True Crime All The Time - Cindy Wanner

Episode Date: September 24, 2026

In November 1991, 35-year-old mother of two Cindy Wanner disappeared while cleaning her sister’s home in Granite Bay, California, leaving behind her infant daughter, shoes, and coat. Weeks later, Cindy’s body was discovered in a remote mountainous area, and investigators determined she had been strangled. Join Mike and Gibby as they discuss the murder of Cindy Wanner. Despite extensive searches and the mysterious use of Cindy’s bank card shortly after her disappearance, the case went cold for decades. Nearly 35 years later, advances in DNA testing and facial recognition technology finally gave investigators the breakthrough they had been waiting for, bringing answers in a case that had haunted Cindy’s family and law enforcement for generations.You can help support the show at patreon.com/truecrimeallthetimeVisit the show's website at truecrimeallthetime.com for contact, merchandise, and donation informationAn Emash Digital productionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello everyone and welcome to episode 535 of the True Crime All the Time podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson and with me as always is my partner in true crime, Mike Gibson. How are you? I'm good, man. And yourself? I'm doing great. Yeah. We just talked on Patreon about all the good television shows we're watching.

I know. There's so many out there, it's kind of hard to get them all in. I feel like I need to develop my own series. Yeah. That would be gangbusters. There's the name. Gangbusters. The gangbusters.

All right, buddy, are you ready to get into this episode of true crime all the time? I'm ready. We're talking about Cindy Wanner. In November 1991, Cindy Wanner was abducted from a suburban home outside Sacramento and strangled to death. Decades later, facial recognition technology helped solve the murder. 35-year-old Cindy was a devoted mother of two. She was married to Bob Wanner, and they had two children. who were four and 11 months old at the time of Cindy's death.

Little ones. Yeah. It's heartbreaking, right? Anytime someone is killed. But then you look at the scenario, right? She's got a four-year-old. She's got an 11-month-old. They're not going to, you know, get that time with her.

No. Growing up. And, you know, kids need that. they need their their mom they do and then you then you start to think about okay all the milestones so every birthday every christmas graduation getting married and it just makes it even that much more heartbreaking i mean for the 11 year old i mean 11 month old i mean 11 month old i don't remember when kids start walking and talking and some about i think my oldest started about 11 months yeah Walking.

Missing all that, you know, missing the, you know, time that you don't have to change diapers anymore. I don't miss those days, but Cindy and Bob moved to Rancho Cordova, California from Denver in 1990. After they both lost their jobs, Bob was working as a truck driver at the time of his wife's death. You know, you and I have talked a lot about Denver. We spent a lot of time in Denver. We had a company that we worked with out in Denver. So we had to go out there. Both of us did.

And it's a great state, man. It's beautiful. Oh, yeah. And I love the city of Denver. Colorado is great in general. Colorado is beautiful. Yeah. It really is.

Cindy's oldest sister Elaine described her as a very religious woman and a devoted mother with no enemies. Okay. Well, we already know that she's going to be found strangle to death. So for investigators, you're starting out with a woman who allegedly has no known enemies. Where do you go? She had to make somebody upset. Yeah, to want to kill her. Unless this was just an opportunistic type of stranger murder, about six weeks before Cindy went missing,

her sister Susan and her husband, Phil, moved into a new home in Granite Bay, the suburb of Sacramento. Cindy was paid to clean her sister's house on Monday. Cindy had recently spoken to officials at her church about getting help finding a job several weekends before her death. Cindy collected a box of clothes from the church to put on a garage sale to help pay for an ear operation their youngest daughter needed. So I mean, sounds like she's doing what she can to help out, right?

Yeah, but it also sounds like, you know, they couldn't have been, you know, in the best place financially. They both lost their jobs. That's why they had to move to California. I mean, Bob's working. She's still looking for a job. She's cleaning her sister's house. But the other thing is you can see, and this happens a lot with the church, right?

