STILL NO REAL SUSPECT OR ANSWERS ON WHAT HAPPENED TO NANCY GUTHRIE

The high profile disappearance of Nancy Guthrie has captivated the nation and as of this date, the many questions people have asked have not been answered. Specifically, what happened to the 84 year old mother of NBC News journalist Savannah Guthrie. Perhaps soon we will have the answer. But for now we only have speculations, theories and even some conspiracy theories. One thing is clear. The investigation challenges and delays may have created some future legal challenges when prosecuting the case. This too is pure speculation and all depends on when the suspect or suspects are caught and charged. It also depends on what solid evidence law enforcement has and how it was obtained. Is there a confession? What incriminating evidence is found on this person or persons? Are there any witnesses or direct evidence to convict?

POSSIBLE LEGAL HURDLES WHICH MAY COME INTO PLAY FOR ANY FUTURE CASE OR TRIAL

Its easy for one to be an armchair police officer or FBI agent. Reality is that this investigation appears complex and has its challenges.  That being said, it also appears that there are some potential "holes" in the investigation. These are not necessarily mistakes, as "hindsight is 20/20". But as a defense attorney, I can assure you that a competent and skilled attorney will use these "holes" or "oversights" to their defense in any criminal case. Here are some potential issues which may come into play for a future case or trial.

FIRST, IT MAY HAVE BEEN PREMATURE TO ALLOW THE FAMILY BACK INTO THE PROPERTY SO SOON. This was one day after Nancy was reported missing. Any potential pieces of evidence seized after this time, can be argued to be tampered with or not in its original state. It could also be argued that any evidence of value should be suppressed as law enforcement had their chance before to seize the evidence and secure it. This could pose a huge obstacle for the State to try to admit this "evidence". In Arizona, a defense attorney can apply the U.S. and the Arizona constitution to try to suppress evidence, and the Arizona Rules of Evidence. Evidence can be challenged with pre trial motions and evidence can be suppressed even before a trial commences. Here, the family entered the house, the last place in which Nancy Guthrie was seen at, only one day after the disappearance. Since then, law enforcement have seized additional items and "evidence" from the home and surrounding area. Why wasn't the entire home and area around the home blocked off from people? This perhaps should have included the family. We all have seen the media circus around the home and the videos which surfaced about the blood splatter near the front door. Why were non law enforcement officers even allowed to be so close to a potential crime scene? It appears the home was unguarded only a day or two after the missing person report. We have seen footage of reporters and others wandering on and near the property snapping photos and making videos. There are reports of even a pizza delivery driver who wandered on the property trying to find the correct home who made the order, and a pool cleaner on the property with no idea it was a potential crime scene.  Why was the alleged crime scene opened up so soon? Was it premature to open up the scene to the family and public so soon? These are questions that could be raised during a case and a reason to justify suppressing evidence.  We know that the F.B.I. eventually closed the crime scene again as further investigation became needed. This may not be an uncommon practice but this also opens the door to future challenges to what may have been found later at the home and area around the home. 

SECOND, THE DNA EVIDENCE that has or will be obtained may not be conclusive and could be challenged by the Defense. We have heard about many gloves apparently found at and near the home. About 17 gloves thus far.  These may have no value. In addition, even if there is some DNA match and a person is found who matches that DNA, this does not necessarily close the case. The Defense can argue potential contamination and even a secondary transfer of DNA to the object (eg. glove). In other words, " a match does not automatically equate guilt". It may only show that this persons biological material came into contact with that item at some point. The police would still need to build a narrative around it says ex F.B.I. agent Jason Pack. Mr. Pack further stated that a DNA match helps an investigation, but does not close it. In addition, any "inconclusive" DNA finding may not be  as solid evidence as the State would hope. The Defense could argue that the glove for example, may have been exposed to environmental contaminants or the material on the glove resulted in the inconclusive findings. We have to remember also, just because a glove or other evidence is found and has a DNA match, does not necessarily mean it has anything to do with the crime scene. The approximately 17 gloves randomly found by law enforcement may have zero value to solving the crime. They have to be tied to the actual crime. Only time will tell. 

CONCLUSION. We all want to find out what happened to Nancy Guthrie. We all want answers and a closure. Law enforcement is investigating the crime scene and trying to find out what actually happened. Who is responsible for this? But they also are mindful of building a future case against the person or persons responsible for the crime. This includes preserving evidence and ensuring the chain of custody is handled properly. Any evidence seized or found, has to pass the scrutiny of the law and any challenges by a defense team. It appears that there are some questions that need to be answered. This article only touched upon a few issues which have been discussed at length in the media and by those interested in this investigation. But these issues are imperative in any criminal investigation and subsequent trial. Could these issues present an obstacle to the State once a suspect or suspects are found? Nobody knows.  But one this is clear, many will be glued to this story until there are some answers and closure.