Chuck and Julie Show, July 6, 2026

Chuck And Julie Show with Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden Investigations, Activist Judges, and the Nancy Guthrie Disappearance Case Guest Host, Mark Pfoff and Guest John San Agustin Guest Hosting With a Law-Enforcement Lens In this episode of The Chuck and Julie Show, Mark Pfoff guest-hosts while Chuck and Julie are away, bringing his background as a retired detective from the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and current investigative consultant into the discussion. He opens with political commentary before turning to the main investigative focus of the episode: the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie in the Tucson/Pima County area. Later, he is joined by John San Agustin, and the two discuss law-enforcement process, investigative mistakes, digital evidence, task-force work, and the danger of letting major cases go cold. Political Commentary, Candidate Controversy, and Public Integrity Before the investigative segment begins, Pfoff comments on several political and legal stories. He criticizes a Maine political candidate referred to in the transcript as Plattner or Platner, describing allegations against him and arguing that political alignment should never excuse serious misconduct. He also criticizes Jasmine Crockett for remarks about a knife in a Texas stabbing case, using the example to explain the legal definition of a deadly weapon. Pfoff’s broader point is that public officials, candidates, and commentators should be held to standards of truth, integrity, and legal common sense regardless of party or agenda. Judges, Immunity, and the Limits of Authority Pfoff then turns to what he calls activist judges and discusses judicial and prosecutorial immunity. He uses the Judge Dugan case as an example of a judge allegedly acting above the law by interfering with law enforcement in a courthouse, then claiming immunity after being charged. Pfoff argues that judges and district attorneys should not be able to misuse authority without consequence. He also discusses Judge Boasberg, immigration-related rulings, and the limits of what courts can compel an administration to do, presenting these examples as part of a larger concern about judges exceeding their proper role. The Nancy Guthrie Disappearance and Early Investigative Concerns The core of the episode centers on the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, described as an elderly woman who was dropped off by her son-in-law on the night of January 31 and reported missing after she failed to appear at church the next morning. Pfoff says the case has gone on for about five months without clear answers, and he compares the initial handling to other high-profile investigations that may have been damaged early. San Agustin emphasizes that the first twenty-four to forty-eight hours are critical and argues that, given Guthrie’s age, limited mobility, and circumstances, investigators should have treated the case as potentially serious from the start rather than as a routine missing-person matter. Experience, Resources, and the Need for a Task Force Pfoff and San Agustin focus heavily on the importance of experience and outside resources in major investigations. San Agustin says a detective with only a couple of years of experience should not be placed in charge of a possible kidnapping or homicide without strong leadership and support. They argue that Pima County should have brought in Tucson, Phoenix, state, and federal resources early, especially because the region has experience with kidnappings, cartel-related crime, and complex cases. Pfoff compares this to the response after the Tom Clements homicide, where multiple agencies gathered quickly in a task-force environment to share expertise and leads. Digital Evidence, Timelines, and the Risk of Lost Leads The discussion then moves into investigative methods, especially digital evidence and timeline building. San Agustin says investigators should examine geofence data, cell-tower records, Ring video, neighborhood canvassing, forensic evidence, motive, and activity in the days before the disappearance. Both men suggest the case does not appear random and may have involved prior surveillance or planning. They also discuss a reported ransom or kidnapping note, uncertainty about whether it was genuine, the importance of physical evidence from the home, and the danger of revisiting a scene multiple times after releasing it, because defense attorneys can later challenge the integrity of that evidence. Lifelong Learning, Expert Testimony, and Technology in Court The final section broadens into a discussion of criminal-justice expertise, teaching, and digital forensics. Pfoff and San Agustin explain that investigators, attorneys, experts, and juries must keep learning because technology changes rapidly. They describe cell phones as a kind of modern DNA because of how much information they can provide, but they also warn that law enforcement sometimes overstates what cell-tower and call-detail records can prove. Pfoff criticizes shortcuts in digital investigations, including searches without warrants and claims that phone records place someone precisely at a location when the technology was not designed for that purpose. The episode closes with Pfoff thanking San Agustin, Chuck and Julie, and the audience, while suggesting future discussions may cover additional federal cases and investigative issues.