People will oftentimes really come together and help out, you know, a member of the congregation who's in need. And it sounds like they were, you know, an ear operation for their youngest daughter. That's not elected. That's not, you know, something that, you know, you're not straightening teeth. This is something that really needs to be done. It needs to happen. And I'm sure it's not cheap.

On November 25th, 1991, Cindy went to her sister's home in Granite Bay to clean. She brought her 11-month-old baby with her. Authorities believe Cindy was abducted between 1230 and 1.15 p.m. This was between the time her sister and brother-in-law left the house and Cindy's husband Bob arrived to pick her up. It was a fairly small window. That's what I was thinking. I just talked about, you know, here's a woman who people said, you know, have no known enemies. but they do have what appears to be a pretty small window of time.

Yeah. When they believe that this abduction took place, Bob told police that he was bringing over a load of wood from Susan and Phil's old house and had just picked up their daughter from daycare when he arrived at the house to get Cindy. Bob rang the doorbell, but there was no answer. He heard his younger daughter crying in. side. The front door was unlocked, so he entered the house. He found the baby sitting in her high chair at the dining room table where she had been when Cindy's sister and brother-in-law left.

So I just got done talking about, right, here's a woman, no known enemies. That doesn't give investigators much to go on, but they do have a pretty small window of time here where they believe the abduction happened. And then it's like, you know, as you're putting it all together, it seems pretty obvious to me. And I think it would to investigators that this happened pretty soon after her sister and brother-in-law left. The baby was already, you know, like in a high chair. And then the baby's still in that high chair. Yeah. So somebody came in, abducted, you know, Cindy. left the baby and then her husband comes in and finds the baby. And if I was the husband,

I'd be wondering, did I just miss them? Did I just, oh, I mean, how close was I to getting there when this was all taking place? Was it five minutes? Was it 30 minutes, right?

45 minutes. It's somewhere in there. Did I be thinking about all the cars I passed? Headed there coming in. Did I see the, yeah. Did I miss them? Cindy's brother-in-law,

Phil, 1.15 p.m. to talk to Cindy, Bob answered and asked where she was. So, you know, you're finding out a little bit more, right, how they came to this kind of small window of time. Concerningly, Cindy left behind her shoes and her coats, but seemed to have taken her purse with her. And this is something that we talk a lot about, especially on unsolved, right? What do people leave behind? and sometimes it's in the context of, well, did they, you know, up and leave to start a new life where they're not happy? But here, there's a couple of things that are jumping out to me. First of all, what mother's going to leave her 11-month-old baby?

Just sitting in the high chair. Yeah, very unlikely. Very unlikely. And then who leaves the house without your shoes? or a coat. I've been on what the weather's like. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Yeah, I go out all the time without a coat.

I don't leave the house barefoot. That's kind of a non-starter for me. What if she was abducted, right? They're not going to take those items. Maybe they grab the purse because maybe they think there's a way to get some money from her. Yeah, maybe her ATM card is in there or cash is in there or whatever. But they don't care if she has to walk barefoot. No.

Possibly. Bob called the police to report his wife missing. And, you know, that has to be a really tough one for a husband, would be for a wife if it was the other way around. Officers found no signs of a struggle in the home. But Cindy had vanished. Her family knew she would never abandon the baby. No, as you just talked about,

who would ever leave an 11-month-old? Yeah. And they knew she wouldn't leave without, you know, her code or, shoes or a vehicle, right? What is she going to do? She's walking on foot to wear. Bare foot, yeah. It doesn't make any sense.

Investigators wouldn't comment on whether Bob was a suspect, but family members told the Sacramento B that Cindy and Bob had a really strong marriage. Now, make of that what you will, because we've done many cases where the marriage was said to have been great. There's no cracks. They're, you know, these people are the perfect couple. And then, you know, it all starts to come out that, no, they weren't. Right. One was cheating on the other or one was plotting to kill the other or did kill the other. But it wouldn't surprise me, right? Bob may not be called a suspect, but at the very least, he has to be a person of interest. Oh, I think for sure.

