← The Megyn Kelly Show
The Megyn Kelly Show
Genetic Genealogy and DNA Evidence - Part 3 of Megyn Kelly Investigates Nancy Guthrie's Disappearance | Ep. 1276
01:09:58
Megyn Kelly is joined by security experts James Hamilton and Will Geddes and forensic DNA analyst Suzanna Ryan to discuss how the Nancy Guthrie case might be solved through genetic genealogy, how genetic genealogy and DNA testing works, what items in the house forensic investigators should be testing for DNA, how to build a profile of a suspect using DNA, how easy it is for a perpetrator to transfer DNA at a crime scene, the possibility that a transnational criminal group could be behind Nancy's disappearance, how that would impact the ability to find a DNA match, why the FBI put billboards up for “missing” Nancy Guthrie, and more. Geddes- https://www.icpgroupcompanies.com/index.html Hamilton- https://www.hamiltonsecuritygroup.com/ Ryan- https://ryanforensicdna.com/about/ Birch Gold: Text MK to 989898 and get your free info kit on gold PureTalk: Save on wireless with PureTalk visit https://PureTalk.com/MEGYNKELLY Cozy Earth: Visit https://www.CozyEarth.com/MEGYN & Use code ME...
Loading summary
Transcript143 lines
- [00:01]
James Hamilton
With the Venmo debit card. A taco in one hand and ordering
- [00:05]
Will
a ride in the other means you're stacking your rewards. Nice.
- [00:09]
James Hamilton
Get up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash on your favorite brands when you pay with your Venmo debit card.
- [00:15]
Will
From takeout to ride shares, entertainment and
- [00:18]
James Hamilton
more, pick a bundle with your go tos and start earning cash back at those brands. Venmo Stash bundle terms and exclusions apply. See terms at venmo me stashterms max $100 cash back per month.
- [00:30]
Susanna Ryan
Hey guys, have you heard of Gold Belly? It's this amazing site where they ship
- [00:34]
Megyn Kelly
the most iconic famous foods from restaurants
- [00:37]
Susanna Ryan
across the country, anywhere nationwide. I've never found a more perfect gift than food. Gold Belly Ship Chicago deep dish pizza, New York bagels, Maine lobster rolls and even Ina Garten's famous cakes. So if you're looking for a gift for the food lover in your life,
- [00:53]
Megyn Kelly
head to goldbelly.com and get 20% off
- [00:55]
Susanna Ryan
your first order with promo code GIFT. That's goldbelly.com, promo code GIFT.
- [01:01]
Megyn Kelly
Welcome to the Megyn Kelly show live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon East. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to the Megyn Kelly show, still in a remote location, still broadcasting for you guys. And this is part three today of our special four part series into the disappearance of of Nancy Guthrie. In this episode, we take a closer look at the science and the unanswered questions surrounding the DNA collected so far in this case. DNA evidence can be a powerful tool for investigators and prosecutors. As you know, it can confirm identities and place individuals at a scene. And there are ways of tracking someone down and even getting a picture of someone when you find DNA at the scene, even if that specific DNA cannot be matched to any criminal database. And we're going to talk about that today. You could actually come up with a composite picture of someone based purely on unknown DNA, which can tell you what somebody generally looks like. Isn't that so crazy? So it may not match to a criminal database, but you can come up with a profile. It's like they're so advanced. Now the real question here is, why hasn't that been done? Clearly they're not sure whether they have the DNA of the perpetrator. Now, we know that forensic testing is underway on many samples taken from Nancy Guthrie's home, but authorities have not publicly detailed the full scope of what they've collected. Somewhere in Nancy's home, there is DNA belonging to the suspect. That's what virtually every DNA expert will tell you. Like this guy was not so, so forensically antiseptic that he prevented any of his DNA from getting into that home. It's just a matter of whether it can be found. Genetic genealogy is hot. It is the future of law enforcement. It's amazing. CeCe Moore, who's been on the show a couple times, she's the godmother of it.
- [03:05]
Susanna Ryan
I've actually worked cases back to 1958 now.
- [03:08]
Will
Whoa.
- [03:09]
Susanna Ryan
Yeah, quite a bit before I was even born. And so it's just amazing what can be done in those cases where the crime scene investigators were so forward thinking they collected things, they couldn't have imagined how powerful they would be today.
- [03:24]
Megyn Kelly
Touch DNA doesn't have to be yours that they find like in their database. It can be your sixth cousin.
- [03:30]
Susanna Ryan
So it's like reverse engineering someone's family tree and eventually their identity based on their ancestors.
- [03:37]
Megyn Kelly
She was saying, this is why you're not going to have serial killers anymore in the United States.
- [03:42]
Susanna Ryan
About 10% of the cases that we've helped solve or been able to create profiles for have been touch DNA.
- [03:50]
Megyn Kelly
She actually came out and explained it with respect to the Kohlberger case, because, you know, in that case they grabbed trash.
- [03:56]
Susanna Ryan
Most states allow this. It's considered abandoned at that point. And then they go through the trash and try to find an item that might have DNA on it. They were able to perform what is basically a standard paternity test comparison to the profile from the button on the sheath and determined that that individual's DNA from the trash was the father of the individual who left his DNA behind at the crime scene. It is extremely confident, as we saw by the number, 99.99998%. So that means that there's basically no one else on earth that could be the father of that individual.
- [04:34]
Megyn Kelly
This is what's now going to be done to the DNA on those gloves and, and probably also that found in Nancy's home. And you start drawing circles around the person and getting to all their relatives until you can get closer and closer and closer in this case to Tucson, Arizona and somebody who might be living there.
- [04:49]
Will
This is very close to home for me, Megan, because the first case I remember as a little boy growing up in Philadelphia was the boy in the Box case. And late 50s, a little boy found in a box and sort of the outskirts of Philly. No one knew who he was. Finally, after all these leads all around
- [05:07]
James Hamilton
the world, who is this Little boy. We got to give him a name. That breaking news at 5 o'.
- [05:12]
Susanna Ryan
Clock.
- [05:12]
Megyn Kelly
A major break in the case of
- [05:14]
Will
the boy in the box. About two, three years ago, through genetic DNA, that little boy was finally identified.
- [05:22]
Megyn Kelly
Sources tell us police have a name
- [05:24]
Susanna Ryan
and they know who the boy is related to.
- [05:26]
Will
They can put a name on his tombstone. Now, it's hard to figure out who killed him, but now we at least know his name. It is amazing what can be done now. Let's just hope we have something here at Mrs. Guthrie's house.
- [05:36]
Megyn Kelly
They go to the public databases that have people's DNA in them. They're not supposed to go to 23andMe or ancestry.com or heritage.com which are private. Those are not supposed to be accessible by the feds. But it's just like distrust of having your information out there and where it could go. So I can see why they don't really want to be the assistant on this. Have you ever considered taking one of those DNA tests? You never stop because you were afraid of where that might lead. Some of my favorite stories on NBC were the 23andMe stories or the Ancestry.com stories. But the question is, how accurate are those? Okay, I really want to know the answer to this. Get Savannah Guthrie to go to all the companies and say, please give us permission, because you can give us permission. It's not a violation of law to let us have access to this so we can see if there's a match to find this kidnapper. The problem for us here is we don't know if the abductor's DNA is on those gloves or if the DNA they have found inside the house that doesn't match Nancy or one of her service providers is, in fact, the perpetrators. We're not even at the place yet where we know that we have a snp. Unless they have it and they haven't told us. Now, as far as what we do know, the Pima County Sheriff's Department announced last month that it did find DNA at Nancy Guthrie's home that does not belong to her or, quote, those in close contact to her. So that's somewhat promising. But then we since learned that it is mixed DNA, meaning it's from more than one person, making it a little tougher to isolate whose DNA it is. As of now, there's been no report of any DNA matching anyone in the FBI's criminal database or leads generated from genetic genealogy matches, which does take longer. But as we've told you, there is much that we do not know. About what exactly the FBI and the local authorities have uncovered in the investigation. It's very possible they have more than we know. Joining me now to unpack all of this and more will get us. Will's an elite bodyguard who has over 30 years of experience as a security expert. He consults with US Law enforcement and federal government agencies and now runs a firm called International Corporate Protection. If you get kidnapped, you should call Will. Have your family call Will. James Hamilton is here too. He's a former FBI Supervisory Special agent and creator of the FBI's Close Protection School, which is a specialized training program designed for agents to protect high level officials. He now runs his own security firm called Hamilton Security Group. Between these two, you have your family. You call them. God forbid anything were to happen. And here for her first appearance on the program, Susanna Ryan. Susanna is laboratory director at the private forensic DNA lab, Pure Gold Forensics, based in California. She has over 24 years of experience as a forensic DNA analyst and has testified in well over 100 cases. So she knows what she's talking about. Think about this. In 2006, $20,000 equaled roughly 33 ounces of gold at spot price. At today's prices, those same 33 ounces would be worth about $165,000. So you would have put in 20 grand and you'd have something worth 165,000 grand.
