's important for them to understand that all those decisions on how the investigation was made, how quickly the house was turned over, the search assets, those were completely command Driven. It was the sheriff, one of his chiefs and a captain that were the shot callers. So when people ask questions, why didn't the investigators do this or take the mat or why'd they give up the, the scene so quickly? Why wasn't there security posted? I can, I can only point to, to our command that that was their decisions. So.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, they're schooled officers. It's not like they were born yesterday. These guys have dozens and dozens of years of experience behind them, all three of them. Do you think that they called off the search and returned the scene because they thought real soon after taking a look inside that they had focus and they knew that they thought it was the son in law and that's all they needed to do?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, I don't think so at all. People have to remember that, that first week we didn't know what this was. It wasn't until we came.

[Ashley Banfield]

Why would they call everything off if they didn't say, you know, we know where we're going with this and all this other stuff is ancillary and none necessary. Necessary?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, I, I, it defies any explanation. I think if we could hop in a time machine, we would all wish that we kept that scene locked down for the entire week. And then once the FBI video, you know, or the video that the FBI was able to recover was released, we would be very grateful that we had that scene locked down. It's, I, I have no explanation.

[Ashley Banfield]

It just seems odd. I mean, the searching in particular, stopping the search within 30 hours, I, I am mystified. The only explanation I could come to was that someone with that much experience as the sheriff and his two deputies had, that they had their minds made up, they knew who they were looking for. And at that early stage, inside sources told me it was the son in law. Mistaken.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Possibly. Possibly. This instance is where you desperately need a very senior homicide detective who's been through trial, been raked over the coals, they know what to look for, they're trying to solve the case while simultaneously case prepping, because that's another important aspect as well. And be ashamed to catch this guy and just have him walk based on something improper at the scene. So this is one where you wanted a very seasoned veteran inside the homicide unit to run the scene and have the authority to make those decisions. And I can't explain why not.

[Ashley Banfield]

I think if you have to rely on evidence from the scene, that's going to be real tricky. If and when slash, let's cross our fingers this guy is caught. But listen, if he's got Nancy's things or Nancy at all, or knows where Nancy is alive or dead. That's a different. That's a different kind of prosecution. And that would be lucky for. For this department, I would think. I want to ask you about the cause. You know Arizona so much better than I do. I'm Canadian. But I know a desert and I know how unforgiving a desert is to search for a body. And in so many of these missing person cases, you have to turn your head towards a search for a body. What are the possibilities if Nancy is out there somewhere in the desert that you can actually find her in any way?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Good. Frankly, it's a vast desert.

[Alex Kanchwitz]

However,

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

bodies, just in my experience, we recover them years later. We had a very famous case where a young girl was taken out of her home and she was found out west of Tucson a couple years later, just a couple hundred yards away from the road, buried, I believe, next to a. A different little girl as well. So it is possible to recover bodies years later, buried, though.

[Ashley Banfield]

Did you. Did something uncover, did you see or did you get a tip to dig?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I believe someone stumbled upon. Because, you know, digging in, digging graves out here is. Is very difficult work. So you're not going down there are graves? No, no, ma', am, no. Not unless you have heading machinery.

[Ashley Banfield]

And so these shallow graves eventually with the elements will reveal themselves.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's oftentimes been my experience working patrol. And we get these calls often. A lot of our recoveries are obviously people know where we are, so we're very close to the border. So we have. We recover bones from udas cross in the desert.

[Ashley Banfield]

What's a uda?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Undocumented alien.

[Ashley Banfield]

Okay.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

So we'll get someone. Some hiker will find him and. And call it in for us. But occasionally we get one like. Like the young girl that was. That was taken and dumped out in the desert in, I believe, a shallow grave, if my memory serves me correctly.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, you know, you mentioned something a second ago. You said a couple hundred yards or maybe 1, 150 yards off. Off the road, right? I believe so, yeah. So if this is a single suspect and Nancy Guthrie was around, you know, 150 pounds, and. And you would have to, God forbid she's dead, and you would have to move that body, you're not going a whole lot further than say, 100 yards off the road, right?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It's hard to say. I mean, there's so many trails that lead out in the desert and. And if they were combing the desert with with search assets. You know, that's unknown to me. It was. It was pretty quiet. They didn't enlist a lot of search and rescue assets if they did. So it's. It's hard to say, you know, if. If you drove out in the middle of. Of the desert and. And had a. Either a grave already pre. Prepared or you were digging that morning or something. It's. It's very macabre to talk about this stuff, and I hope that isn't the case for the government, but isn't that