The husband's always going to be. They're going to look into it. Until they're ruled out. Yeah. Pastor Glenn Cole of the Capitol Christian Center told to be that when he arrived at the house, Bob was lying in the backyard, sobbing uncontrolled. And, you know, you would expect a loving husband in that scenario where he thinks his wife has been abducted to kind of be inconsolable.

I think you'd either be like that or you'd be like that. you'd be so mad, you know, that you would just be screaming and just like... Yeah. Yeah. But the thing is, people can fake that. They can. You know, it can be faked. And police are normally pretty good, especially detectives,

at telling what's real and what's not, but, you know, they can't always. Police called off intensive search efforts on November 28th after sent dogs, helicopters and ground searchers failed to find any trace of sending. So that's why it's like three days. Yeah. You know. But at a certain point, when you feel like, you know, there's nothing else to look at or, you know, you don't have a direction, right? You've probably gone within a certain radius.

anywhere outside of that, you'd just be throwing darts at a wall. Well, that's true. And spending a bunch of money and using up a bunch of resources. Now, if you're the family, that's not going to make you feel good, but it is the true. Yeah. I mean, at this point, it's a needle in a haystack. Yeah. At a certain point, you're going to have to wait to get some more information.

Now, investigators had to resolve some possible sightings. On December 3rd, Placer County officials issued another plea for help. Inspector Johnny Smith said there was nothing in the family's background that was out of the ordinary. There were no indications that Cindy would have left voluntarily. And I think that's true in most cases. I think so. Every now and then somebody says, you know, I hate my life. I don't want to, you know, go through this.

I want to do something different. Okay. well, then maybe you start to think they could have voluntarily left to start a new life. But in most of the cases that we've done, that's just not how it works or how it's been. I can see where you can say, well, maybe there's some of that postpartum, you know, depression. Depression driving this. But from everything that we heard, I don't believe that that was a case.

So she didn't leave voluntarily. that means somebody had to come and take her. I mean, that's only option you have left, right? Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. I can't think of another option. Detectives had canvassed Granite Bay in the surrounding area,

but there seemed to be no witnesses to Cindy's abduction. On December 9th, Inspector Johnny Smith announced that Cindy's bank card was used less than four hours. After she disappeared, But police didn't find out until nine days later. And that kind of is shocking. It is to me. You would think that would be one of the first things that you would check on. Now, maybe it takes some time or took some time back then, but eight days, I don't think so.

That's a bit of time. You know, to put something on her accounts to figure out whether or not her bank card was used. I mean, I would think a call to the bank or, you know, something like that, they'd be able to get it. Smith explained that this was due to a misunderstanding on the part of the Rancho-Cordova branch of Wells Fargo. He said, the bank was asked to put a hold on the car, but someone didn't pass it on. The bank failed to report the transaction to the sheriff's office. Wells Fargo spokesman said, the bank didn't know it was expected. too. So there's the, there's the, uh, drop in communication. Yeah. But I, I, I find this to be

strange because I feel like this is C.YA on the part of the, the police department. Yeah. You're saying, oh, well, the bank didn't call us. Right. Why are you not monitoring? Yeah. The transactions in, in, in some way. Also, I thought it was strange that they wanted a hold put on the card. Yeah. Why would you want that? When you, want them to be able to use it. Yeah, the way you can keep tracking it maybe get closer and closer to whoever's using. Right. Because you put a hold on it and it doesn't work.

To me, it's almost like you would be endangering her life at this point. Yeah, I mean, who cares if they were drawing money if it means that you now have a possible location where she's at? Yeah, or something to work on, right? Yeah, at least. detectives weren't notified until December 4th when they made a routine follow-up inquiry at the bank. Cindy's card withdrew $40 at the AMPM mini mart at Auburn Boulevard and Greenback Lane and Citrus Heights. This is about nine miles from where she was abducted. And I thought 40 bucks doesn't seem like a lot.

