Latest / Crime Stories with Nancy Grace / GUTHRIE GLOVE DNA, NO DATABASE MATCH

Transcript

GUTHRIE GLOVE DNA, NO DATABASE MATCH · Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

0:00
Speaker 1: Crime Stories with Nancy Grace, breaking news Savannah Guthrie's mother,
0:09
Speaker 1: Nancy Guthrie missing, day seventeen.
0:13
Speaker 2: Is she alive? Is she dead? Is she suffering? Where
0:18
Speaker 2: is she?
0:19
Speaker 3: Good evening, I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. A
0:22
Speaker 3: lot happening in the search for Nancy Guthrie. I'm going
0:25
Speaker 3: to go straight out to a special guest joining us.
0:27
Speaker 3: Andrew Black is with us, former special Agent in charge
0:32
Speaker 3: of the Tucson Office.
0:34
Speaker 2: Of the FBI. Let that sink him.
0:37
Speaker 3: Former FBI Agent in charge of the Tucson FBI Division,
0:44
Speaker 3: twenty seven years with the FBI, Former Chicago felony prosecutor,
0:49
Speaker 3: never a lack of business in Chicago. Currently Chief of
0:54
Speaker 3: the University of Hawaii Department of Public Safety. Andrew Black,
0:59
Speaker 3: thank you for being with us. I'm sure you're going
1:02
Speaker 3: to put this in more flowery terms than myself. But
1:07
Speaker 3: did Nanos go rogue again and issue another statement without
1:15
Speaker 3: consulting with the FBI. I'm not saying getting their permission,
1:19
Speaker 3: I'm saying consulting with.
1:21
Speaker 4: You know, the press release in what out yesterday regarding
1:25
Speaker 4: the exonerating the Guthrie family that was put out unilaterally
1:30
Speaker 4: without input from the FBI. If you read the language,
1:33
Speaker 4: it's oddly written, begging the media to honor their profession
1:39
Speaker 4: and begging them to report with compassion and professionalism. That's
1:44
Speaker 4: an oddly worded press release. What I'd like to see
1:48
Speaker 4: is Sheriff Nanos deferring to the FBI for all communication
1:53
Speaker 4: going forward on this case. The FBI are very professional
1:57
Speaker 4: in their communication. They're well ted in dealing with the
2:01
Speaker 4: media and public and messaging coherently. The public needs to
2:05
Speaker 4: hear from the investigators on a regular basis. It should
2:09
Speaker 4: be done through the FBI to give confidence that the
2:12
Speaker 4: hardworking agents and personalel the Sheriff's Department are doing everything
2:16
Speaker 4: they can to try to locate Nancy Guthrie.
2:18
Speaker 3: I was very distressed Andrew Black when I heard, I'm
2:22
Speaker 3: sure another renegade press comment when Nano's blurted out it
2:29
Speaker 3: could take a year to find her. Yes, okay, she
2:33
Speaker 3: could be dead in a year. She's eighty four.
2:35
Speaker 5: That's not Why would he blurt that out. She could
2:38
Speaker 5: be found tomorrow, she could be found tonight.
2:41
Speaker 2: Why would he say that. It was like a kick
2:43
Speaker 2: to the teeth.
2:44
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's demoralizing for people who are on the ground
2:47
Speaker 4: even volunteers who are looking for her. So this is
2:49
Speaker 4: something I think that demonstrates a lack of experience in
2:52
Speaker 4: training and handling big matters like this. The FBI executives
2:56
Speaker 4: are well trained. They go through media training, the ten
3:00
Speaker 4: conferences with members of the media, and they know how
3:04
Speaker 4: to message properly. Those were some awkward statements.
3:08
Speaker 3: The reward is now up to two hundred thousand dollars
3:12
Speaker 3: in exchange for information leading to Nancy Guthrie. A lot
3:17
Speaker 3: has happened in the past hours. Straight out to Dave
3:19
Speaker 3: Matt Crime Stories investigative reporter, Dave, what's happening right now?
3:23
Speaker 6: You mentioned the reward money going up. Michael Huppy, an
3:27
Speaker 6: attorney in Milwaukee who actually heads up Milwaukee crime Stoppers.
3:31
Speaker 6: He's the one that stepped up to add one hundred
3:33
Speaker 6: thousand dollars to the reward. That's for starters of all.
3:37
Speaker 6: You know the DNA that we've been waiting for results
3:40
Speaker 6: back from the lab in Florida on the we're talking
3:45
Speaker 6: about the glove that was found about a mile and
3:46
Speaker 6: a half from Nancy Guthrie's home. They did get that
3:51
Speaker 6: DNA into Cotis and there were no hits on the
3:56
Speaker 6: DNA found on the glove. They still they being law enforcement,
4:01
Speaker 6: still waiting on the DNA that was found inside Nancy
4:05
Speaker 6: Guthrie's home. We don't have status on that one yet.
4:08
Speaker 6: But the male DNA found on the glove did not
4:11
Speaker 6: have a hit when it was run through cotis right now.
4:15
Speaker 3: Okay, hold on just a moment, Dave mac regarding the glove,
4:19
Speaker 3: we are also learning that the glove that had been
4:21
Speaker 3: pictured is not the glove that was tested.
4:25
Speaker 6: Explain, well, you know the the glove that was pictured,
4:30
Speaker 6: it was from the New York Post, and you know, Nancy,
4:34
Speaker 6: a lot of people people jump to conks based on
4:37
Speaker 6: what we see and what other reporters say, and none
4:42
Speaker 6: of it is official. It just gets picked up that way,
4:44
Speaker 6: and sometimes the news runs with a story without having
4:48
Speaker 6: firm footing underneath.