- [08:48]
James Hamilton
Pretty good.
- [08:49]
Megyn Kelly
That's why many smart Americans diversify a portion of their savings into precious metals. And that's why you should consider buying gold for from Birchgold Group. For thousands of years, gold has been a store of wealth and today it's a crucial part of any balanced strategy. Even better, Birch Gold can help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax sheltered retirement account in gold. Just text MK to the number 989898 to receive your free info kit on gold. There's no obligation, just useful information with an A rating from the Better Business Bureau and tens of thousands of happy customers. Let Birchgold help you diversify with gold. Now that's peace of mind. Again, text MK to 989898 today, Will, James, Susanna, welcome to you all. Great to see you again. Susannah, we're going to start with you because we want to kick it off on the question of DNA. And you know, we haven't heard anything thus far other than there's mixed DNA inside of the house. And so far they haven't been able to match anything with a known criminal database like the FBI's CODIS. So if you were brought in on this case. Where would you go from there?
- [09:57]
Susanna Ryan
It sounds like they're doing what I would do, which is moving on to genetic genealogy. Now, one thing I would say is I do hope that they're making full use of the CODIS database. And what I mean by that is Arizona is one of the few states there's only about 11 or 12 that allow for something called familial searching. And so what that is is searching for a near match. We're actually searching the regular CODIS database for someone who might be, let's say, a father or a brother of your unknown perpetrator. And again, there's only about 11 or 12 states that allow that. It's not done automatically. It has to be done by a special request. So I do hope that they're doing that. But if they've done that and they don't have a match, then genetic genealogy is pretty much, you know, one of the only ways that short of finding a suspect and doing a direct comparison, that I think this case might be solved. But of course, you do have the difficulty.
- [10:56]
Megyn Kelly
Give us the simple explanation. You run it through the CODIS database that the FBI has. We have criminals and arrestees, and there's nothing. Now, how do you then say, because I know it's a different kind of testing, but how do you then say, okay, I'm going to try to see whether I can use genetic genealogy to figure out whose DNA this is.
- [11:16]
Susanna Ryan
Yes, it is a completely different type of testing. And so you have to have enough sample remaining for, from that original sample where you did your traditional DNA testing, you uploaded it to codis, you did comparisons to any known reference samples. There has to be enough remaining, which there isn't always enough when we're talking about touch or trace DNA. So if you have enough sample now, you have to do a totally different type of testing called SNP testing. That's single nucleotide polymorphisms. And once that is completed, then you're uploading that SNIP profile into the available databases. And that includes GEDmatch Pro and Family Tree DNA. There are other publicly available databases, but most of those do not allow for searching purposes. And so, you know, talked about 23andMe. That's probably the largest one. I think there are about 50 million profiles in that database. The databases they're allowed to search have a couple of million each.
- [12:21]
Megyn Kelly
So you're looking for. You couldn't find a hit in the criminal database, and now you're trying to go over to a more Widespread. Sort of one of those databases people use to find relatives or figure out interesting fun facts about their family history. Now, you're looking for a match over there, and if you can find a match directly to the perpetrator there, great. But you might find a match over there to a father or a distant, distant relative. I mean, it could be like your sixth cousin twice removed. But you'll see something in the genetic information that's returned to you to show I have found a relative of this person who was in Nancy's house.
- [13:01]
Susanna Ryan
That's correct. Right. So what they're looking for is the amount of what we call centimorgans of DNA. So they're looking to see how much just chunks of DNA you share with other people. And, you know, it's interesting. Like, for example, the 23andMe database, that's something that's automatically done. You know, I, I've done that. My sons have. And when they put their DNA in it, automatically matched up to their aunt. Right. Because she had done it. So it just is an automatic process. Now. That's exactly what they're looking for, these pieces of DNA, because you, we know that, you know, with your parents, you share about 50% of your DNA, brothers and sisters at least 50% of the DN. And then you start moving outward, cousins about 25%. And so they're just looking for pieces of DNA, lengths of DNA that have been passed down, that have to have been shared through a family relationship. And the further you go, the less DNA you're going to share. But that puts you in a category of, okay, this may be a second or third cousin. And you have the genealogists who are very skilled then at building out those family trees and trying to narrow in on a specific family. But once you do that, once a family has been identified, you still need to do a direct comparison. The traditional STR testing that we always do. That's what's. That is what the comparison has done. That's what's used in court. Is.
- [14:27]
Megyn Kelly
What do you mean about that? Is that like to take the Bryan Kohlberger case for an example, they had a hit on that knife sheath to eventually they got to Brian's father, and then they had to cheek swab Brian to like. Is that the piece you're talking about? Like, now you do a direct DNA on the actual suspect?
- [14:45]
Susanna Ryan
Yes, that's absolutely correct. So the way we kind of look at it is the SNP testing, the genealogy is sort of a tip. It's a lead. What is actually used in court is that confirmation sample. So once we have that lead, and, you know, I've done this in a number of cases. I have someone, you know, I have a DNA profile and it's gone into codis. It hasn't hit anyone. All right, let's do genealogy. And they tell me, okay, it might be, let's say, one of five brothers. And then they have to get a reference sample from each of those brothers, whether it's a trash pole or they go up to the person and say, hey, will you give me your DNA? And then we rule that person in or out based on the traditional DNA testing.
- [15:29]
Megyn Kelly
Okay. Gosh, it's so complicated. So what about this? The sheriff is saying it's mixed DNA. And our friend Matt Murphy, you know, a longtime Orange county prosecutor, he kind of rolled his eyes at the sheriff saying, oh, it's gonna be tough for the labs to do because it's mixed DNA. Because Matt was like, he's tried many, many homicide cases. He was like, the labs deal with mixed DNA all the time. But, so what's your take on mixed DNA? Does it make it more complicated and is it a deal breaker?
- [15:59]
Susanna Ryan
So we do deal with mixed DNA all the time. That's correct. Especially with the sensitivity of testing. I mean, we're getting DNA from a dozen cells or so. Right. So we're getting mixtures all the time. But that's with traditional testing that you sort of hear about all the time, the SNP testing, it is much more challenging to work with mixtures that you
- [16:22]
Megyn Kelly
need for genetic genealogy.