You know, if you're an abductor, trying to get money, now we don't know how much money they had in their account. It's true. I mean, they were, well, it seemed like rough times. Yeah, I think they were struggling somewhat financially, but. But also, maybe they didn't, the people taking the money out, didn't want to flag any systems, wanted to test it out. Is it still good? Let's take out 40 bucks. Let's see what we get.

That could be. Yeah. And then they would do it again. My thought about that, though, is the more times you do it, the more chance you're probably going to get caught. So why not get the max, whatever the max allowable is that day. Like a print balance out and go, okay, here's what I can get. And maybe 40 bucks was it.

I don't know. But by the time detectives got to the store, the videotape system had automatically erased the image of the person who used the car. This is the problem of them not being notified. by the bank or by the police not scanning that on regular basis. Because if they would have, I'm guessing they could have got to the store. Before it.

Yeah. Before it was probably taped over. Whoever used the bank card also had the pen needed to complete the transaction. But is that hard to do? I mean, if you kidnap somebody, you probably can, unless they voluntary give it to you just straight up, can they not torture you a little bit to get that information? Oh, I think, yeah, they could.

It's macabre to think about. But yeah, I'm sure in situations it does happen. But we're also assuming that an abductor is using the card. At this point, detectives have no idea. It could be Cindy. It could be, yeah. Who used the card. Yep.

They don't know. Authorities noted that Wells Fargo was contacted about the cart. 52 minutes before the transaction occurred on November 25th, 1991. A spokesperson, a spokesperson? Spokesperson? Spokesperson? Yeah. Yeah.

Said it was the bank's understanding that the sheriff's department had asked only to freeze the account and look up the day's activity. So, yeah, I think they're battling back and forth on the blame game. Yeah, putting the blame on each other. On December 14th, 1991, Cindy's, body was found by a quail hunter in a mountainous area three miles northeast of forest hill near the small community of baker ranch her body was found 50 yards from forest hill road and she was found wearing only a braw yeah brutal it is right and we haven't even talked about what happened to her

yet just and the way that the person disposed of her body yeah first of all you're you've taken somebody's life and then post-mortem you have desecrated i'll use that word for a lack of a better one then even more by leaving them out there with hardly anything on now if you're a killer You don't care. You don't. Because if you can kill, you can do the other stuff too. Absolutely. Makes no difference to you.

On December 15th, authorities announced that Cindy's cause of death was ligature, strangulation. No other marks were found on her body. Investigators also said that she may have been dead for only three to five day. Okay. And I think that kind of makes the bank card. snafu, even that much bigger of a deal. Yeah, because if they would have found out, they could have maybe seen the video

and would have known who. Maybe got into her in time. Yeah. It did appear to them that Cindy was killed elsewhere and then dumped in the forest. Criminologists speculated she was alive for possibly up to two weeks. Wow.

After her kidnapping. And you got to think about and kind of ask the question. Why? Why would that have been? We know or we believe, right, that her abductor went to the ATM, had her PIN number, took out 40 bucks. Seems like a low amount to me. Maybe there was a plan to do more with money or maybe this person just found out that she didn't have much money. Yeah, much money. Didn't have much. Maybe there was a sexual component, right? If you're investigators, you got to think about that.

was she kept for two weeks because this person was sexually assaulting her during that period of time. I think if you're a detective or if you're investigators, you've got to ponder all these types of questions. Why hold on to her? But I think that's a real concern. You know, why? What was the driving force there? And I think he kind of, I think he kind of hit it on the head. I think it's, I think it's, you know, that sexual, why else would you keep her for two weeks?

Why not just dispose of her right away? Yeah. I don't know. Yeah. Cindy's case quickly went cold and it remained cold for nearly 35 years. Law enforcement did test evidence over the years, but there were insufficient results due to a lack of advanced DNA technology. And again, these are things that we touch on in our unsolved episodes. a lot, right? There are times, many times, when authorities have some type of evidence. Maybe it's

DNA related, maybe it's not. You have to always keep in mind that DNA and different types of technology is always advancing. And I'm sure at some point, this case was thought to probably be unsolvable. Like, they just probably wouldn't solve. Yeah. And if you're, the killer, you're thinking, eh, life is good. I'm home free, right? It's been 35 years. There's no way they're going to catch me now.