4:50
Speaker 3: Hold on just a moment before you back door trashing
4:56
Speaker 3: the New York Post. That was a photo of a
4:59
Speaker 3: glove found. That doesn't mean that it was the glove
5:05
Speaker 3: that was sent to be tested. So there's a subtle
5:08
Speaker 3: bit important distinction right there. Okay, I want to go
5:12
Speaker 3: to what you just said that they did retrieve mail
5:15
Speaker 3: DNA from the glove that was sent for testing and
5:19
Speaker 3: they did not get a hit on CODIS.
5:23
Speaker 2: All is not lost.
5:25
Speaker 3: Tammy Balor joining US DNA crime scene consultant, crime Scene
5:29
Speaker 3: Investigation reconstructionists, former DNA criminalist d n A criminalist for
5:35
Speaker 3: San Diego's Police Department Crime Lab. Tammy, we may not
5:40
Speaker 3: have gotten a direct hit on CODIS, but there's so
5:46
Speaker 3: much more to be done explained.
5:48
Speaker 7: We definitely checked the box, so that's the first thing
5:51
Speaker 7: that needed to be done. Maybe you get lucky that
5:53
Speaker 7: it's somebody in the national database and now you work
5:57
Speaker 7: from there, so you're going to take more or of
6:00
Speaker 7: the local state approach. It sounds like the state lab
6:04
Speaker 7: is now going to be retesting that glove. There's still
6:07
Speaker 7: additional items that are being analyzed by DNA Labs International
6:13
Speaker 7: in Florida. They're doing that in record timing. I am
6:17
Speaker 7: imagining there's going to be mixtures they have to deal with,
6:20
Speaker 7: and so getting that good, clean data back out there
6:24
Speaker 7: for additional comparisons and database searches is going to be
6:28
Speaker 7: pretty much paramount.
6:29
Speaker 3: Question Why is the same DNA being tested in the
6:32
Speaker 3: Arizona labs.
6:33
Speaker 7: Well now because they Florida lab and also with the
6:38
Speaker 7: FBI laboratory. They would not have been able to go
6:42
Speaker 7: into a state CODIS database and enter the data. They
6:47
Speaker 7: can only get to the national level. So now they've
6:50
Speaker 7: got to get that state lab to be able to
6:55
Speaker 7: test the data, get that into the code database for
6:58
Speaker 7: the state level, and then they can also pursue things
7:02
Speaker 7: like familial testing, which you mentioned yesterday. So it's a
7:07
Speaker 7: multi pronged approach. And I think everything is happening in
7:10
Speaker 7: a pretty good real time as far as the DNA
7:13
Speaker 7: world goes, because it definitely takes longer than I think
7:17
Speaker 7: most people think, but they're cranking that out in record time.
7:21
Speaker 3: Tammy Ballad, are you telling me that when DNA Labs
7:25
Speaker 3: International in Florida entered the DNA intokotis, the national database,
7:32
Speaker 3: it would not hit on Arizona.
7:37
Speaker 7: Defendants, It would not hit on suspects that have been
7:43
Speaker 7: entered into a state lab and also other profiles that
7:49
Speaker 7: potentially didn't make the cut or reach that threshold that
7:52
Speaker 7: you need so desperately to get into a national search.
7:55
Speaker 7: So there's a lot more restrictions at the national level. Rightfully,
7:59
Speaker 7: So because you have so many samples, you want to
8:03
Speaker 7: make sure that once you identify somebody. You have a
8:06
Speaker 7: very good, solid hit and database association, so they know
8:11
Speaker 7: they could not enter it into there. But that's again
8:15
Speaker 7: a risk to take to get that expedited into that
8:18
Speaker 7: national search. And then now it's triaging and going to
8:21
Speaker 7: the second tier, and now you've got to get to
8:23
Speaker 7: a state level and work additional evidence.
8:27
Speaker 3: If you think, okay, I still don't understand your answer,
8:29
Speaker 3: Tammy Ballard.
8:30
Speaker 5: My question is that if you are convicted of.
8:33
Speaker 3: A felony in Arizona, you're telling me your DNA is
8:38
Speaker 3: not in CODIS.
8:39
Speaker 7: No, it's not that it's not in CODIS. It's just
8:42
Speaker 7: that the national database has certain offenders and convicted offenders.
8:50
Speaker 7: But also if Arizona has additional suspect reference samples that
8:57
Speaker 7: are not in the national database, there's more that can
9:01
Speaker 7: be done. You also cannot do familial testing at the
9:05
Speaker 7: or comparisons at the national level, so you can only
9:09
Speaker 7: do that at the state level and have to have
9:11
Speaker 7: that state lab involved in that process if you do
9:16
Speaker 7: want to attempt familial testing prior to something like genealogy testing.
9:27
Speaker 1: Crime stories with Nancy Grace.
9:33
Speaker 3: To Andrew black joining US former Special Agent in charge
9:37
Speaker 3: of the Tucson FBI office and Arizona.
9:42
Speaker 2: Okay, does this make sense to you? So far?
9:45
Speaker 8: It does?
9:45
Speaker 4: But all, like you said, all is not lost. There
9:47
Speaker 4: are public databases where people have freely submitted to their
9:51
Speaker 4: DNA as part of their trying to identify their family tree,
9:54
Speaker 4: their genealogy. There's also private databases that the FBI can
10:00
Speaker 4: tap into. They'll need legal process to do that though,
10:03
Speaker 4: but that DNA profile that was developed, they can compare
10:08
Speaker 4: it against somebody who's closely related and if that happens,
10:11
Speaker 4: we really narrow down the field of the individual who
10:14
Speaker 4: would be wearing that club.
10:16
Speaker 2: We are also learning.
10:17
Speaker 3: Scott Iiker joining US digital forensics expert, founding member of
10:21
Speaker 3: the FBI Cellular Analysis Survey Team, also former cop homicide
10:27
Speaker 3: detective with the Norfolk, Virginia PD, now at pc A
10:34
Speaker 3: Experts dot com. That's Precision Cellularanalysis dot com.