[Ashley Banfield]

what the police have to do Is a horrible topic, but you've got to get inside the sick and twisted man's mind to know what he might have been capable of if you were alone. And I dare say, alone, you can't get as far as with an accomplice. And so if he were alone, it technically would be easier to find a body.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yes. Yes. And it just takes some hunter, someone driving their quad around, or some hiker that wants to just take a stroll through the desert. It happens very frequently. Like I mentioned previously, we. We get calls about recovering bones, human remains out in the desert very often. And so sometimes we. We recover, you know, just a few. You know, the. The animals. We have a lot of coyotes. Coyotes out here in Tucson, so they obviously will have an impact on that, but we recover them, and, yeah, the sun will bleach them, but they're there. And usually they get found.

[Ashley Banfield]

Sergeant, why do you suppose the Pian Navy was rebuffed or ignored? Ghosted, however you want to put it the way they said it. They came, they offered their assets, they made a pitch to the sheriff, and they didn't get an answer. And I don't know how many quads they had coupled with however many quads locals might have had who might have been happy to put together an armada to do exactly what you're saying.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, it really was strange. And I understand if the sheriff didn't want them to be inside the neighborhood, Ms. Guthrie's neighborhood, causing issues, but we do have a lot of desert area east and west of. So I didn't see the harm in letting them check out. East off, maybe Reddington, or out west off Avor Valley. If people are looking at a map. You take the aver Valley all the way west, and that's where the young girls were found. And I didn't see any harm in that. You know, let them go. And even if they don't find Ms. Guthrie or anything related to this crime, potentially they could solve another crime. Yeah.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah. So what do you think the logic was behind. No, we don't want help, we don't need help. We are not going to search for a missing woman.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

The sheriff likes to control things is just my opinion. And if they're out there self deploying, it's not in his fear of control. And I think he may have taken some issue with that.

[Ashley Banfield]

Do you think that'll change? Do you think suddenly it's going to be like, you know what, we're at a loss here. Things have stalled and all hands on deck. We'll take all the help we can get. Is that something that could happen?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No. Wow. Not in my opinion, no.

[Ashley Banfield]

Not while he's at the helm.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

You're saying that's correct.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, that's unfortunate. Okay, I need to talk to you about January 11th. Because when the FBI released those images, people were very quick to notice one image had a backpack and a gun and the other image did not. And so it wasn't long before sources, many people's sources, almost every media outlet had sources that said these are two different nights. And Sheriff Nano said that would be speculation. But since then we've learned even more. I think it was Fox News Channel had two sources that said not only is it a different night, it's January 11th. The image without the backpack and without the gun. So talk to me a little bit about why that wouldn't be important to release that information because it might actually drive better, more pointed tips about what happened on that day.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I totally agree. And the public could start searching their, you know, people in the area could start searching their surveillance cameras for footage from that night and see if they're able to get something that's beneficial to the investigation. I have no explanation as to, as to why that wasn't released. This type of crime, you want as much help as you can get to solve it. So, you know, it makes sense. Like I mentioned before, it looks. Looked like the perpetrator had somewhat scouted this. This location somewhat. And so that would track completely that if he was there on the 11th.

[Ashley Banfield]

Why do you say somewhat? What's your thought process behind saying somewhat?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Just my personal opinion. Viewing the video from the night in question, it didn't appear to me because, I mean, when you're a cop for a long time, you see lots of surveillance foot of bad guys committing crimes. And so when I was, when I was viewing it that night, when it was released, I was watching it several times just like almost everybody else. And I thought, he looks like he's somewhat familiar because that neighborhood is very dark. You know, there may have been a full moon out. However, there's no street lights, almost none. And so he didn't look like he was stumbling his way in the dark and in an area that he'd never been before. That's just my opinion. It looked like he'd been there at least once before, maybe a few times, and just kind of familiarized himself and got his mind right around the layout. That's, again, that's just my opinion from. From watching the video.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, you got a bigger and better opinion than the rest of us because you do this for a living. But I did see something, and I want to get your opinion on this. Did he have a bite light in his mouth?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It looked like it, yeah.