But in early 2006, detectives submitted a final piece of evidence to the neighboring Contra Costa Sheriff's Office Forensics Lab. According to A&E, the DNA was collected from the site where Cindy's remains were found and they knew that it did not

belong to her. Okay. And this new round of testing resulted in a positive identification. Placer County Sheriff's Office spokesperson Elise Soviar told Annie, this piece of evidence existed for years. But it was so small. We didn't believe we would get a match. But as DNA testing technology evolved, we decided to test it and we got a direct hit. This is so, this is so, I can't even speak.

this is why it's so important to hold on to all this DNA, all this evidence. Because someday, maybe, you know, like she said, we couldn't get a hit for all these, for these years, but now technology improved so much that we could have something so small and get a good hit off of it. Yeah, but for me, it's not just holding onto it, right? It's, it's how do you collect it in the beginning? Yeah, that's true. How do you store it?

Preserve, yeah. And it really does amaze me sometimes. that you can go back to cases where nobody even knew what DNA was or what it was going to become, but they still followed procedures that allowed for DNA testing 30, 40 years later. They were smart enough to think about, let's collect this stuff, hold on to it, preserve it the best way we can, so maybe it can be used down the road. Yeah, it's amazing. It really is.

So the DNA turned out to believe. long to 64-year-old James Lawhead, Jr., who was 30 at the time of Cindy's murder, Lawhead was released from prison in early 1991 after serving a prison sentence for sexual crimes involving a child. Back in 1980, he broke into a home, beat a 71-year-old grandmother nearly to death, and then raped her 11-year-old granddaughter. He was sentenced to 19 years for the crime, but he only served 11. He was released 10 months before Cindy was murdered. Wow.

What a piece of shit. Well, and how mad does that make you? It frustrates me because, one, I mean, who gets out so early? One, I don't think 19 years is enough. Right. The original sentence pisses me off. Yeah. But then 19 gets whittled down to 11.

You beat a 71-year-old woman to death, and then you raped an 11-year-old. There is no way that you should be out walking the streets in 11 years. No. That is ridiculous. I mean, he went right back to things that he does, right? He wasn't reformed. Why is that, though? Because he didn't spend enough time.

Well, maybe. I mean, personally, that could have been a life in prison. Could have been. With no parole situation, as far as I'm concerned, if you're able to do that, and then the thing I often think about is, okay, these people, they spend, you know, number of years in jail or prison, what do they do? Are they trying to better themselves? Are they trying to turn their life around? Or are they just sitting there thinking about what they're going to do when they get out? as far as the crimes that they want to commit.

Yeah. And I think a lot of them lean towards the latter. I agree with you. I mean, think about it. He was 30 when he committed this crime, did 11 years. So he was, was that 19, 18 when he committed the first crime? And maybe they took that into account, but he was still obviously an adult. An adult, yeah.

And that's such a heinous. crime that I'm shocked that he got out in 11 years. He also had run-ins with the law after the murder. In 2002, he was arrested for failing to register as a sex offender in Placer County. He disappeared from California in 2005 after a warrant was issued for an outstanding weapons, Charles. Clearly he's not a good guy. No, absolutely not.

You know, if you're, again, even at 18 or 19, if you're able to commit that type of crime or those two crimes, which are about as bad as it gets. Sure. I'm okay with you never being free in society. I really am. Yeah. And as proven, he should have not ever came out. No, no, he shouldn't have. But I just, it really does.

tick me off. You know, when we, we do these kind of cases and find out that, now, you make argue that 11 years is not a slap on the wrist, but also look at the severity, right, of his crime. Yeah. It shouldn't be even close to a slap on the wrist. And I think in context, that was a slap on the wrist for what he did. Yeah, I agree. 11 years.