10:38
Speaker 2: Scott, thank you for being with us.
10:39
Speaker 3: I want to talk to you about Bluefly, which is
10:42
Speaker 3: a highly technical bluetooth identify or explain what it is
10:49
Speaker 3: and how it's being used.
10:50
Speaker 9: So Bluefly is basically a Bluetooth scanner. It's scanning the
10:55
Speaker 9: area to pick up Bluetooth signals. Now our phones actually
10:59
Speaker 9: do that. When you look into try to set up
11:02
Speaker 9: your AirPods to your phone, your phone is actually scanning
11:05
Speaker 9: all the Bluetooth signals in that area to try to
11:08
Speaker 9: connect to your earbuds. But this is a bigger and
11:13
Speaker 9: more powerful device that allows it to bring signals in
11:17
Speaker 9: from further away. Again, we still have the problem that
11:21
Speaker 9: Nancy Guthrie's pacemaker probably doesn't transmit very far because it
11:25
Speaker 9: was only used to connect to her phone. So we
11:29
Speaker 9: do have to use either ground or low flying aircraft
11:33
Speaker 9: to try to connect with that pacemaker of Nancy Guthries.
11:39
Speaker 9: And I'm sure they're continually doing that searching, not just
11:43
Speaker 9: around the house, but in other areas of interest.
11:46
Speaker 3: What you were just seeing the videos from our friends
11:48
Speaker 3: at blue Fly YouTube to Dave mac isn't it true
11:52
Speaker 3: that the range is now over two football fields or
11:59
Speaker 3: is it three? No, it's football fields that this blue
12:02
Speaker 3: Fly technology can pick up.
12:04
Speaker 6: They've developed this blue Fly technology Nancy, that it goes
12:07
Speaker 6: six hundred and sixty to eight hundred feet, so yes,
12:11
Speaker 6: you're talking two and a half football fields away. It
12:14
Speaker 6: can pick up the Bluetooth signal instead of the twenty
12:18
Speaker 6: feet that we were talking about at the very beginning
12:20
Speaker 6: where the pacemaker would hook up with her Apple Watch.
12:23
Speaker 6: Well now we're talking a couple of football fields away
12:27
Speaker 6: and this thinking and find it, which is why they've
12:30
Speaker 6: been working on this since four days out, trying to
12:34
Speaker 6: get anything they can on the pacemaker from Nancy Guthrie.
12:37
Speaker 3: Now we know, Scott Iiker, that a pacemaker cannot be identified,
12:42
Speaker 3: cannot be located, it does not have a GPS signal
12:46
Speaker 3: that is emitted.
12:47
Speaker 2: But this could work.
12:49
Speaker 3: And at first they had a sniffer, a signal sniffer
12:53
Speaker 3: attached to a helicopter. Now it's been moved to low
12:57
Speaker 3: flying drones and they've been going all through the neighborhood
13:01
Speaker 3: where Nancy Guthrie lived and beyond.
13:04
Speaker 2: Why the switch, Well, we.
13:06
Speaker 9: Want to get more specific and as you said, the
13:09
Speaker 9: signal is not very strong from her pacemaker. There's no GPS.
13:13
Speaker 9: Hopefully it'll run for as you mentioned previous, to show,
13:17
Speaker 9: you know, seven to ten years, it'd be great. So
13:21
Speaker 9: using us a lower flying aircraft to kind of help
13:25
Speaker 9: us pinpoint if we do capture that signal. You got
13:29
Speaker 9: to remember they're capturing probably thousands every second and they
13:32
Speaker 9: have to weed out all the noise and concentrate on
13:36
Speaker 9: just the one that matches the MAC address for her pacemaker.
13:40
Speaker 3: So is that possible, Scott Iiker, that you when you're
13:44
Speaker 3: using the signal sniffer, that you filter out everything except
13:50
Speaker 3: pacemakers or Nancy Guthrie's pacemaker.
13:54
Speaker 9: Yes, So from what I understand, the pacemaker has a
13:57
Speaker 9: MAC address, just like a computer or anything like else,
14:00
Speaker 9: anything else that has bluetooth. So that MAC address is
14:03
Speaker 9: specific for her pacemaker, and they're scanning and capturing all
14:08
Speaker 9: the Bluetooth devices in that area and it'll filter out
14:11
Speaker 9: everything else except for hers, and once it matches hers,
14:15
Speaker 9: then you get to be able to track it to
14:16
Speaker 9: a specific location.
14:18
Speaker 3: Could you explain what you mean when you say Nancy
14:20
Speaker 3: Guthrie's pacemaker has a MAC address.
14:23
Speaker 9: Well, MAC address is an identifier for that device. It's
14:27
Speaker 9: very specific, it's unique to that device, and no other
14:31
Speaker 9: device will have that. So it's helping us to identify
14:34
Speaker 9: that pacemaker if we can get close enough to it.
14:39
Speaker 3: It's like the VIN on a car, the VN number.
14:42
Speaker 3: Only one car has that ven number, and it's very
14:46
Speaker 3: hard to get the VEN number off of a car.
14:48
Speaker 2: Of course, experts.
14:49
Speaker 3: Can do it, So you're saying her pacemaker had a
14:53
Speaker 3: VN number of sorts.
14:54
Speaker 2: It's the MAC address.
14:56
Speaker 3: So you're also telling me, Scott Iiker that the signal
15:00
Speaker 3: sniffer can filter out everything except her MAC address. That's correct,
15:06
Speaker 3: and they're very easy to look up. I have to
15:10
Speaker 3: look them up every time my mom goes to the hospital,
15:13
Speaker 3: which between a deep cough or we think maybe does
15:16
Speaker 3: she have COVID or her back hurts or her chest
15:19
Speaker 3: or she's ninety four, we go straight to the er, right,
15:23
Speaker 3: don't wait to find out. And every time they want
15:27
Speaker 3: to put her inside of an MRI, but she can't
15:30
Speaker 3: do that because she got a pacemaker that it's not compatible.