- [16:24]
Susanna Ryan
Yes, Correct. Yes. And the reason for that is just think of the name. Single nucleotide polymorphism. Many changes. Right. So every single base pair, there's different pieces of DNA that they're looking at. Whereas the type of testing, the traditional testing, it's sort of these chunks of DNA, and we're looking at maybe about 24 of them. They're looking at hundreds of thousands of pieces of DNA. So if you have a mixture now, it's very difficult to pull that mixture apart if it's not the correct ratio. If the. If the person of interest is what we call the major contributor, there's more of that person's DNA, that's definitely something that the labs are able to deal with. Once you start seeing that person of interest being the minor component. Maybe only, let's say, 20 or 25% of the mixture. Now, the genealogists, they have a much more difficult time working with that kind of mixture. And if you have a mixture of three people or four, which is not uncommon with these type of samples, it becomes almost impossible.
- [17:32]
Megyn Kelly
Now, let me ask you, at the time they brought you in, if they brought you into Nancy's house in this investigation and said, where should we be testing for DNA? Right. Like, I mean, in a perfect world, you'd find that mouth flashlight sitting there on the floor, right? Of course, with his saliva all over it. But clearly that didn't happen. So what would you say to them, like walking into this crime scene, what would you want as the DNA analyst?
- [17:59]
Susanna Ryan
Right. So, you know, I mean, I think initially people think, oh, he has gloves on. He's not going to leave his DNA. Well, that's simply not the case. We know that people can leave DNA even when they're wearing gloves because people have a very common habit of touching their own face or hair or skin and other body parts. So anything that wasn't covered, if he's touching it, he's touching that flashlight in his mouth. Now he has his saliva all over his hands. So I would definitely be looking at points of entry, points of exit, doorknobs, light switches, bedding. So let's say Nancy was in bed at this time. Well, he may have gone up to her and shaken her shoulder to wake her. If she's under the covers. Let's look at those covers. Anywhere that was touched on the covers, we have the potential to pick up DNA. I would recommend using an instrument called the M Vac. It's basically a wet vacuum that, that can pick up greater quantities of DNA, sometimes dozens of times more DNA than traditional swabbing or cutting of a sample. So I would definitely want to end back that the bedding. I've had cases, it sounds like this guy was in there for a little while. I've had cases where people use the toilet and they don't always flush. That could be a source of DNA. Sometimes people get really comfortable. These burglars break in and no one's home, and they're having a drink of, you know, take a Pepsi or a beer from the kitchen and then they leave it on the counter. So anything that's like out of place appears to have been moved, would have had to have been touched. That's the things they want to zero in on. And then if they start seeing the same profile in multiple places that excludes any of the known people, then that they're going to have more confidence that they have the correct profile to really.
- [19:56]
Megyn Kelly
That's good. So if they found his DNA or, or someone, the same person's DNA, maybe on the remnants of the nest. Camera in the front. And then again in. We have video of the inside of Nancy's bedroom that we found on the Today show website from 2013. So maybe you'd be testing that ornate and distinctive headboard that Nancy had in her bed in her bedroom, or this little lamp. Like you'd be going to all the little spots right around her, looking for the common profile.
- [20:28]
Susanna Ryan
Exactly. Because we do have to be careful. You know, people are constantly bringing in DNA. You know, yes, they've cleared her. The people that they know have contact with her. But, for example, you know, if I just shook your hand, I probably have your DNA on my hand. And then if I go and open a door now, your DNA might be on that doorknob, but you never touched it. So we have to be really careful when we're talking about this trace or transfer DNA. And that's why I say if we start seeing the same profile over and over again, we have a higher degree of confidence that we have the true perpetrator's DNA.
- [21:03]
Megyn Kelly
So, good. Okay. I want to bring in my expert panel here, because I'm sure they have questions, too. James, you want to ask Susanna anything?
- [21:10]
James Hamilton
Yeah, fascinating, by the way, and good to see you again. And I think Susanna makes a good point, which we were talking about last week. And I think a lot of people weren't confused about when. When we had the, you know, the neighbor being mouth swapped. And I think Susanna can back me up, but I think they did that so they could exclude her. Her DNA, if it was found in the home. They're just looking to exclude folks that may have been in the house. That's why, you know, when we heard about it, we were like, why would they, you know, swab the neighbor's mouth? Susanna, I have two questions for you. But would that make sense that that's why they did it?
- [21:45]
Susanna Ryan
Yes, absolutely. If they want to be able to eliminate any unknown profiles that are in there. And sometimes that helps work with mixtures, like, let's say, her DNA. Even if she's eliminated, if her DNA is present on something, if we know that we can sort of back that person's DNA out, that then helps us to isolate the profile that we're really after.
- [22:08]
James Hamilton
And how difficult. You were talking about a tool that you would recommend, I think, you described as some type of vacuum. But would Pima County. Are you familiar enough with Pima county to understand does their crime scene have those type of capabilities?
- [22:24]
Susanna Ryan
I don't know if Pima county has it. I Will tell you that a number of law enforcement agencies do. I do know that, for example, the Florida lab that has been discussed, DNA Labs International that is doing the testing, I know that they do have an M Vac. They were one of the early users of the M Vac. So the M Vac is portable and if Pima county needed that, they could bring it out there. Or on the other hand, certainly they could take the bedding, submit that to the lab, and then at the lab the analysts can really focus on particular areas that they want to test.
- [22:58]
James Hamilton
Right. And what do you make of the. You know, ostensibly we don't have a suspect yet and it's been quite a while. What do you make of the, you know, no DNA match to any type of database, either CODIS or, you know, 23andMe or genealogy. I mean, let's say there isn't a match. What would you make of something like that?
- [23:19]
Susanna Ryan
You know, I mean, CODIS maybe not terribly surprising. That's going to be only convicted offenders, maybe some other forensic unknown profiles. Now, Arizona is one of the states that allows for arrestees. So people who have simply been arrested of certain felony offenses, their profiles go into the database. And not all states are like that. So that does open up another category to search. But if this person hasn't ever been arrested or convicted of a serious crime, they're just simply not in the database. So we, I do think once we've cleared the CODIS database, I think that the next possibility is genealogy. Now, there are certain racial groups that are are overrepresented in the commercial genealogy databases. Caucasians, many more Caucasian individuals than other racial groups. So it's easier to find someone with a relative if they are Caucasian. I think I heard a stat it was like 90% solve rate if you have single source Caucasian profile. So it can be more challenging if the person is of a different racial background. Doesn't mean impossible. I mean, for example, this glove that was found, which I was kind of surprised they were focusing on because it was so far from the scene. But you never know. There could have been other information that they really thought it was connected. But look, it worked, right? They got a DNA profile. It didn't match anyone in codis, but they did genealogy and they did find who that was, right?
- [24:58]
Megyn Kelly
The restaurant worker.
- [25:00]
Susanna Ryan
Exactly. So it works. It's just finding the correct DNA profile to focus on.
- [25:05]
Megyn Kelly
It's not as easy as we'd like it to be. And the problem in. I'll bring you in one second, will. But the problem in getting they'd love to have access to that 23. And me and Ancestry.com they'd love to be able to run any of these samples in comparison to those. But there's a policy at those entities, at those companies that does not allow it because they know that nobody would sign up for this. Like, not nobody, but fewer people would give their DNA over if they. They thought it was also gonna be accessible by law enforcement. We're naturally. We're Americans. We're naturally skeptical of our government. And also, you know, you don't want your brother to get arrested. A lot of us are like, I don't wanna make it any easier for my family members to get arrested. But they did do it. Like, they did it in Kohlberger. And it was a big deal because they weren't supposed to. And then the defense attorney in Kohlberger made Ann Taylor, she made a big deal out of this, saying that the whole DNA analysis should be thrown out because they access those databases and they shouldn't have. But it's not a law that you can't go into those. It's a policy. And if you can get them to violate their policy, then great. And that's why some people have been saying, correct me if I'm wrong on this, Susanna, that Savannah Guthrie should go to ancestry.com, who, by the way, is a huge participant on the Today show. When I was there, we had an Ancestry.com segment every three days to say, will you please bend the policy and let us run DNA comparisons against your now. So they may already been be doing that, Susanna. Right. Like, they wouldn't publicize it, they would not broadcast it for all the reasons I just said. But it's possible that they are cooperating.