Yes. Authorities believe he. fled to Arizona and lived under an assumed identity as Vincent Reynolds. Okay. Interesting name. Is it? Vincent. It seems kind of benign to me. That's just old Vincent, you know. He's not, he's, you don't have to worry about him. I only knew Vincent growing up, only one, the guy that did, uh, scary movies. Vincent Price. Yeah, that's the Vincent I knew. I'm sure there were more. I'm sure there was. I think there are quite a few names, quite a few people named Vincent. In California, some law enforcement agencies, including Placer County, are prohibited from using facial recognition technology to cross-check photos of suspects with other images.

Investigators had to seek assistance from police departments in Arizona. I wonder why that is. I don't know. It seems strange. Oh, some type of privacy thing, I'm guessing. I guess, but at least you can go across the border and say, hey, we need your help, guys. Can you do it? Okay.

Well, we'll just use your information. An analyst with the Scottsdale Police Department got a match on James Lawhead after finding his photo in the States Department of Transportation Database. As suspected, he was using the alias Vincent Reynolds. So obviously, Vincent Reynolds worked for a very long time. Yeah, I did. According to CNN, the Arizona Department of Transportation's facial recognition system is usually used to flag fake driver's licenses, state IDs, and suspected identity theft. Clearly, a system that was not around when you were forging driver's license and the university you went to for help people get into bars and buy alcohol. Allegedly.

Allegedly. Yeah, sorry. you know no it was not but i'm still back to okay that that seems like a good tool to have and to use why would it be prohibited in some places i i'm with you it's got to have something to do with some either real or perceived invasion of privacy right that's the only thing i can think of an adot spokesperson told a z family that potentially for fraudulent photos undergo three levels of review by detectives trained in facial recognition. The Scottsdale PD analyst used data from the police department's license plate reader surveillance

system to get a photo of one of lawheads registered vehicles. He was living in Bullhead City, which is over 200 miles north of Scottsdale. So pretty interesting, right, how they zeroed in on him. first it's okay we're identifying him using you know updated advanced DNA technology but then they still have to find the guy right and then they they do that by kind of using some of this facial recognition technology lawhead was arrested at his home on april 24th 2026 authorities sees numerous items of evidence included loaded firearms throughout his house he had $15,000 in cash and a burner phone.

Because you always have to have a burner phone ready to go at any moment. Well, you know, a lot of people have firearms. I don't make that much of it. Now, he's a convicted felon. Yeah. Which means he shouldn't have had firearms at all. That's what I'm thinking. Legally.

He wasn't allowed to have them. Now, do people keep large amounts of cash at home? I'm sure some people do. Sure they do. But you know what this screams out. to me is $15,000 in cash and a burner phone, that's like grab it and go. Yeah. Right?

I got to, they're on to me. I got to get out of Dodge. And it's my backpack. What do you call those people that have backpack with everything in it ready to go? People with backpacks ready to go. I don't know. Is there a special? If you're a prepper, you have a backpack.

Oh, like a go bag. A go bag. Some people call it a go bag. Like it's his go bag. Like it's got probably everything he needs to go out in a few minutes. Like you have probably one. I know I have a bag that I can grab and disappear for a while. But I can tell you what mine doesn't have in it is $15,000 in cash and a burner found.

I know. I looked. I didn't see any money. I was like, damn it, no cash in here. I can't keep any cash around here because you're like this far away from a dog, a sniffing dog, A cent sniffer. I just want to see if you have any of those collectibles. Yeah.

You have a nose for the green. And when I say that, I mean money. Yeah. So Lawhead was charged with murder with the special circumstances of kidnapping and rape. Now, it was said that his neighbors in Bullhead City were shocked by the arrest. Neighbor Alonzo Avalos told Aze family, it's kind of concerning because you never really know who people are. It's kind of scary. scary. Honestly, it really is, right? I mean, you just don't know who's living next door to you.