15:34
Speaker 2: It'll blow up.
15:35
Speaker 3: Right, So every time, even though it's in the hospital records,
15:38
Speaker 3: we have to look up the pacemaker and the exact
15:42
Speaker 3: one that is in her every single time it's in
15:45
Speaker 3: hospital records.
15:46
Speaker 2: It's really not hard to do.
15:48
Speaker 3: So the signal sniffer can hone in and only respond
15:54
Speaker 3: if it gets that MAC address correct.
15:57
Speaker 9: That is correct out of thousands, which is fantast do
16:00
Speaker 9: to Sky.
16:01
Speaker 2: And Lazarro special guest joining us.
16:03
Speaker 3: She is a veteran criminal defense attorney joining us out
16:06
Speaker 3: of this jurisdiction in Utah. She has worked both state
16:10
Speaker 3: and federal cases with Ray Quinny and Kneebacker.
16:14
Speaker 2: Thank you for being with us. Guy.
16:16
Speaker 3: I imagine if this ever does get to trial, which
16:20
Speaker 3: I hope it does, that there will be a huge battle,
16:25
Speaker 3: an evidentiary battle as to whether this evidence regarding the
16:30
Speaker 3: signal sniffer will be allowed. It's just like the first
16:33
Speaker 3: fight over DNA or the first evidentiary fight over fingerprints.
16:39
Speaker 5: There's a huge fight whether it's.
16:42
Speaker 3: Reliable or not. Of course it will be deemed reliable,
16:45
Speaker 3: but there's still going to be a huge evidentiary battle.
16:48
Speaker 2: Do you agree?
16:49
Speaker 10: I do. I think any defense attorney in this case
16:51
Speaker 10: is going to fight absolutely everything. I think there's going
16:55
Speaker 10: to already been some problems, but especially with new anything
17:00
Speaker 10: new that relates to technology or requires some sort of
17:03
Speaker 10: expert to testify too, They're going to fight this tooth
17:06
Speaker 10: and nail.
17:07
Speaker 3: You know another interesting fact about the signalsmith for Andrew Black,
17:10
Speaker 3: I just want to throw it in. Cybersecurity technology in
17:16
Speaker 3: the defense field has used this technology for years and
17:20
Speaker 3: years and years when trying to sniff out, for instance,
17:27
Speaker 3: let's just say a foreign national government listening in you know, bugs,
17:33
Speaker 3: all sorts.
17:34
Speaker 5: Of waves, bluetooth waves, and they've.
17:36
Speaker 2: Been using it for a really long time.
17:40
Speaker 3: Now it has advanced to where it's being used to
17:44
Speaker 3: let's just say, find a victim and an avalanche, find
17:47
Speaker 3: a missing person on a hiking trail a densely wooded forest.
17:51
Speaker 3: So it is now being adapted for us, just like
17:53
Speaker 3: we're seeing right now, but it's been around for decades.
17:57
Speaker 4: Yeah, this is awesome technology and you can go to
18:01
Speaker 4: there are electronics stores that the public can you know,
18:05
Speaker 4: purchase these devices and use them for scanning for spyware
18:10
Speaker 4: in their own house on their computers. If they travel
18:13
Speaker 4: to airbnbs. People are paranoid of cameras being and they're
18:18
Speaker 4: not really a paranoid. There's been cases where airbnbs have
18:22
Speaker 4: had cameras spying and individuals. Yeah, this equipment is available
18:27
Speaker 4: to the public and it's being used across a wide
18:32
Speaker 4: variety of areas and fields and including like you describe
18:38
Speaker 4: outdoors sports like mountain climbing and things like that, and
18:42
Speaker 4: locating avalanche victims.
18:44
Speaker 3: Guys, you are seeing video from our friends at Bluefly
18:47
Speaker 3: YouTube to show you what we're talking about. And you
18:51
Speaker 3: can see if we could show it the helicopters that
18:54
Speaker 3: were darting through the sky with the sniffer on them.
18:59
Speaker 3: We believe that the sniffer is on there. You go
19:03
Speaker 3: on the skids right there. This from our friend at
19:05
Speaker 3: Fox News. This was happening until they got the wonderful
19:09
Speaker 3: idea to attach the sniffer to drones. Low flying drones,
19:15
Speaker 3: very low flying drones. That's what you're seeing right there. More,
19:19
Speaker 3: there is the DNA update. We are now looking in
19:23
Speaker 3: other data banks, particularly the Arizona State Data Bank. We
19:29
Speaker 3: are also understanding that the DNA found in that glove
19:33
Speaker 3: and in the home is being tested in genetic genealogy
19:40
Speaker 3: data banks, things like jed match and more. To Dave
19:45
Speaker 3: mac tell me about the DNA found in the home.
19:48
Speaker 2: What do we know about that?
19:49
Speaker 6: You know, Nancy, it was DNA that was found inside
19:53
Speaker 6: the home, but they they being law enforcement, they had
19:56
Speaker 6: not indicated exactly what it was, just DNA found in
20:01
Speaker 6: the home. We do know so that it were llabed
20:05
Speaker 6: for testing, and we're hoping to get that information back
20:09
Speaker 6: as soon as this afternoon, and then they'll they will
20:13
Speaker 6: be able to compare what they've already found and see
20:16
Speaker 6: if we can't connect between what was found in the
20:19
Speaker 6: house and what was found on the glove. And again
20:22
Speaker 6: something that was mentioned earlier. You know, when it comes
20:24
Speaker 6: to codis nancy and getting a hit on codis not
20:27
Speaker 6: everybody in the world is in a database. So if
20:31
Speaker 6: you've got somebody's at DNA and you've identified this DNA,
20:35
Speaker 6: but they're not in a system anywhere they're not going
20:38
Speaker 6: to show up. You have to have something to compare
20:40
Speaker 6: it to so you can move forward. So that's the
20:42
Speaker 6: other side part of this whole thing.