[Ashley Banfield]

From your investigative history, that's what that is?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, that's what it looked like to me.

[Ashley Banfield]

And did you notice that he. It looked like to me. So I'm going to ask you, did you notice that it appeared he bit down and lit up right at a step before you get to the archway going into Nancy's entrance?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yes. And maybe that might have been from making the step. And so he puts a little more pressure on the light, and so it briefly turns on.

[Ashley Banfield]

So he knew there was a step coming because he was lighting up to watch for it.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

You were keying in on things that I saw for myself as well. That's why I believe that he'd been there before.

[Ashley Banfield]

Can I ask you as well, your opinion again from the investigator's eye? Because mine is just the journalist side. It's very, very different. But I have been doing true crime for decades. When he manhandled the camera, to me, it looked like he was squeezing it, not trying to cover it, trying to squeeze it and pull it off and realizing he couldn't get his fingers, this is my opinion only, that he couldn't get his fingers between that very, very narrow, narrow opening between bracket and camera. He then went off to MacGyver a solution, looking around, briefly noticing there's nothing in the actual entryway and then settling on those vines. And I don't think he's trying to cover the camera with those cute little, you know, leaves. I think he's got his fists on that, and he's putting the vine between the camera and the bracket. He's trying to pull it off. Am I off base with that theory?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, it's entirely possible, for sure.

[Ashley Banfield]

But. No, no, no, I want your. You've seen that. You've seen that image a lot. And as an investigator, what were you all coming to the conclusion of as to what he was up to with those lines.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That one I wasn't frankly, I'm just my personal opinion, I wasn't 100% on what he was trying to do. He may have just been trying to come cover up some frames before he's able to wrench it off, you know, in his brain. I mean you have to think like a bad guy a little bit and which is difficult to do sometimes. But it did, it did look like he was struggling with it. I was just unclear whether he was trying to cover it while he struggled or if he was trying to use that stuff to wrench it off. But that's kind of what I'm getting at. When I he looked a little prepared, but not very prepared prepared. You know, he could have just walked up and spray painted the thing and it would have been a non issue from that point forward. He didn't have to mess with it. But he decided for whatever reason that he wanted to rip it off and take it with him. That's kind of stuff when I say that he was a little prepared but. But not a pro me ask rip

[Ashley Banfield]

it off or smash it off. Because Michael Ruiz of Fox Digital reported that there were fragments of glass below where the doorbell cam had been.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. And perhaps it was damaged as he was ripping it off.

[Ashley Banfield]

But you didn't hear one way or the other if it had been eventually just smashed off.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, no, I did not hear one way or another.

[Ashley Banfield]

So January 24th is the week after January 11th and now neighbors are reporting that they're being asked about January 24th. So what's your read on the fact that there's a January 11 connection where law enforcement says that image of him without the backpack and the gun is from January 11 and then the next weekend neighbors are being asked about January 24th and the weekend after that she's taken. What do you think is going on

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

January 24th, that one I wonder. And again it's just speculation. I wonder if it's either they, they found a different image from from that day that they're asking about or if they were combing through suspicious activity calls that we occasionally get. And maybe there was a call from that night and maybe that's why. But again that's just my guess.

[Ashley Banfield]

Can I ask you how extensive the early fanning out and searching was for contractors not just at Nancy's house, but at everyone's house nearby and sex offenders who are registered in the roughly in the vicinity.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I while I don't have a Specific answer that I've. You know, it's not like I've asked that specific question to the investigators, but the detectives I spoke with in CID mentioned that they. The entirety of CID was dedicated to this crime. CID stands for Criminal Investigations Division. So all our detectives, save for a few units, everybody else was tasked with helping out on this. And they were asked with. Asked to go back to addresses. For the third or fourth time. There was a Circle K that, that they were trying to run down maybe a lead on. On a suspicious vehicle or something that I think they went out there three or four times as well. So I'm fairly confident that everybody was at least in a certain radius from. From the home, were spoken to repeatedly.