Mm-hmm. You know, I mean, and this is why I choose not to know. I don't, I choose not to get to know my neighbors. Yeah. Because, you know, if it comes out that one of them's a serial killer, I'd be like, yeah, I don't know. I really didn't know the guy. Exactly. I don't have anything to say about it. It doesn't surprise me at all because I never got to know. Yeah. But you hear that a lot. Oh. Right? Because if you had an ink. that the person next door was a serial killer, maybe you make a call or something at some point in time. So how could you not be shocked to find out that a killer is living next door to you?

Because what does that say about you, that you should have known or you don't have a good sense of who people are? Now, this guy's exactly right. You don't really know who's living next to you. I remember telling my neighbors when I moved in where I'm at, you know, what do you do? I'm like, I do this true crime podcast.

They're like, hey, we got to go. We're seeing you. I was like, okay. Yeah. The problem is that's not even the,

by a long shot, the scariest thing that you do. Oh. You throw that out there to, you know, move suspicion off of all the other weird stuff you're into. That's right. I can't help it if I'm out there at weird times of the night digging holes.

So the next day, authorities also arrested Lawhead's 71-year-old sister. Terry Lawhead Steele and charged her as an accessory. Terry was arrested in South Carolina. Okay. Terry had spoken with law enforcement several times over the years and spoke with detectives just weeks before her arrest. She claimed that she hadn't heard from her brother in over 20 years. But it turned out she owned the property in Bullhead City where he was living. He said, full lies. Well, what are you going to do?

How do you not know that he's living on your property? No, she knew. She definitely knew. She lied to law enforcement. You know, I get it. She was trying to help out her brother. The question is, did she really know that he was a killer?

She had to have known that he was on the run, right? Maybe not sure why. Yeah. And technically, he was on the run. but not really. Law enforcement didn't know who he was. No. Forever.

So in that respect, he really wasn't on the run. But he did something bad enough that he had to change his name. Oh, absolutely. In his mind, he was on the run. Yeah, and she knew that he changed his name. So obviously, there was some type of crime committed,

but what was it? Yeah, now he could have possibly made the explanation, and something like, well, I got out of prison. I wanted to change my name. Somebody might buy that. Yeah. You know, you did something really horrible. Yeah, that's true.

So you might want a fresh start. You might want to change your name. Investigators searched Terry's home in San Clemente, California and found evidence that she owned the Arizona home and had remained in contact with her brother over the years. So she was very, very much aware. Yeah, or he was. And that's why she was charged, you know, as an accessory.

I think if she had just been honest with, you know, the police, she wouldn't have been charged. I think you're right. I mean, if she would have said, oh, I know, I knew where he's at or where he's been doing. Yeah, unless there's some evidence she somehow knew about this murder, which I don't, I don't know that there was. Right. Lawhead was extradited to California in late April. On April 27, 2006, the Placer County, Sheriff's office announced the arrest in a press conference. Sheriff Wayne Wu said,

arguably, this is one of the most heinous, notorious cold cases we have here in Placer County. Sheriff Wu talked about how they initially found no trace of lawhead, saying it appeared that he just disappeared since 2005. Well, and that's because he changed his name. Yeah, moved away. Moved away. Woo said, We've actually been looking for him for quite some time. We explored all possibilities of what could have happened, whether he was still living under a fake identity, whether he had left the country,

or whether he was even deceased. And those were, I'm sure, before they found out, all possibilities that had to be explored. Wu called the Scottsdale analyst, an unsung hero in this case. Truly was. Oh, yeah, absolutely. And, you know, detectives, investigators, they get a lot of the glory, right?

And a lot of cases. But you have tons of analysts kind of working behind the scenes. They're not talking usually at a press conference, but they're doing some amazing work. They really are. And obviously, whoever this was really broke the case wide open. I think like, you know, analysts in this situation, nurses, you know, don't, always get the credit they should. And it's the doctor.

Teachers. It's the co-host of a podcast versus the main host. Sometimes the co-host doesn't get, you know, the recognition that he should. Sometimes he gets more than what he really deserves. I don't know. It depends on how you look at it. For his, the amount of contributions, he actually makes. Now you open this door and I'm going to walk right through.