- [26:38]
Susanna Ryan
Yes. If short of, you know, knowing what I know about the Coburger case, I would say, oh, no, they're not going to do that because this is the DOJ's own interim policy on genetic genealogy. But they sure did it in that case. And listen, I get. I see both sides of it, you know, I get it why you would want to do that. But I'm kind of a rule follower and there are policies and things in place because what can happen, and I've seen this happen, it gets taken away for everyone. Right?
- [27:05]
Megyn Kelly
Yeah.
- [27:06]
Susanna Ryan
So there used to be a.
- [27:07]
Megyn Kelly
That's why it's DOJ database.
- [27:09]
Susanna Ryan
Yes. Right. But, yes. So there used to be a YSTR database, this sort of a family tree, a surname search. It was publicly available. People could go online and, you know, search put in their YSTR profile. Well, law enforcement found out about that and started searching. And then they found the wrong person in a pretty high profile crime. And then the company, which I think was Sorens, related to Sorenson, it was in Utah, they just took the whole website down. So now nobody has access to it. That's what they scares.
- [27:43]
Megyn Kelly
DOJ is worried that if we start going into these private databases too much, they will never cooperate and no one will ever get their DNA over and they will be rendered, maybe not useless, but they will sort of stop in 2016. March of 2016 or 2026 was the last time anybody willingly gave their DNA over because that's when the it became so readily, readily available to law enforcement. So I get it too. And I mean, I almost understand the Kohlberger thing. It's like four college students were murdered in the course of 12 minutes by some serial maniac like that. That one seems rather extreme. You might actually bend the policy with respect to Nancy Guthrie. It's like, I don't know that this would rise to the same level of like, oh my God, you know, there's some massive serial killers on the loose. We'll see. Will, did you have any questions for Susanna or comments?
- [28:30]
Will
I do. Megan, thank you again for the invite on the show. I think one of the things that we were discussing last week, the three of us, was about the control of the scene of crime, you know, and how they were taping off this area and how well protecting or preserving they were of the evidence. And that was one of our biggest concerns, particularly when they lifted obviously the tape around the property. Literally, I think it was a day or two after the actual disappearance of Nancy. And then there was that instance of one of the neighbour's dogs having a pee on the front steps of the actual property itself. And so the question that I would have really for Susannah is what question is there to the degradation of DNA integrity? Is there? Because one of the biggest concerns is if they were so haphazard potentially about controlling this scene of crime, what they were actually doing in terms of gathering that evidence, how well they gathered it, whether there could have been a huge amount of cross contamination on that DNA or is it precise enough that it will be preserved for a good period of time and how long would it last, do you think?
- [29:41]
Susanna Ryan
Right, so DNA that's outside the home, if there was anything outside. For example, you know, that welcome mat that I think is probably still sitting there, that was an item if they collected right away, what if the perpetrator with that mouth flashlight, there was some saliva that came out of his mouth and landed on the mat. That would have been great. At this point, I think it's probably useless because it's been sitting outside, it's exposed to the elements. How many people have walked on that mat that have transferred or taken DNA, picked DNA up, put DNA down? So that's going to be an issue for anything that's outside. I don't think we have to be concerned about degradation, especially the inside samples. So degradation refers to the breakdown of DNA where we're no longer able to get results because the DNA is sort of falling apart. I don't think that's as much of a concern as cross contamination or contamination from people walking through the house, people touching things. Again, even if the investigators, the crime scene people have gloves on, there's something called investigator mediated transfer. Anything they touch with a glove and then touch something else, they could have picked up DNA from that one object and placed it on another. So that is more of a concern to me. Now, the DNA can last a really long time. It can last days, weeks, months, even years, you know, depending on how well that area is cleaned. You know, I had a case once where there was a CODIS hit on this. It was a double homicide. And there was DNA on the bathroom door where the murder had occurred. And it was a male profile. The same male profile was on the kitchen hand towel hit in codis. It couldn't have been him. He was in jail for the past year. So, I mean, DNA just can last a long time. Yes.
- [31:29]
Megyn Kelly
Wow. Oh, I mean, that's very telling. I have a question for you about. I mentioned it in the intro. The ability to create a picture of a suspected perp without knowing who the person is. So they test the DNA. Let's say they go into the Nancy's bedroom and on her headboard, they find unknown DNA. There's no hit in CODIS. They actually get the permission to run it through 23andMe and Ancestry. No hits. No idea who this is. There is a company, I think there's more than one. But the one we featured at NBC was Parabon. And Andrea Canning, who I work with there, by the way, like her positive comment about NBC. She's sweet. They ran her DNA through Parabon, this company that does this, and they came up with like, a profile of what she would look like, not based on what Andrea actually looks like, just based on the DNA. Parabon does this service where they say, this is what this person they can tell, like, oh, of Irish descent and possibly with like, you know, Spanish influence, whatever it is. And look at what they came up with. This is the actual Andrea on the right in the red. And this is the profile of her that they came up with on the left. It's amazing. They have the general facial like structure. The nose is close, the mouth is pretty close, the eyes are pretty good. They've got the blond hair. I think this is incredible. And that there was a lot they could tell about Andrea Canning without having anything other than an unmatched DNA sample to anyone. So can you talk about that, Susanna?
- [33:16]
Susanna Ryan
Yeah. So interestingly, that was the kind of the forebearer of genetic genealogy. So the same type of testing, it's the same data that they have for genealogy. That is what is also used to find out things like hair color, eye color, ethnicity, do they have freckles or not? Because it's all in your DNA. Right. So they're just looking at specific areas that they've already tested. So Parabon, that's what they initially, that's what they were known for, was doing these sort of genetic composites. Once GEDmatch, that private DNA DNA database, hit about 1 million profiles, they knew at that point they had a good chance of actually identifying people. So they're the ones that started uploading these unknowns and getting matches once there were enough people in that database. And it was because they already had all of these police agencies who had already done the composite profiles. It's the same DNA. They didn't have to do any more testing, just were searching it.
- [34:19]
Megyn Kelly
So do you think if they found DNA, let's say, on Nancy's headboard and on the back door handle and on what's left of the Nest camera, like its cradle, which I think remains. You don't know who it is, but you know it's the same DNA from the same man. Let's say that they could come up with a picture like that, that they could start determining ethnicity, hair color. The freckles thing is crazy. In my case, they'd be like, we can tell you for sure. She cannot, like, do directions in a car. And she's very bad at facial recognition. I'm convinced this is a genetic problem I have. But would they be able to do
- [35:00]
Susanna Ryan
that assuming it was not a mixture or not too much of a mixture? Yes, they could.
- [35:07]
Megyn Kelly
Wow. Oh, that's so interesting. All right, Susanna, this is. You've been awesome. Final question for you. Do you think that DNA will solve this case?
- [35:18]
Susanna Ryan
Yeah, I do think that there's A good chance of it. I feel like it's almost like a needle in a haystack at this point. Right. I mean, we have this. I'm sure there have been so many samples collected and the lab is probably working on them or has already gotten results. And there, as you said before, there can be a lot going on behind the scenes that we simply don't know about. Right. So it's very possible that they already have a profile isolated and now they're doing that genealogy step. And that can be very time consuming. You know, if someone isn't in the database, their close relatives aren't in the database, the first further out the relatives are, the longer it takes to be able to build that family tree. So that very well could be going on behind the scenes right now.