[Ashley Banfield]

And you think it was robust, the search for the contractors who'd be in the neighborhood enough times to be familiar with it? They didn't have to be working at her place, but they may have driven by and seen her out there getting her mail at some point. But the contractors who worked in the neighborhood and the registered sex offenders, you think there was a really robust running down of all those folks early on and all as we speak.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

My opinion is the first week, no, they just wanted to speak to all the residents and. And find out what they could get from them. I believe, just my opinion that if they're gonna be speaking to contractors or registered sex offenders and stuff, that's something the task force is probably grinding through right now. And that's what I mean about the grind. Those. Those are not the easy people to track down and speak with. There's only different jobs in different parts of the town or the. Of the county. So you need to go find them and speak to them and see what they know.

[Ashley Banfield]

So, listen, I'm no investigator, but whoever did this may not have known that there was a famous person connected to this case and may not have known that it was going to be the biggest news story for seven weeks straight. And wouldn't it be a little late to be looking for that contractor now because he's seen how hunted he is and he's long gone.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It's possible, yeah. And we are very close to the border, so that would obviously make things difficult if. If he decided to. To go to Mexico. And it's. It's an interesting angle because some of the reporters were speaking to me from out of town and not familiar, and they. They were wondering, oh, well, do you think they had any trouble getting across the border to Mexico if they went that way? And I just. I just laughed and told them, no. Man, there's no one checking for.

[Ashley Banfield]

And it's like a McDonald's coming in, drive through. You don't even have to stop at the speaker.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, the federales wave at you as you, as you go south. There's checkpoints coming in to America, obviously, but on the way out, they just wave at you.

[Ashley Banfield]

However, being that you and your folks there are so close to the border, I know that you also have informants that work both sides of the border as well. Is there a robust effort to tap into the resources of those informants in Nogales just to see if maybe this guy showed up down there in the last couple of weeks looking for some. Looking for someone to harbor him because he's not, you know, used to living there or maybe needs family all of a sudden. You know, the weird things that happen, the weird patterns. Is there an effort to find out if there's something weird in the patterns down there too?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I imagine there, there must be. I worked narcotics for a few years and I had a few professional, what we call them pro cis, professional confidential informants. And they, they're constantly supplying information because they get paid for it. And so if, if there's anything popping up on, on the Mexican side of the border and it makes its way over here, I imagine the confidential informants will be relaying that back, most likely to our federal partners.

[Ashley Banfield]

Have any of these CIS confidential informants thus far done you dirty? Given you some information? Information that didn't pan out?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

If they do, it's usually early on and they, they're not CIS very long, but oftentimes they're incentivized to give good information.

[Ashley Banfield]

I'm only going to say because there were two raids that were very heavy handed. It didn't pan out.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. And it's hard to say the genesis of those, those tips that led to those, those warrants, I mean, they must have had something again to get their search warrants. Unknown what it was, though.

[Ashley Banfield]

Talk to me a little bit about this. Early on, everybody was just so ginned up about the alleged ransom seekers. Is it now commonly felt throughout Pima county that it was garbage? These were ne' er do wells who were glomming on to a terrible situation and trying to maximize their benefit from it.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, every investigator I spoke with early on, and again, it's just our opinion, but every investigator I spoke with shared mind that it was. These were red herrings, just people trying to cash in on a horrible situation. What specific information was contained in the ransom demands are unknown still to a Lot of us. But I understand there was some information to try and make it seem valid. But, yeah, I think we all believe that right away that these were just bad actors.

[Ashley Banfield]

Did anyone ever send a communication saying that Nancy had died? Not to my knowledge, because Savannah and her family put out a message saying, we understand, we just want her back so we can celebrate with her. Which to many of us sounded like, we want her body back. We understand what you're telling us. AKA maybe she's dead. Please just give us the body back. What was the thinking in the. In the department right around that time?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It was all speculation, but, yeah, it was. It was possible that they. They mentioned that she might not have been alive. But again, we. We all believe that they're bad actors. Perhaps inside the unit, inside the homicide unit, maybe they had a different opinion. But from those of us sitting on the outside of the investigation, looking in, hearing that stuff, we all thought was a pretty. Probably scams especially kept it close to

[Ashley Banfield]

the vest early, obviously, but it's been six weeks since then. And then I wonder, how close to the vest does it stay? Obviously there's talk. Obviously, you guys talk. Everybody talks. Are they talking about having seen communications that suggested that Nancy wasn't alive?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, none. If. If there was, they have not spoken about it. Yeah.