20:44
Speaker 3: Dave Matt, what can you tell me about FBI agents
20:47
Speaker 3: taking We've been told forty names, forty photos to gunshops
20:53
Speaker 3: all around Tucson.
20:54
Speaker 6: They actually did. They got the pictures together, they got
20:57
Speaker 6: bios on these people, and they forty Now we don't
21:02
Speaker 6: know where they got the forty names, forty pictures. We
21:05
Speaker 6: don't know that, but what we do know is that
21:07
Speaker 6: they did have this list that they called in law enforcement.
21:10
Speaker 6: Then the FBI they went all throughout Tucson. I remember,
21:14
Speaker 6: there's a lot of stores that sell guns. You're trying,
21:16
Speaker 6: pawn shops and everything else. So they were visiting all
21:19
Speaker 6: of these stores and showing pictures and talking to sellers
21:24
Speaker 6: about businesses they've been conducting with selling firearms to find
21:28
Speaker 6: out if anybody recognized any of the forty plus pictures
21:32
Speaker 6: they were seeing, or the names, or were even just familiar.
21:36
Speaker 6: I mean, most people in Tucson have heard about this
21:38
Speaker 6: case right now. They're probably more familiar than most. And
21:42
Speaker 6: the FBI just decided to canvass every place that sells
21:46
Speaker 6: guns to see if anybody recognizes one of these forty
21:50
Speaker 6: that they've come up with thus far. And we don't
21:52
Speaker 6: have we don't have the results. We just know that
21:55
Speaker 6: they've been canvassing those names and those names and pictures.
22:00
Speaker 3: I'm very curious where those forty photos and forty names
22:02
Speaker 3: came from. Who are they, how are they identified? Or
22:06
Speaker 3: were they identified because their cell phones popped up in
22:09
Speaker 3: Nancy Guthrie's neighborhood around the time she went missing. Are
22:14
Speaker 3: they people that worked for or around Nancy Guthrie? Are
22:17
Speaker 3: they church members? Are they distant relatives?
22:21
Speaker 2: I want to know who those forty people are.
22:24
Speaker 3: But before I go to skylazarro on the dangers of
22:27
Speaker 3: photo lineups and the constitutional problems with that, I want
22:30
Speaker 3: to go back to Tammy Ballard and button down the
22:32
Speaker 3: DNA issue. Tammy, I know we're being told tonight that
22:37
Speaker 3: the DNA found in the one glove did not get
22:41
Speaker 3: a hit in codis what I really want to know
22:45
Speaker 3: is did the DNA in or on that glove found
22:48
Speaker 3: in the area of Nancy's home match the DNA found
22:53
Speaker 3: in the home. That's what I really want to know. Now,
22:56
Speaker 3: what type of DNA analysis would reveal that.
23:00
Speaker 7: Are going to do the same exact DNA testing that
23:03
Speaker 7: they did on the gloves for a direct comparison, hopefully
23:08
Speaker 7: for what you referred to as an str profile. So
23:12
Speaker 7: that same profile from the glove was single source enough
23:18
Speaker 7: from one at least a good enough profile to get
23:21
Speaker 7: all the way up to national, so you've got something
23:24
Speaker 7: great to compare to when you do identify additional profiles
23:29
Speaker 7: from inside the residence.
23:30
Speaker 5: When you say it was good enough to get to national,
23:33
Speaker 5: what do you mean.
23:34
Speaker 7: It's a pretty high bar to get a profile up
23:36
Speaker 7: to national because there's so many people in National. Again,
23:40
Speaker 7: you don't want to have something hit to you know,
23:44
Speaker 7: more than one individual, So you really have to have
23:47
Speaker 7: a very solid profile because there's millions of profiles in
23:51
Speaker 7: that national code of database. So they have a good
23:55
Speaker 7: sounds like we they've.
23:56
Speaker 3: Got to read certain expectations, like it can't be degraded,
23:59
Speaker 3: it can't be a mixture of DNA.
24:01
Speaker 2: Is that what you're saying.
24:02
Speaker 7: They can have mixtures, but those mixtures have to strongly
24:06
Speaker 7: favor a significant contributor in there, such that they are
24:10
Speaker 7: reporting and I haven't seen the profile, but they are
24:13
Speaker 7: reporting that is an unknown male, So that's pretty significant.
24:18
Speaker 7: That tells me that there is a very strong contributor.
24:21
Speaker 7: Even if there's a mixture, it sounds like the majority
24:24
Speaker 7: of that DNA is associated with one person.
24:28
Speaker 3: Guys, the DNA is being compared on many, many different levels.
24:33
Speaker 2: So Tammy Ballard, you're saying that now the.
24:36
Speaker 5: Same type of test has to be run on the
24:38
Speaker 5: same DNA.
24:40
Speaker 3: In order to match it potentially to DNA in Nancy
24:44
Speaker 3: Guthrie's home.
24:45
Speaker 7: Correct, They're just going to do that same type of
24:48
Speaker 7: DNA testing to compare. That's not saying they can't do
24:51
Speaker 7: additional testing also, but for now they would be looking
24:55
Speaker 7: at comparing an STR profile to an STR profile Apples
25:00
Speaker 7: to apples.
25:01
Speaker 5: So at what point do you use up the DNA?