- [36:03]
Megyn Kelly
I remember CeCe Moore explaining that she would go. She would pull birth announcements, she would pull marriage announcements, death announcements, to try to like. It's a painstaking process because they really do have to create the whole family tree around the person who's. Who they did get the hit on, like this sixth cousin, you know, twice removed. You know that this person's in the database and is somehow related to your perp. But to find the perp, it's this huge spider web around this person. You've got to figure out their whole life who got married to whom, what are the other offspring, who are this person's cousins, where did they move? Like, it's. It takes a long time. You're right. So this could be happening. We're praying that it's happening and that they have enough DNA in this house to go by. And sorry, I should have asked this, but you're. You were saying before, even though this guy was covered head to toe, you think he left DNA?
- [36:52]
Susanna Ryan
I do. Especially given the amount of time they think that he was in the house. I just, knowing what I know about how easy it is to get DNA, you know, for example, in the laboratory, we're constantly wiping down surfaces with bleach. We're putting down fresh paper, changing our gloves. I'll go through a box of gloves on like one item of evidence because I don't want to transfer DNA. It's so sensitive. So if you have someone, and still rarely, of course, but it can happen even in the laboratory. Right. So if you have these protective equipment and things that are going on in the lab and you can still occasionally transfer DNA, think about how easy it's going to happen in real life. And the longer he spends there, anytime he's touching anything even that mask that he has on his DNA is going to be sort of sloughing off the skin cells on that mask. And DNA doesn't just stay on one, you know, it's not going to just stay on the inside of the mask. It's a tiny little cell. It's going to go through to the outside. And he could be picking up DNA from his mask, from his clothes, you know, so it's very easy to transfer DNA. And even though he was covered, I do think that there's a good possibility he left DNA behind.
- [38:07]
Megyn Kelly
Gosh, you make a good point though, about that. Welcome, Matt. It's too bad that was still sitting there, right? There was such a good observation. What else was left behind that should be in an evidence bag? Susannah Ryan, thank you so much.
- [38:21]
Susanna Ryan
Absolutely. Thank you. Appreciate it.
- [38:23]
Megyn Kelly
It's time for a little spring cleaning. Here's a place to start. Go drag your old dated wireless contract out of the closet and beat it with a broom. Then freshen things up by switching to Pure Talk, who gives you unlimited talk, text and plenty of data for just 25 bucks a month with no contract, no cancellation fees, and no overseas customer service. If you ever need help, maybe you'll like them as much as Lois. Listen to this review quote Switched to Pure Talk a few years ago. Amazing. Same coverage and clarity as Verizon or AT&T a fraction of the price. Award winning customer service just upgraded to an iPhone 16E and the support and deals were superb. Why anyone is still getting ripped off by the big guys is beyond me. Want to make the switch? Dial £250 and say Megyn Kelly and then switch to Pure Talk. You get an extra discount if you say with an Irish accent. Dial pound 250 and say Megan Kelly. No, it's not true. You get the same discount, but try it just for fun and you could save 50% off your first month. Good deal. What does comfort that really carries you from morning to night feel like? For many, it's Cozy Earth. It starts with their essential socks. They're soft, breathable and thoughtfully cushioned to support you step by step, from the first step out of bed to the end of a long day. With multiple styles, they fit seamlessly into everyday life. And when the day winds down, that same comfort shows up at night with Cozy Earth's comforter. It's luxuriously soft, light and naturally temperature regulating so you stay cool, calm and comfortable all night. No heaviness, no overheating, just deeper rest. That's what sets Cozy Earth apart. Every piece crafted with intention and attention to detail, designed to quietly elevate the everyday. And it's completely risk free. With a 100 night sleep trial and a 10 year warranty. Discover how care in every detail transforms simple routines into real comfort. Head to cozyearth.com, use my code MEGAN for up to 20% off. That's MEGAN for up to 20 percent off. And if you get a post purchase purchase survey, be sure to mention you heard about Cozy earth right here.
- [40:26]
James Hamilton
UnitedHealth Group is simplifying healthcare by investing in tools to help patients know more and pay less. These tools help patients find providers and compare costs and save hundreds of dollars annually. Learn more@unitedhealthgroup.com commitment.
- [40:43]
Will
In the red corner, the undisputed undefeated weed whacker guy. Champion of hurling grass and pollen everywhere.
- [40:52]
Susanna Ryan
And in the blue corner, the challenger,
- [40:55]
Will
extra strength hannity eyedrops that work all day to prevent the release of histamines that cause itchy allergy eyes. And the winner by knockout is Patterny Hatterday. Bring it on.
- [41:12]
Megyn Kelly
Hey, everyone, it's me, Megyn Kelly. I've got some exciting news. I now have my very own channel on SiriusXM. It's called the Megyn Kelly Channel. And it is where you will hear the truth unfiltered, with no agenda and no apologies. Along with the Megyn Kelly show, you're gonna hear from people like Mark Halperin, link Lauren, Maureen Callahan, Emily Jasinsky, Jesse Kelly, Real Clear politics, and many more. It's bold. No BS news only on the Megyn Kelly channel, Sirius XM111 and on the SiriusXM app. James and Will. How interesting was that, right? That was good stuff.
- [41:50]
Will
Yeah, totally fascinating. I learned a heck of a lot, I have to say, from Susanna. She's certainly her subject matter expert, that's for sure.
- [41:58]
Megyn Kelly
Yeah, she testified in 140 cases, so she definitely knows what she's doing. And maybe this really will be the way. So I teed it up with her first, because there's a place I'm going with this and it has to do with your theory, James, about this being potentially a South American, like B and E crew breaking. See, I'm like in the biz now, a B and E breaking and entering crew. Because you've been saying on this program for a couple of weeks now that you'd seen video of like these South American criminals who were breaking into homes. So we finally went and pulled what you were talking about. And this is my new number one theory. You've Got me. Now that I see the video of these guys, I totally get it. Will, you've got to look at this. We pulled video of what James is talking about. We have a few different episodes. Here's one. This is in. Hold on a second. This is video four, which is San Diego, okay? They. For the listening audience, they look a lot like our perp. They have a hoodie sweatshirt on. They have black masks. They have gloves. They are pretty much covered head to toe. They're clearly not wanting to be recognized and potentially not wanting DNA. Now, here's another guy. He's got like a. It looks like a balaclava that you'd wear skiing over your head. You can only see the guy's eyes. Now here's. Here's another group sneaking onto somebody's back porch. There's three or four of them in each of these videos, except. Yeah, there's like, they're together now here, this guy, look, the backpack, the face covering. And there's another one we're going to show. But they. I'm going to start with you on it, Will, because it's not your theory. But. But look at this guy. This is in Tennessee. He's got the backpack. He's got the reflective thing on the front of the backpack or a light, I can't tell which. This almost looks like the actual guy who broke into Nancy's. So your thoughts on it, will.
- [43:59]
Will
Okay, so my initial thoughts. And James and I, we've discussed this at some length, and I think we're going to continue to argue the toss on this one. My gut feeling is it isn't a B and E. The simple reason being is the value of the content of the house. And secondly, the actual disappearance of Nancy, Nancy's body itself, you know, her person, it's vanished. And without wishing to sound flippant in terms of the outfits that these individuals are wearing, it looks like a standard day in London, if I'm absolutely honest with you. We get a lot of people walking around dressed like this. So it's really about the fact that the disappearance of Nancy which sort of conflicts me to fully buying into the B and E theory.
- [44:41]
Megyn Kelly
You're on the. So you're on the Fitz program of victimology is where you start. Like. Like, look at the victim. What happened to her? Who would have the motive to hurt her? That's how you solve the crime. As opposed to.
- [44:52]
Will
And why remove her and why take her away from the property?
- [44:56]
Megyn Kelly
Yeah. Go ahead, James.