[Ashley Banfield]

Okay. The next thing I keep doing, thinking about is the unknown male DNA that we keep hearing about that was found inside Nancy's home that is not from her immediate circle. How robust is that sample? Meaning it could be. It could have come in on a FedEx package and popped on the, you know, kitchen counter, or it could be found on her sheets. Do you know why we care so much about this unknown male DNA? Partial sample. And I was asking because. How significant was it to the potential of being part of the crime?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, that's hard to say. I mean, they're. They're hanging a lot on it, it seems. So I imagine it must seem pretty related to. To this incident. I can only speculate about it. Again, they have not let that slip. A lot of the details from inside the home have been. They've kept that a lid on it. It's hard to describe. They've done a great job keeping that information close to the vest, like you said. But it seems like they are putting a lot of the investigation on the results of this DNA. And I heard that it may be a technology that this Florida lab was going to rush to be ready just for this case. That was something that I heard.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, all that's great. And this is A great lab. This Florida lab is great. DNA International in Deerfield beach, they've solved cold cases before, so nobody should be ascribing any kind of, you know, they shouldn't be criticized. I don't think the Pima County Sheriff's Department should be criticized for using that lab. They're great. I just wonder what the source of the DNA is that makes everybody care because again, unless it's found in an area where no guy really should ever be, meaning the bedroom and the sheets and. As opposed to the kitchen counter where, I mean, it could have been somebody, an electrician who. Or Amazon guy. An Amazon guy could have packed an Amazon box, sneezed inside, closed it and sent it off to Nancy's and she opened the box and now there's unknown male DNA in her house. And that's my question. Why are they hanging so much hope on this male, unknown male DNA source but for the fact that perhaps it was. Was found in a place where no Amazon box would be?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Right. And I think there's two likely scenarios. It's either one clearly related to the incident based on what they were seeing, whatever it was, which I think would be the best case scenario. The worst case scenario, I fear, is that they had so little inside the home that they're just hanging their hat on, on this. I hope that's not the scenario. I hope it's the former, not the latter. But it's, it's hard to say at point, this point.

[Ashley Banfield]

And do you think that within that task force a huge focus is on the investigative genetic genealogy as it was for Coburger behind the scenes? None of us knew that that was going on to the extent that it was going on, that they had fanned out and found family members and they had pulled their trash and discovered, we got him, we've got a son, we've got somebody. Like, do you think there's a lot of that same coburger styled work that's going on right now?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

You know, I'm not a DNA expert and I don't want to pretend to be one here, but I, I think from what I understand, the issue is that it's mixed. That's what I've heard.

[Ashley Banfield]

Which is not a problem. Which is not a problem. Rape cases, they're all mixed, you know, like mixed DNA. And, and I'm only hearing this, I'm not a DNA expert either. I'm only hearing this from the DNA experts that I've interviewed where they've said, don't think for a minute mixed makes A problem here. It doesn't. Just about every crime we've solved has some kind of mixed DNA, especially sex assault. So the mix isn't the issue, it's the partial that they have, the partial sample, and they can't upload that to CODIS because it has to be a full sample. But you take partial, just like this crappy little sample that they had on the knife sheath for Coburger, and they're able to work with the partial and then do investigative genetic genealogy to find all the people that have that piece.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Piece.

[Ashley Banfield]

And then start gumshoeing after them to find out, you know, who among them it is. But that's what I'm wondering. Like, you know, the duck that floats quietly above the water while the paddle below is that kind of story, do you think? With the DNA in this place?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

We hope. We hope. And I've heard the same things about this lab that you've heard, that they are actually fantastic. And it comes with a price tag, of course, but they are very good. And so they're hoping that they can rush this technology. What I'd heard was that the technology that they were trying to use for this was not going to be really used or launched until next year. But they're rushing it up for this one. That's what I'd heard.

[Ashley Banfield]

Tell me more.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's all I know. That's the only thing that they relayed to me.

[Ashley Banfield]

So not only are they rushing this job, they're using state of the art tech that hasn't been used before.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's all I was told was that it was something that they were going to roll out next year and they're trying to use it now. Again, what that technology is, I. I don't know. And how it applies to this DNA, I'm not sure. That's just what I heard.

[Ashley Banfield]

That's really fascinating and promising. Any word that it sounds promising or any other word about the hopefulness of it?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, I'm afraid that's all I have for you, ma'. Am.