25:05
Speaker 7: Well, I'm going to hope that with a glove. A
25:08
Speaker 7: glove is usually a pretty decent amount of DNA potentially,
25:12
Speaker 7: And again I don't know what the source of the
25:14
Speaker 7: DNA is within the residents. Hopefully that's sufficient, but most
25:19
Speaker 7: private laboratories have a pretty strict policy about not consuming
25:24
Speaker 7: the DNA. So unless they're asking for and getting authorization
25:29
Speaker 7: to consume that there should be sufficient DNA remaining to
25:34
Speaker 7: also test again. And also I wouldn't hesitate about re
25:39
Speaker 7: swabbing a glove and assuming sufficient DNA is quite a potential.
25:45
Speaker 7: So it's a lot of surface area on a glove,
25:48
Speaker 7: and it sounds like if this DNA is associated with
25:52
Speaker 7: a single person, then there's probably a good chance that
25:55
Speaker 7: there's more DNA on that glove that you can work with.
26:05
Speaker 1: Crime stories with Nancy Grace.
26:11
Speaker 5: Back to Skuy lazarro joining US veteran criminal defense attorney.
26:14
Speaker 3: In the Utah jurisdiction, a photo array lineup is governed
26:21
Speaker 3: largely by the same rules as an in person lineup.
26:24
Speaker 3: It can't be persuasive in that you can't know that
26:30
Speaker 3: your purpose sixty three and then put four guys that
26:34
Speaker 3: are five to one and one guy that is six
26:36
Speaker 3: y three In the lineup, It can't be a false lineup.
26:41
Speaker 3: So what I'm getting at are the photos that have
26:44
Speaker 3: been shown to gun shop owners, which basically are tantamount
26:49
Speaker 3: to a photo array lineup.
26:53
Speaker 2: What do you think?
26:55
Speaker 10: I think this can be hugely problematic, especially if they
26:58
Speaker 10: identify someone.
27:00
Speaker 8: You know, they're going to get challenged all over the place.
27:02
Speaker 10: Was it suggestive, like you said, is this really a
27:05
Speaker 10: photo lineup?
27:06
Speaker 8: Did they do it?
27:08
Speaker 10: Were they just showing pictures? Did they give some sort
27:11
Speaker 10: of description first things? Along those lines?
27:14
Speaker 8: Are they looking for a particular gun?
27:18
Speaker 10: I think it's it's going to cause some serious problems,
27:20
Speaker 10: and it's a huge due process problem, I think for
27:24
Speaker 10: the state a lot of times, and we see eyewitness
27:29
Speaker 10: or convictions based on eyewitness testimony thrown.
27:32
Speaker 8: Out all the time if you look at a lot
27:34
Speaker 8: of the things that.
27:35
Speaker 3: But wait a minute, Skylosar, I'm not talking about eyewitness testimony.
27:39
Speaker 3: I'm talking about the constitutionality of a photo or an lineup,
27:42
Speaker 3: which I personally have.
27:43
Speaker 5: Brought into evidence many, many, many.
27:45
Speaker 3: Times, and I've never had a problematic issue with them.
27:50
Speaker 8: I think it depends on how it's done.
27:52
Speaker 10: I think they can be admissible, but if it's not
27:54
Speaker 10: done correctly, or you have an officer who doesn't document
27:57
Speaker 10: it correctly.
27:58
Speaker 8: I think it's definitely challenged by the defense.
28:01
Speaker 3: Oh, there's going to be a challenge on everything, whether
28:03
Speaker 3: it's justified or not. You're right about that, Hey, Tammy
28:05
Speaker 3: Ballard very quickly. In the home, we're talking about DNA
28:09
Speaker 3: found in the home. I'm guessing it's touch DNA, not blood.
28:14
Speaker 3: Where would you look in the home to get touch DNA?
28:17
Speaker 7: Well, if I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm really
28:20
Speaker 7: curious to know if there's blood right inside that front
28:23
Speaker 7: door as well. But let's assume maybe there's blood in
28:27
Speaker 7: the rest of the residence, anything around those areas where
28:30
Speaker 7: a struggle may have occurred, any indication where somebody could
28:35
Speaker 7: have left something behind. Maybe again, they could be injured
28:40
Speaker 7: as well if she did fight back, so we might
28:43
Speaker 7: have two bleeders and get really really lucky. So, yes,
28:48
Speaker 7: touch DNA, but it's got to have something where you're
28:51
Speaker 7: localizing an item of evidence or something that you think
28:54
Speaker 7: might have come in contact with that perpetrator.
28:57
Speaker 3: Okay, those were a lot of words. So you're saying
29:02
Speaker 3: maybe the purp blood. So you think an eighty four
29:06
Speaker 3: year old woman that had been asleep got actually got
29:09
Speaker 3: to hit in. I don't think that the purp is
29:12
Speaker 3: going to have bled I think that's Nancy Guffries's blood,
29:15
Speaker 3: probably from a nosebleed. Plus you had propula, which you
29:19
Speaker 3: can see that in the picture where her hand is
29:22
Speaker 3: all bloody under the skin. People get that from using
29:26
Speaker 3: blood thinners. It's very very common. So I would wager
29:31
Speaker 3: any blood found on the scene is hers. So let's
29:34
Speaker 3: move to the next possibility. Where could you get touch
29:37
Speaker 3: DNA in the home that's not hers?
29:41
Speaker 7: Well, if we're going to assume that he's got gloves
29:44
Speaker 7: on because of the video footage, you know that that
29:48
Speaker 7: anything is the potential with that. You know you're talking
29:51
Speaker 7: to somebody who's done DNA for my entire adult life.
29:56
Speaker 7: I wear a glove very differently than a normal human.
29:59
Speaker 7: Where's a glove, So I guarantee that perpetrator was touching
30:04
Speaker 7: his holster, everything on his person. I'm willing to wager
30:08
Speaker 7: that bet. So you've got his DNA on the outside
30:12
Speaker 7: of those gloves as well as the inside, So he's
30:15
Speaker 7: probably leaving some DNA behind in that residence. The struggle
30:20
Speaker 7: is going to be trying to figure out where he
30:22
Speaker 7: would have left touch DNA and on what items.