- [44:57]
James Hamilton
Well, I was going to ask Susanna, you know, not having a DNA match so far, and they might have one again. They're keeping this very close to the vest. What they do have, what they don't have. But if you came in here on a tourist visa, you flew in from another country, and you came in through a port, port of entry, we're not going to have your DNA. If you haven't been arrested in the US we're not going to have your fingerprints. So all this DNA, if they're coming up blank again, to me, that might point toward this theory of, you know, it was a criminal, transnational criminal group, and that's why we're not getting any DNA hits. You know, as far as the body, again, I'm with Will. I wrestle on that a lot. But I also know that, you know, these guys aren't stupid. And it's very difficult for you as an American to understand, you know, how little human life can be valued if you're from another part of the world where. And I've been there. And so, as Will, human life doesn't mean as much. And, you know, take her. Why? Because there's evidence on her, just as Susanna pointed out, there's trace DNA evidence all over her body. So they took her. You know, that could be a theory that would explain, you know, why. Why they did take the body. But again, you know, it is a theory. But a lot of things seem to, you know, be adding up.
- [46:12]
Megyn Kelly
Well, here's the other thing that's interesting about the theory. You know, Jennifer Coffendaffer, she's former FBI and she's a commentator, frequent on News Nation and on X. And she was pointing out she's a retired FBI special agent, that an FBI spokesperson has said, they said last month that they're posting billboards in cities throughout Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California with pictures of Nancy, you know, call it 1-800- call FBI now. You could just say those are the states around Arizona, Arizona and the surrounding states. Or you could draw conclusions from this. And here is what she asked. While law enforcement doesn't have the DNA from Nancy's house entirely sorted out, she writes, do they have a DNA contributor's origin figured out? Kind of like the Paraben thing we were discussing, is the person of Mexican descent? This is why I ask billboards in California, Arizona and Texas, particularly Houston, these are all states, she writes, with large Mexican populations. Just because the DNA has not identified the exact person, has the sex and ethnicity of any of the profiles in the samples been determined culturally? Many Hispanic men groom their eyebrows like women. That's just A fact she writes. She continues, I am Hispanic, so I'm very familiar with this. I bet that DNA has already provided some answers. The FBI did not randomly choose where those billboards should go. There was a reason. What do you guys make of that?
- [47:51]
Will
I think there's every good chance that they may have some sort of profiling there in terms of ethnicity. I think that's all together possible. My only concern is, and again, that's from principally working in the shadows as opposed to, say, James and guys in the bureau is that when you have a call 1-800-FBI the likelihood of someone who may be connected to the individual or individuals responsible for Nancy's disappearance may feel a little suspicious about calling that line in the event that they could be captured or they could be identified through that process. Even though there may be assurances that
- [48:31]
Megyn Kelly
we're trying to figure out whether there's something to glean from the chosen states. Right. That Arizona, Texas, Houston and New Mexico. Did I say California? Yeah, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California. And in particular concentration around Houston could be interesting news. I don't know. And like, the thing about the eyebrows, James, you know, we all talked about that. He does look like he has especially groomed eyebrows. Nancy's perp, though, we've also been debating whether it just looks like that because the ski mask may be cutting off the top bushier half that most men would have. You know, most men don't have perfectly groomed eyebrows like this guy appears to, but it could just be they're kind of sliced off by the mask.
- [49:13]
James Hamilton
Yeah. I remember when I was first with you, I thought it might be a woman just based on the eyebrows, but I think Jennifer is making a good point there. And the other thing I just wanted to comment on was that I've seen two stories now. The one you just showed about the billboards, which is called this 1-800-general FBI number. And then there was an article in the New York Post this morning about FBI agents re canvassing the neighborhood, asking about two particular days. And what I'm not seeing here is any mention of task force. I'm not seeing any mention of Pima County. So you would believe that the FBI alone is working this case, which we know is not the truth. So what is happening is, is the FBI getting information, Pima county is getting information. And then how are we getting this together as a symbiotic or, you know, a task force type of investigation? To me, it still seems bifurcated. It seems like the FBI is over here doing something and Pima County's over here doing something and I don't like to see that at all. I would have loved to have seen that. Hey, the task force was here, the Nancy Guthrie task force, made up of Pima county, FBI, even Arizona State Police. But I'm not seeing any of that, so I think it's interesting.
- [50:24]
Megyn Kelly
Well, what do you make of the fact that the sheriff was out there, Will, a couple days ago, saying he thinks he knows the motive in the case and that he's had a strong suspicion about it from the beginning and there's absolutely nothing that steered him off of that. That suspicion. What we. What is it? Like, why wouldn't you be sharing that?
- [50:43]
Will
To be honest, the sheriff is beyond comprehension in my book right now, Megan. I mean, anything that comes out of his mouth is dribble as far as I'm concerned. And there is no substance or credibility. So it's just white noise running in the background. But to go back to your original question, which was about these billboards being put into particular areas, having worked a lot in Latin America and certainly working on missing persons and kidnapping cases, the one thing I do know is in Latin communities, they can be a very close knit community as they can be, for example, Islamic communities in the Middle east. They can be very close knit. They don't necessarily want to share information with the wider populace. They may know, and they certainly tend to know a little bit about each other's business. So those locating of those billboards could be very relevant to specific ethnic and the specific communities. But again, there is a suspicion of law enforcement, there's a suspicion of federal agencies, there's a suspicion of the government, which may in itself be counterproductive. Although it's a great gesture, sometimes it can be better to try and disguise these things in a different way, make it slightly less confrontational to invite people to communicate.
- [51:57]
Megyn Kelly
What do you make, Will, of the fact that there's no. Sorry, sorry, quick point. That there's no picture of the perpetrator on the billboard. So, like, there's a picture of Nancy. I'm like, okay, great. But like, aren't we actually trying to find somebody who might recognize that guy? I realize it's not exactly like a high school graduation photo, but there is a decent image of him from those from the video released by the FBI. And it's not on the billboards.
- [52:20]
Will
Absolutely. I mean, and again, it's who's serving the purpose here? It's a huge, huge sign. Why isn't there a full length picture showing his physique or as far as we can deduct his physique from what he was wearing, the face, the eyes, even the weapon that he was wearing and the holster that he had that weapon contained within. You know, there's a lot of information about the perpetrator. I mean, in the same way as people will issue or law enforcement agencies will issue photo fits, you know, and impressionist drawings of suspects. Again, anybody worth their soul, if they want to know what Nancy Guthrie looks like, then absolutely, yes, it could be useful to have that picture if she may have been seen with other parties. But why not have both?
- [53:03]
Megyn Kelly
Yeah. Because the odds of this perpetrator, if Nancy is still alive, parading her around in public are probably very slim. But this man is going to have to be out and about, and we presume is out and about right now, walking around living his life. And somebody knows him. Somebody knows him. But not everybody even knows that Nancy Guthrie was kidnapped. You know, Jennifer was pointing out. Remember, there was that pizza delivery guy who showed up to deliver a pizza to one of the independent journalists who was on site, courtesy of, like, I think a viewer who seemed totally unaware he was walking right into a crime scene. You know, he went up and was, like, ringing the bell on Nancy's property. Had no idea. You know, most people are not obsessed with the news. A lot of people don't ever watch the news. Those are the happy people in life. And it's very possible that. That they don't even know Nancy's missing. But if you put a picture. Yes, okay. She could be on it. But if you put a picture of this perpetrator big on a billboard, it's tough to pull your eyes away from, even if you haven't heard about the case. James, your thoughts?
- [54:02]
James Hamilton
Well, yeah, I think you're exactly right. And I think it's. It's a misstep, you know, from the FBI perspective, because to me, missing person doesn't resonate as much as abducted. So if the words on the billboard were abducted, an exclamation point, that would get a lot. You know, I mean, great point. Missing, right? Missing person, mean, okay, there's a lot of missing people, right? Well, let's say abducted, and then you're right. Let's have a picture. And you just said what all these other experts have been saying since this case started. Which was what? Oh, someone knows this guy. And that's why they went up to a million dollars. So someone knows this guy. Well, guess what? It doesn't look like anybody knows this guy or they're not talking. And what. Again, the reason you may not know this guy is he's not from here. He is not from this area.