[Ashley Banfield]

Wow. What's the story about the polygraph test? Because I had a law enforcement source that told me that the sheriff relied. And you can tell me what you think about this, but that the sheriff relied on polygraph tests and voluntary surrender of electronic devices to clear the family to. Does. Does that sound like it tracks with what you know?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I'd heard that, too. That would be unusual because our. I mean, to my knowledge, I don't believe we've ever used polygraphs in investigations. I know the Feds use them pretty frequently. But it would be kind of a breaking new ground for us to use, to use polygraphs. So I'd heard the same thing and then I'd heard that the polygraphs that were held were for new hires, which is something we do use them for. So it's hard to say.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, I'll say again, did you hear it from me or did you hear it in your circle because your circles are more important?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, I think I'd heard it through the media. So it probably was you. Credit to you for breaking it.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, I will say this, that Brian Enten was able to report that there were polygraphs going on at the sheriff's department headquarters for something unrelated, for staff related things. So that made sense, but separately, I had heard very separately from my law enforcement source that they used polygraphs for the family as well, as well as their voluntarily surrendered electronics to clear them, which, you know, listen, I'm an outsider, but that sounds crazy.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. And maybe that was the Fed's idea, since they were helping at that point, to have them come in and do polygraphs. And maybe the family was willing to do it. Maybe they said, hey, we'll gladly take a lie detector test just to eliminate us because so many.

[Ashley Banfield]

But you can't. That's what I'm saying. It all sounds great, you know, in CSI World and tv, but, but polygraph tests aren't even strong enough to, to be used in court. Which is why I.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Right.

[Ashley Banfield]

In your world, do you, typically you and your colleagues, you rely on a polygraph to clear someone or do you rely on, you know, alibis and evidence and that kind of thing Done.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, that's what I mean. We've, we have not used them in our department to my knowledge, for that very reason, because they're not admissible in court. So we like to rely on other methods. But again, you know, perhaps that was the Fed's contribution to the case was, was running through polygraphs, because I do know they do that.

[Ashley Banfield]

Ah, but again, even the Feds know that polygraphs aren't admissible in court. They're just, they're investigative sort of directional techniques, but they're not to be relied on, you know, certainly not for big, big decisions, you know, that kind of thing. What does your gut tell you? Just because you look at things with a different eye than I do, you have way more experience. Did this perpetrator act alone or do you think that there were accomplices or one accomplice or any of those combinations?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I really have two minds of it. You know, if, if he acted alone, that would explain why we haven't heard anything. Because a lone actor is able to keep his secrets to himself, keep the information quiet and not bragging to other people. But it's always hard to pull off these types of things solo. So I, I'm really of two minds about it. And I know there's some speculation that there was someone else that he was signaling to, you know, someone in a car. But again, if, if there was someone else, I think the likelihood that this would slip out would be. Would be greater. You know, more. The more people are involved in these types of crimes, it's. The more lips involved.

[Ashley Banfield]

I have 1.2 million reasons why the other guy would talk.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. Yes. Yeah. And that was another thing that I think probably would have been more beneficial was to have the family because they wanted to have a large reward right away. I think that would have been best practice because you had the most eyeballs on this case at that point. And you're not going to get someone to turn in their best buddy or, you know, a girlfriend to turn on her boyfriend for, you know, $50,000, $5,000, whatever it was, you know. But if, if this had come out right away of a very large reward, I feel with the most amount of people paying attention to the case, I think that would possibly be. Been beneficial.

[Ashley Banfield]

There's a, there's an alternative theory to that, and that is that girlfriend may be breaking up with him soon. And guess what? There's no honor among thieves or ex lover.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

You are correct. You are correct. And a lot of our tips come from those. And, or, or someone will be bragging out at a bar or something and someone will overhear it and go, oh, I, I know just who's called with that information. So they can then get a nice payday.

[Ashley Banfield]

Bragging or frightened.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Both are motivating factors, for sure.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah. So maybe the patience will pay off in that circumstance. Lots of discussion has been about whatever it was in his pocket from an investigator's eye. What did you think that was sticking out of his pocket?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It was really hard to say. I've heard all sorts of theories that it was a jammer, that it was a radio.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, those are coming from me. I want to know what you think because again,

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

yeah, I, I really don't know. I really don't know. I don't think it's your colleagues.