30:26
Speaker 3: Okay, that was so smart out of curiosity. This is
30:30
Speaker 3: not probative to the Guthrie chase.
30:32
Speaker 5: But what do you mean you wear gloves differently than
30:34
Speaker 5: the rest of us.
30:36
Speaker 7: I watch people wear gloves because my whole life is
30:39
Speaker 7: protecting the DNA. So when I see someone put a
30:43
Speaker 7: pair of gloves on at a crime scene and grab
30:45
Speaker 7: the pen out of their pocket that they've been carrying around,
30:49
Speaker 7: those gloves are now contaminated. The average person doesn't realize
30:54
Speaker 7: that they're cross contaminating their gloves with their own DNA
30:58
Speaker 7: with the simplest of tasks, you know, using a pen,
31:02
Speaker 7: wiping your brow, touching that holster that you most likely
31:06
Speaker 7: he wasn't handling that holster at all times with gloved hands.
31:10
Speaker 7: So his DNA is on these items and would transfer
31:13
Speaker 7: onto those gloves. Then those that those gloves could be
31:16
Speaker 7: that transfer inside the house for touch DNA as well.
31:20
Speaker 3: And that is why Tammy Ballard is the expert. Hadn't
31:24
Speaker 3: even thought of that of transferring touch DNA to become
31:29
Speaker 3: touch DNA in the home.
31:32
Speaker 2: And we see him touching the holster.
31:36
Speaker 5: What if he wiped his nose, what if he touched
31:39
Speaker 5: his face, what if he rolled up his sleeve, rolled
31:42
Speaker 5: down his sleeve.
31:44
Speaker 3: There is a plethora of possibilities of getting DNA.
31:50
Speaker 5: How do you go in there and figure out?
31:52
Speaker 2: Tammy Ballard?
31:53
Speaker 3: Okay, See many people would say, we'll get the door
31:56
Speaker 3: handles in the light switches, but there's so much than
32:00
Speaker 3: door handles and lights, which is Tammy yes.
32:03
Speaker 7: And again, it's really difficult to make assumptions when you
32:08
Speaker 7: haven't had access inside the scene to see what is disrupted.
32:13
Speaker 7: You know, maybe she was able to. I mean, maybe
32:16
Speaker 7: there's a very clear area where something is disrupted, where
32:20
Speaker 7: there could be something handled, an item of evidence that
32:24
Speaker 7: just really sticks out that might have been collected. I
32:28
Speaker 7: just it's hard to speculate. But those are the items
32:32
Speaker 7: that you're going to see.
32:33
Speaker 3: What about the saliva on the flash line, the light
32:36
Speaker 3: bid those remember he had that in his mouth.
32:38
Speaker 2: Those are keep it in his mouth the whole time.
32:41
Speaker 2: I'm sure those.
32:42
Speaker 7: Are my favorite. That's your source of DNA right there,
32:45
Speaker 7: and that's saliva. So I've had several of those cases. Uh,
32:50
Speaker 7: those are the best. He's also probably adjusting that really
32:54
Speaker 7: uncomfortable face mask. So he's got all that sweat and
32:57
Speaker 7: saliva from his own face mask that he's trained spring
33:00
Speaker 7: onto his gloves and potentially transferring on to something else.
33:04
Speaker 5: We can only pray Tammy Ballard.
33:07
Speaker 3: And this is why my direct examinations always took so long,
33:12
Speaker 3: because every time the witness the expert would say something,
33:15
Speaker 3: it leads to a whole series of other insanely relevant questions.
33:22
Speaker 3: Who would have thought other than Tammy Ballard about him
33:27
Speaker 3: touching his holster, which we see him do over and over,
33:29
Speaker 3: and then touching something in the home, or fiddling with
33:33
Speaker 3: his face mask, or fiddling with his gloves, or taking
33:37
Speaker 3: the light bite which is covered in his saliva and
33:41
Speaker 3: touching something else.
33:43
Speaker 2: We can only pray he made a mistake.
33:47
Speaker 3: And speaking of all of these accouchment to Andrew black
33:51
Speaker 3: joining Us, former Special Agent in charge of the Tucson
33:55
Speaker 3: Office of the FBI, currently Chief of the Universe Hawaii
34:00
Speaker 3: Department Public Safety, Andrew, I want to talk to you
34:05
Speaker 3: about Walmart.
34:08
Speaker 5: We know that the Ozark backpack is sold at Walmart.
34:13
Speaker 3: Our crime story's staff within an hour had identified objects
34:18
Speaker 3: also sold at Walmart that it looks like he's wearing
34:22
Speaker 3: the jacket, the face mask, the backpack. I can only
34:30
Speaker 3: imagine what the shoes would reveal. Walmart sells gloves like that.
34:36
Speaker 2: The holester, the holster.
34:40
Speaker 3: It's a cheap about a ten dollars polyester holster, and
34:44
Speaker 3: when we last checked, it was only available at two
34:47
Speaker 3: twos on Walmart's What if this guy and why wouldn't.
34:53
Speaker 2: He got it all at once?
34:56
Speaker 3: And there would be the receipt for the FBI to
34:59
Speaker 3: find us. Another thing we've been talking a lot, or
35:02
Speaker 3: I've been talking a lot how cass sailor annalysis survey
35:05
Speaker 3: team with the FBI has been identifying phone usage in
35:09
Speaker 3: Nancy's neighborhood at the time she went missing. Problem would
35:14
Speaker 3: be a burner phone. They're harder to trace, but they're
35:18
Speaker 3: also sold at Walmart.
35:20
Speaker 2: And what about the bite light? What about that?