- [54:46]
Megyn Kelly
So that's the other thing I wanted to ask you about. I raised this in our special yesterday. Nancy Grace had on a tattoo expert, you know, a guy who's been doing tattoos for three decades. And he said, because you can see a little bit of a tat on the perpetrator's wrist. And he took a close look at it, and there are shades of gray and black in there. And he said, in his experience, that could very well be a Mexican. It could be a Mexican gang member who. He said, they use this exact shading, like the gray is an odd choice. And he said, I guarantee you that tattoo goes all the way up the arm. He said it actually could go all the way up the neck or possibly even to the face. And he said that is very common amongst Mexican gang members, that. That choice to shade and possibly even those who have been in prison. He had a lot of thoughts on it, actually. But that was the other thing that made me think of you, James, in your theory.
- [55:42]
James Hamilton
Yeah, again, it sounds right to me. And where's the body? Well, if they went 60 miles south, went across the border and put her somewhere, it's very, very, very difficult to find her. And that's why we don't have the body yet.
- [55:57]
Megyn Kelly
How can you satisfy Will that these south of the border, you know, gang members would. Why would they take her?
- [56:06]
Will
I can buy into James's suggestion that it is a south of the border team that have come in, whether it was for breaking and entering. Again, it depends on whether there are particular items, anything that was taken from the property in inclusion, obviously to Nancy herself. But it could have been a team, and James knows this. Sometimes you get professional organized crime groups which will come across the border to conduct a snatch of an individual or to take someone for a kidnapping. My only big question here is what options have law enforcement taken to communicate with their counterparts across the border to see if there is any gang activity that they're aware of, any intelligence that they're aware of, of any particular group that might have been or could be deemed as a viable prospect to carry out an operation like this?
- [56:56]
Megyn Kelly
I mean, Sheriff Nano says that he has good contacts down there, which I would imagine because he's his. His, you know, Tucson's an hour from the border, but. Yeah, but, I mean, I. I get the skepticism because in those other cases we were showing, Patrick Mahomes was targeted by These gangs, reportedly about a year ago, along with another football player, I think, and okay, there you go. But nobody ever got stolen, right? So it's like they're looking to steal your high end goods, not you.
- [57:25]
James Hamilton
Let, let me, if I could, Megan, just real quick go into that. And it is a very, very difficult to mentally try to understand the activity of these individuals. Okay, you, me, will. We would not break into someone's house at 2 in the morning. Right. Because we just aren't that way. But these folks do. And so when we start to take our rational brain and try to, you know, put it into what, what are they thinking? It's a very difficult thing. I worked a case in Nebraska as an FBI agent where a guy from, you know, South America, he shot and killed seven people in a bank. He didn't take a penny, he didn't steal a dime. And when I asked him why, he said, because I could. Okay. Now I can't even. I can't even fathom shooting seven people for no reason. But he did. Right. And so it's very, very difficult for us to, you know, to try to put our brain into their brain. Oh, why do you take the body? Well, it's hard for you to understand that because you've never been there. Right. They do things that will boggle the mind. Right. And it's very, very hard for us to mentally go there. That's. Yeah, that's just my experience.
- [58:31]
Megyn Kelly
My mom, who is. She spent her career helping veterans at the VA in behavioral health, mental health. She would always say, I cannot respond to irrational behavior rationally.
- [58:42]
James Hamilton
That's exactly right.
- [58:43]
Megyn Kelly
That's exactly what you're saying. Like we're kind of playing a fool's game here because. Yeah, we would not be putting on the, you know, the outfit and the backpack and breaking into somebody's house in the middle of the night, never mind kidnapping a woman. I want to play you guys a soundbite that Chad Ayers said something. He said on our show on episode two, he broke some news here about this case and that he'd heard from, I'm presuming, a law enforcement source that he said is very solid on the ground in Arizona. Listen here.
- [59:15]
Will
As of about two hours ago, Megan,
- [59:17]
Megyn Kelly
I can report from a very, very
- [59:19]
James Hamilton
reliable source, that is boots on the ground there, that the FBI and the
- [59:26]
Megyn Kelly
Pima County Sheriff's Office have no leads, no solid suspects. What?
- [59:33]
Will
And this is from someone, Boots on the Ground that I trust.
- [59:37]
James Hamilton
All right.
- [59:38]
Will
They have no solid leads.
- [59:40]
Megyn Kelly
I can also report that it has
- [59:44]
Will
Been confirmed this morning and I'm sure
- [59:46]
Megyn Kelly
we all assume this, that every family
- [59:49]
James Hamilton
member passed polygraphs with flying colors.
- [59:51]
Will
The FBI has no suspects.
- [59:56]
Megyn Kelly
So he did want to clarify that it wasn't no leads, it was no suspects. No suspects. And that the family not only passed polygraphs but with flying colors. Which we released this clip early because we wanted to get the news out there. And many, many people chimed in saying that doesn't mean anything. Right? Like you can't admit the polygraphs in a court of law. I'm kind of persuaded by it because just the thought, let's take the brother in law for example, because there's been speculation about him. The thought that this guy in a band and a part time middle school teacher was able to beat the polygraph seems ridiculous to me. So if he passed that thing with flying colors, I'm much more inclined to say let's move on from the brother in law. But you tell me James, because you know, you've had a career in law enforcement and I haven't.
- [60:44]
James Hamilton
Yeah, well, a couple things. Conclusive and inconclusive, that any polygrapher and examiners, what they call them a polygrapher, is going to tell you that you're conclusive or you're inconclusive. There is no such thing as quote, pass with flying colors end quotes. That doesn't happen. Okay. That means someone is conclusive, meaning they're telling the machine is indicating that their answers are conclusive. Then there's inconclusive, meaning they're not sure. Okay, so that's that. And then the second thing is that maybe they don't have anything. But as close to the vest as Sheriff. Nan, we have a story, I think you reported it or I read it, that sheriff Nanos and two of his top deputies are the controlling people of this case, not the investigator. Well, if they're making all the calls, that would make sense to me. While Chad is hearing from law enforcement sources down, down, way down the totem pole that they have no leads because they don't know anything because they're being, you know, kept at an arm's length. That's, you know, that's my inference from, from what he's saying. Either they don't really have anything or Sheriff Nanos and his two handpicked guys are not telling a soul.
- [61:53]
Megyn Kelly
And if it is Sheriff Nanos controlling the information, then you have to at least put an asterisk after the polygraph information because he clearly, I mean in my view was leaned on by the Guthrie's to say the family's exonerated. They're not suspects. And then when everybody said, how can you say they're exonerated when you don't have anybody under arrest? He then took steps back from that and said, well, they're not active suspects at this time. It was like, all right, well, which is it? Right? So I don't know. But what do you make of that? Bit of a scoop there. A scoop lit, as we call it in the news.
- [62:29]
Will
I mean, to me it seems, I mean, I agree with James entirely on this, that there's huge compartmentalization. We've seen this from the outset. And Sheriff Nanos keeping everything to himself, wanting to use his own DNA testing labs, you know, although Susanna has obviously vouched for them and said they're very, very good and they can do the job. But it's point scoring that we're seeing by Sheriff Nanos right now. And I think this issue of substantive leads that he has right now, again, until such time as he just breaks cover and actually tells us what those are, Meghan, it. It means absolutely nothing. And the danger that we've seen historically, like you said about the brother in law being released, that there's big question marks over the integrity of the information that Sheriff Nanos is sharing and the false hopes that he's potentially sharing in the same way as he said, we're going to solve this case, he can't say that with any resolute conviction.