[Ashley Banfield]

They don't have a really strong feeling one way or another. Like I have seen that before.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, we're, you know, we're people too. And so you're gonna have a, a difference of opinion. Some people think it's, it's a scanner. You know, that would be a solid theory, but again, it's really hard to say.

[Ashley Banfield]

When you say scanner, do you mean police scanner just to make sure that there's no alarm going off and I'm about to be caught?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Correct, yes.

[Ashley Banfield]

You don't think that's possibly a WI fi jammer?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, because I think that it probably would be too small to be effective if it's a WI fi jammer. I think it's more likely that it was a scanner. If anything, that it would be a scanner. Just so he kind of has an idea or a sense of if a neighbor had called him in suspicious or if they saw a vehicle fleeing the scene that he kind of knows. I think that's more likely than a jammer. That's just my personal opinion.

[Ashley Banfield]

Early in this case, like day two, February 2nd, I mentioned to Sheriff Nanos in an interview that I had with him that there was a case in California that seemed very, very similar. A woman named Nancy, but her last name was Woodrum. She'd been taken from her bed in the middle of the night and it was a sexual assault. It was a contractor, a painter who'd worked on her house. Eventually they were able to find him. They eliminated every other suspect and they found him through a geofence. And then he sang like a canary when they brought him in. But he left DNA behind. And I just wondered if anyone in the department ever went that way and maybe called to find out a little bit more about the investigative techniques that were used to catch the Nancy Woodrum killer. Do you know anything? If it's possible?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's a good question. If it, if it had been done, it would have been done inside the homicide unit. And again, they wouldn't have spoken to anybody about it. They were under pretty heavy gag order. So that's, that's why a lot of information has not come out and the fear of, of the, the consequences if it had. But it's, it's something that I, it's probably worthy to, to run down just to see how they did it. And that's kind of one of the challenges we had is, is that our homicide unit wasn't that experienced. The most senior homicide detective we had in the unit at that time had three years on homicide and the case was assigned to a two year homicide guy. They're great investigators. They just didn't have a lot of time in homicide. So I feel like running that down would have been beneficial to see that, you know, the techniques that they used for it, certainly for. For an inexperienced unit.

[Ashley Banfield]

So let me get this straight. Did you just say that this case was assigned to someone with 2 years experience?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Originally? Yes.

[Ashley Banfield]

The Nancy Guthrie case originally went to someone with two years experience?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yes.

[Ashley Banfield]

How long did it stay that way before it changed?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

My understanding was it stayed that way until it went to the task force. Fortunately, yes. Yes. But again, it was just assigned to him. The case was in effect being run by the captain, the chief and the sheriff. They were the decision makers the day to day as to how the investigation was going to unfold and go.

[Ashley Banfield]

So we shouldn't make anything of it that this case was assigned to somebody with two years years experience for several weeks?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Make of it what you will.

[Ashley Banfield]

It sounds like I should make something of it. Like it does sound like that. That. That isn't misstep.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah. And. And I think it was only due to public pressure because I gave this information to Mr. Brian Enten when he interviewed me. And again, it wasn't the investigator's fault. It's just a situation they found themselves in based on decisions from command. And ultimately it. When it went to the task force, they pulled a more senior homicide guy out of his assignment and moved him over there. So now we have more experience.

[Ashley Banfield]

Another homicide guy existed in the division, in the unit. It's just that they didn't task him with it from the start. They gave it to him later.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Correct. We have more experience homicide detectives, they're just scattered throughout the department. They were one of the.

[Ashley Banfield]

I just have to interrupt for a second. I'm sorry. This was huge on day two to the point where they were holding a news conference. It wasn't a small case. So the sheriff knew on day two how big it was in that it warranted a press conference but didn't warrant a more senior investigator.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That's correct.

[Ashley Banfield]

I'm a bit flummoxed.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

The public is starting to see what we've been screaming about for years now. That's just the way it's done. And it isn't just the homicide unit. It's nearly every unit inside our department. That's the situation. All the experience and the expertise were systematically, through either arbitrary or retaliatory reasons, moved out and just the younger guys were left behind.

[Ashley Banfield]

You mentioned another homicide detective eventually was assigned to the Nancy Guthrie case to be at the helm of it. How many more years experience did he have

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

from the task force?

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

And I don't know if it's assigned to him, but he's at least on the task force, and he has over 10 years of homicide experience, from my understanding.