35:25
Speaker 4: Well that those are all good points. He seems to
35:27
Speaker 4: be a frequent Walmart shopper. And as you've seen, the
35:32
Speaker 4: more information that comes out. First we had the video,
35:35
Speaker 4: we had the backpack that was identified as coming from Walmart.
35:38
Speaker 4: We had a description of the individual with the height,
35:41
Speaker 4: we had the sketch that approximated what he looked like.
35:44
Speaker 4: And now we're getting indications that the clothing that you
35:47
Speaker 4: described were also purchased at Walmart. All this is very helpful.
35:51
Speaker 4: The fact that that Holster has only sold it to
35:54
Speaker 4: Walmart is a very easy lead to follow up. Walmart
35:57
Speaker 4: has a very good loss prevention system, have cameras at
36:00
Speaker 4: every cashier. So ideally you hope this person paid for
36:06
Speaker 4: these items with a credit card. That would be awesome.
36:09
Speaker 4: That would make things much easier. If it was paid
36:11
Speaker 4: for cash, you might have a little trouble because like
36:15
Speaker 4: all businesses, there's a turnover of the length of time
36:18
Speaker 4: that video is kept. Usually it's thirty to sixty days,
36:22
Speaker 4: but as we've seen with the Nest camera, is it
36:24
Speaker 4: ever really gone? It may take longer to get it
36:27
Speaker 4: if it was purchased with cash outside of the thirty
36:29
Speaker 4: to sixty day period from her disappearance. But I'd like
36:32
Speaker 4: to circle back one thing that Tammy was talking about.
36:35
Speaker 4: She did an excellent job analyzing the DNA issues. But
36:39
Speaker 4: the FBI and local law enforce they do have enhanced
36:44
Speaker 4: technology and lighting called alternate light sources that will illuminate
36:50
Speaker 4: any type of DNA material, So they could shine these lights.
36:54
Speaker 4: There's a various levels of spectrums and they can illuminate
36:59
Speaker 4: where DNA can be located. That's how the Polyclass kidnapping
37:03
Speaker 4: twenty something years ago was solved with that alternate light
37:06
Speaker 4: source illuminating some DNA that was otherwise invisible.
37:11
Speaker 3: Wow, when you're saying alternate light sources, are you talking
37:15
Speaker 3: about the use of aluminol or are you talking about
37:19
Speaker 3: blue star?
37:19
Speaker 2: What are you talking about?
37:22
Speaker 4: That's one technique. There are also photographic and light sources
37:30
Speaker 4: that are utilized and when they are shown in a area,
37:36
Speaker 4: and I think Tammy knows about this. I don't know
37:38
Speaker 4: the name of the particular technology, but it illuminates DNA
37:42
Speaker 4: in a row.
37:43
Speaker 3: So, Andrew, you're talking about alternative light sources like blue
37:47
Speaker 3: light technology or U the ultraviolet light.
37:51
Speaker 4: Yes, and I'm sure the technology has advanced since when
37:54
Speaker 4: I left the f guy eight years ago. These are
37:57
Speaker 4: techniques that are used to innate bodily fluids biometric information
38:03
Speaker 4: that otherwise couldn't be detected by the naked eye, and
38:05
Speaker 4: sometimes without even powder.
38:07
Speaker 3: Scott Iiker joining us from PCA Precision a Cellular analysis,
38:13
Speaker 3: You have a question for Andrew Black.
38:15
Speaker 2: What is it?
38:15
Speaker 9: Yeah, Edrea, I, since you're the SAC and Tucson you
38:18
Speaker 9: probably have a lot of experience dealing with the fact
38:21
Speaker 9: that the border is so close, and how you think
38:24
Speaker 9: that might affect us identifying this DNA and suspects in
38:28
Speaker 9: the area.
38:30
Speaker 4: Well, that's the Tucson is considered a border town, right
38:35
Speaker 4: just sixty miles the Mexican border is just sixty miles
38:38
Speaker 4: south of Tucson, So you know, when we've had investigations,
38:44
Speaker 4: it's not a common for individuals who are eluding law
38:48
Speaker 4: enforcement or the FBI to cross over into the border.
38:51
Speaker 4: Right now, there's no indication that that's what's happening. Through
38:54
Speaker 4: the investigators and any information they've released, they believe this
38:59
Speaker 4: is a low crime with local individual or individuals, but
39:05
Speaker 4: you can't rule out the possibility. With the border being
39:07
Speaker 4: that close it is for someone who's on the run,
39:13
Speaker 4: it is very enticing just to cross over the border
39:17
Speaker 4: till things blow down.
39:18
Speaker 2: Why are you so convinced it's local, Andrew, I.
39:21
Speaker 4: Think with all the information that's been coming out, there's
39:25
Speaker 4: been anywhere between thirty and fifty thousand leads that have
39:28
Speaker 4: been generated, I think they would have shared more information
39:32
Speaker 4: about an international aspect of this case. Doesn't mean there
39:35
Speaker 4: isn't it's very plausible because the border's right there and
39:39
Speaker 4: it's attractive to criminals to cross over. But I think
39:44
Speaker 4: we would have heard something either from the FBI or
39:47
Speaker 4: the Sheriff's department regarding some cross border nexus.
39:52
Speaker 3: If you know or think you know anything regarding Nancy
39:55
Speaker 3: Guthy's disappearance, please dial toll free eight hundred two two
39:59
Speaker 3: th five three two four eight hundred two two five
40:04
Speaker 3: five three two four. If you wish to remain anonymous,
40:08
Speaker 3: dial five two zero eight eight two seven four six
40:12
Speaker 3: three five two zero eight eight two seven four six three.
40:19
Speaker 2: Thank you to our.
40:20
Speaker 5: Guests for being with us, but especially to you for
40:22
Speaker 5: being with us tonight.
40:23
Speaker 2: Nancy Gray signing off for tonight. I'ssi you tomorrow night,
40:26
Speaker 2: and until then, good night for it