- [63:28]
Megyn Kelly
So we still have no faith in the sheriff. But one of our guests is pointing out, you know, we are we just being impatient, right, because we're still, it's like we're not even 50 days into the case. And a lot of these big murder cases take months and months and months and sometimes over a year to solve. Like Maureen really believes that there, that he probably knows who he thinks it is and she believes he's building a cage around this person, you know, bit by bit, like evidence and evident. But it takes time. So how do you like that theory? Or do you think James, he's as clueless as he looks?
- [64:10]
James Hamilton
No, I don't know him. And you know, Maureen, if she believes that, that very well could be happening and it's methodical, but again, that's a murder investigation. I thought we started out with an abduction, missing person, kidnapping, live body situation, which is again, like I've talked about, there's. There's a lot more speed, there's a lot more attention, there's a lot more, you know, sense of urgency. But if we're building A case on an individual and it's going to take a long time. Well, yeah, okay, that, that is a theory and I certainly hope that that works out and I certainly hope we find the perpetrator. But I don't think we're being impatient. I think that the, the statistics on an 84 year old woman, my friend, you know, Jim Gagliano was talking about this the other day. I think it's less than 1% of the kidnappings in America are, you know, of that age group. And so it's extremely rare. And that's why we're all kind of looking like where is she? Where, where is this person? This is not the norm. And I don't think we're being impatient at all. And last thing I would like to say is, and, and I know I probably shouldn't do this, but sometimes if you look at the comments of people who either watch your show or you know, on some social media that I'm on, you know, they'll say things like why do we care? This story is being dragged out. Well, we care because we all have, you know, mothers and we all have 84 year old, you know, a lot of us have mothers of that age group and we don't want to live in a country where an 84 year old can just be taken and nobody, no leads, no nothing. This is America. That's the story is like that could happen to my mother or your mother. And first of all, it's callous as hell to say that, that people would say why do we care? Well, that's why we care because I want to live in a country where an 84 year old isn't taken from her bed at 2 in the morning and we can't find her bodies.
- [65:59]
Megyn Kelly
Yes, thank you for saying that. I feel the same. We've done a lot of work on the case of missing baby Lisa Irwin who was taken from her crib at 10 months old out of Kansas City, Missouri. And it's just she vanished into thin air. She was never seen again. No leads, didn't track anybody down. All this time later, still missing, she could still be out there. There was never a body found. There was never a perp. Same thing, right? Will, it's like, no, we can't, we can live in a society where an 84 year old is stolen out of her bed, where a 10 month old old is stolen out of her bed. And the Lisa Irwin case, forgive me for putting it this way, but like, at least it made some sense. Like, like a baby is valuable you know, in, in terms of commercial sales, I'm sad to say, but it. You could sell a baby on the black market, an 84 year old, you cannot sell. So like this one is even more mysterious.
- [66:50]
Will
Yeah, absolutely. And I think also where your show is doing a huge service to this particular case is, and I'm sure James will agree with me and probably most of your other guests that you've had on is, is the distinct difference between what one sees on tv, on Netflix of crime thrillers and everything else which gets solved literally within one hour's episode to the reality of what actually goes on. The complications, the complexities of these cases, the various different strands, tenuous or otherwise, of evidence that then have to be sifted through. This is, you're, I think, showing a perfect profile of how a case like this, which is most unusual and could potentially happen to any one of us, would be potentially conducted. What are the considerations that are being made? So I think this sort of forensic analysis that you're doing, Megan, on this, I think people should actually pay attention to, to actually see what the reality is really like.
- [67:49]
Megyn Kelly
Well, we're lucky to have guys like you who actually know what they're talking about. One last thing I want to hit on, and that is tomorrow we're gonna have on Ashlee Banfield and talk about where her reporting is right now in all of this. But one of the things she's been focused on is Annie Guthrie's car. We first learned from Ashley the first week that Nancy was missing that the authorities had impounded, towed, whatever, Annie and Tommaso's car. This is Savannah's sister and brother in law. The car was just returned this past weekend. We're talking six weeks that they've had her car impounded. Other cars were taken and returned already from other people. So like, well in advance of this. So what does it tell you, if anything?
- [68:34]
James Hamilton
I think that makes sense that they would have it longer. They probably went much deeper with that with regards to any type of evidence collection with all kinds of different tools that, you know, not only Pima county, but the FBI might, might, you know, be recommending. And therefore that equipment may be hard to find and it takes a while to get it there.
- [68:52]
Susanna Ryan
It's.
- [68:53]
James Hamilton
I'm not terribly surprised by the length that they held onto it. They want to make sure. And that makes sense to me why they gave up the other vehicles that quick. I'm with you. I don't know. I don't know why these people were let go or even taken in or Detained. The sheriff would understand that. But I don't make a lot of it being a long period of time. I think it was just further testing and that takes a while. And they wanted to make sure they got as much as they possibly could from the vehicle before they returned it.
- [69:21]
Megyn Kelly
Okay, so that one doesn't, doesn't jump out at you. To me, that seems like a long time, but I don't know what they do. And like you point out, it was the thing that Nancy was last seen in.
- [69:32]
Will
Yeah, I mean, it's a bit like phone forensics, for example. It can be done, actually relatively quickly. If it's done in the private sector, you could turn it around within one day. But it's. But it's not uncommon for law enforcement to hang onto people's devices to do the forensic imaging on them. And it could take weeks, sometimes months.
- [69:51]
James Hamilton
Hmm.
- [69:51]
Megyn Kelly
Okay. Well, we don't know what direction they're going in. All we know is Sheriff Nanos is now saying he believes he has a motive and that whatever's happened since day one has confirmed his early suspicions about who likely did this. Whether he will share that with us remains to be seen. If you are looking to make smarter choices for your health this year, consider Riverbend Ranch. Their steaks are not only delicious, they also contain real high quality protein that helps fuel your body. Beef is a complete protein. It contains all nine essential amino acids your body needs to function. It also keeps you fuller for longer, reducing cravings and snacking. But here's the key. Not all beef is created equal. The quality of the beef depends entirely on how it's raised and where it comes from. And that's where Riverbend Ranch stands apart. For more than 35 years, Riverbend Ranch has been building an elite Black Angus herd, carefully selecting cattle for exceptional flavor and tenderness. All Riverbend Ranch cattle are born and raised right here in the usa. They never use growth hormones or antibiotics. And the beef is processed at their ranch in their award winning USDA inspected facility. No shortcuts, no middlemen. Just incredible, healthy, flavorful beef shipped directly to your home. Order today@riverbendranch.com and use the promo code Megan for 20 bucks off your first order. You guys are so great. Will and James, thank you. Thanks for being here.
- [71:15]
James Hamilton
Great being with you.
- [71:15]
Will
Thank you, Megan. Thanks.
- [71:17]
Megyn Kelly
And thanks to all of you for listening. Tomorrow, as promised in part four of our series, Ashley Banfield will be here. She's been all over the story from day one. Where does she think the investigation is going? She'll be here to tell us. You won't want to miss that. Thanks to all of you for being with us too. Thanks for listening to the Megyn Kelly Show. No bs, no agenda, and no fear. Why have I asked my electrician I
- [71:46]
Will
found on Angie.com to bury my pet hamster? I was so moved by how carefully he buried my electrical wires, I knew I could trust him to bury my
- [71:52]
Megyn Kelly
sweet nibbles after his untimely end.
- [71:54]
James Hamilton
This is very strange, Angie, the one
- [71:56]
Will
you trust to find the ones you
- [71:57]
Megyn Kelly
trust Find pros for all your home projects@angie.com real talent is defined by what people can do, not where they learn to do it. So by stopping at the education section of a resume, you might throw away the perfect hire skills first. Hiring helps you see talent others miss, like more than 70 million stars skilled through alternative routes let their story unfold and gain a competitive advantage. Because hiring managers who start with skills are 60% more likely to to find a successful hire, hire skills first. Learn why at tearthepaperceiling. Org, brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council.