[Ashley Banfield]

So when you say you don't know it's assigned to him, I'm a little confused because I thought that the assignment case was assigned to the. To the. The junior level guy, and then eventually it was reassigned to the senior level guy. Am I wrong?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No. So when we had it inside our own homicide unit, it was assigned to a guy with two years homicide time. And then once they moved it to a task force, I'm uncertain who actually has been assigned the case. I would hope that it would be the more experienced homicide guy, but I don't know that definitively.

[Ashley Banfield]

But you mentioned there was another guy that.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

That.

[Ashley Banfield]

That took it over. That. Is that not what happened?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, the task force took it over. So it's not being run by that detective. From my understanding, that had it in homicide. Once it moved to a task force, I believe it was reassigned to a different detective, and I. I hope it was the one with. With more homicide experience.

[Ashley Banfield]

And, and that other detective that, that took it over was the one you're talking about, he had 10 years or so?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yes, ma'. Am.

[Ashley Banfield]

But you're unclear if he actually took it over. You just think because he's there, he would be the guy naturally who.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Most likely, yeah. Most likely.

[Ashley Banfield]

Can I ask you, if things weren't. If these decisions weren't made early on, do you think we would have caught this person by now?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

It's hard to say. That is hard to say.

[Ashley Banfield]

Possibly.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I can tell you that I. That the scene with. Have been handled differently. If, if this case happened 10, 15 years ago, my opinion is the scene would have been handled very differently.

[Ashley Banfield]

But people say 10, 15 years ago, we didn't have anywhere near the crime fighting toolkit that we have now. And you're saying we would have done better back then?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

In my opinion, yes. We had much more seasoned homicide detectives. They were like titans in the CID department. You know, when they came on scene, everybody knew that you had some real expertise there. These guys were great. And through retirements and transfers, the homicide unit was just gutted just like every other unit.

[Ashley Banfield]

The guy with two years experience who was given the Nancy Guthrie case, did he feel bewildered and make that known among his colleagues? Like, what the hell? I'm not the guy that should be holding this.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

He didn't say to his colleagues that it got back to me, probably because of fear. What would have happened. But I'm sure he probably expressed some reservations to his. To his wife, and that would be

[Ashley Banfield]

the only person he could express reservations to.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Probably, yeah. There's a very real sense of we have a culture of retaliation inside the department, and so everybody understands. What would happen to you if you angered command staff by expressing doubt and concerns, he probably would have found himself transferred out of Homicide very quickly.

[Ashley Banfield]

Even being honest and saying, I don't think I'm the man for this job. I'm too inexperienced, that would have resulted in him being transferred out. Rather than, thank you for your honesty, let me find someone who you know is well suited or better suited.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Yeah, I would wager a large sum of money on it.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, that's really unfortunate. I'm sorry to hear that. Is there anything I haven't asked you that. That you think is important that isn't getting attention or being covered about the Guthrie case?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

No, I. I think that's. We've covered nearly all of it right now. Now, it's just like I said, it's in the grind phase, and they have so many tips that they have to comb through and eliminate. It's going to take a very long time. And they're just doing that. From what I understand, they're doing that while they wait for the results back from the DNA.

[Ashley Banfield]

How many tips do you think are left to go through? Out of the 40,000 or so? How far into the 40,000 or so tips are we?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Impossible to say. Each one has to get looked at on its own.

[Ashley Banfield]

Are we halfway through them?

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

I couldn't even. Don't get me lying to you. I couldn't even tell you.

[Ashley Banfield]

Sergeant Kress, thank you so much for. For speaking to me, for taking the time.

[Sergeant Aaron Cross]

Oh, my pleasure. Thanks for having me on.

[Ashley Banfield]

So that is where we stand. And as I said, I'm recording this on day 48. Please remember, though, we are doing a member Q and a on Sunday, March 22, 6:30pm Eastern Time. Again, it's for the members. So if you want to be a part of the ask me anything, which means you can ask me anything, just hit the join the membership button. But also, don't forget to subscribe. It's two things. They're both really easy. That's subscribething's free and it really does me a solid. So I thank you if you've already done it and I appreciate it if you're about to, and thank you if you just did. Thanks. And I will see the members, all of you, for the Q and A on Sunday. I'm Ashley Banfield. Thank you so much for listening and watching. And remember, the truth isn't just serious, it's drop dead serious. It.