That was supposed to be a one-way door, not a spinning door, not a revolving door. revolving door. Yeah, that came back around. So detectives were attempting to retrace lawheads movements over the past 20 years, including in states like Washington, Oregon, and Arizona. They were investigating whether he was connected to any other crimes. I feel like somebody like that just doesn't become a good person. You know what I mean? Yeah. So let's not forget, right he murdered bludgeon to death a 71 year old woman raped an 11 year old yeah and then within 10 months of getting out of prison he kills again yeah so i'm right with you so you're telling me that after that murder he was mr rogers there's no way there's no way i'm not buying it no

he is not a good guy and a good guy like so a guy like that is not going to just all of a sudden wake up and be like, I don't know what I did back in my back, back in my days, but I'm a good person now. Yeah. And it's not like they found him in a year or two, right? 35 years went by. So from the time that he was 30 to the time that he was 65. Now I get it.

You know, most serial killers at a certain point, if they're not caught, they do slow down or stop probably. Maybe some do to age. I don't think they stop on their own just because they don't want to do it anymore. they might not be able to physically pull it off the way they they could when they were younger but from 30 to 50 you're telling me he didn't do anything i i don't buy that at all not this guy like you said you know he almost killed the 71 year old and he killed this you know mom of a what 11 month old and i came around how old the other child was four four yeah i mean he has no

heart yeah you're right i think i might have said a couple of times that he killed the 71 year old grandmother. He didn't. He beat her nearly to death, but still, horrible. Right, right. It's just, there's no doubt about it. This was a, uh, a terrible individual. So further investigation later revealed law heads registered residents in 1991 was just 1.4 miles from where Cindy's ATM card was fraudulently used after she disappeared. So just a little bit more than a mile down the road, I mean, that's pretty convenient. The Placer County Sheriff's Office said, we encourage law enforcement agencies, specifically those across the West Coast, to look at any cold cases that may have similarities to this case and reach out to our team at 530-889-7-835.

And that happens quite a bit, right? Once somebody is found out, caught, I think a lot of agencies, in the surrounding area and the region, they start to look at some of their cold cases and see whether or not they fit this person's MO, their pattern. I just don't think a guy like this would just go dormant. Nope.

I'm right with you. In those 35 years, I guarantee he left a trail of more carnage. Yeah. On June 16th, 2026, the Placer County DA's office announced, that James Lawhead pleaded guilty to murder and acknowledged special circumstance allegations

that the killing occurred during the commission of kidnapping and rape. His sister Terry pleaded no contest to accessory. Okay. And that, you know, depending on, that can be a very serious charge. Could be. Can be. On July 14th, 2006, James Lawhead waived his appellate rights. and accepted a sentence of life without parole.

His sister was sentenced to time served with two years of probation. She got off light. She got off light, but I mean, what did she really do? Well, that's true. She lied, which she shouldn't have done. But I don't know that she knew that he had killed someone. I don't know that. I hope not.

I hope if she would have known that, she would have did the right thing. Yeah. But you never know. Now, siblings and... Yeah, I think. if they had any proof of it, then she probably would have gotten more time. Right. So whether she knew or not, it's hard to say. What I can say is they probably didn't have proof. Sure. That she knew about that. They had proof that she lied to him. But, you know, what gets me Gibbs is,

okay, he accepted this, you know, sentence of life without parole. I can make the argument. He should have got that before. I get it. It wasn't a murder. But when you beat. You. You know, someone nearly half to death and you know you rape an 11 year old child i can make the argument for it i think you can now i don't know what the sentencing guidelines were in the 80s they probably were different and they didn't allow for that but you know if he was in there longer than maybe cindy would have never been oh absolutely you can you can make that argument yeah now he might have killed somebody the minute he did get out if he got out sure but it probably wouldn't have been Cindy. Sheriff Wu said after the sentencing, in my 36-year career, I don't know that I've

ever seen a homicide case of this nature from arrest to conviction so quickly once the breakthrough occurred. While nothing can erase the pain this family has endured for the past 25 years, I hope today's outcome provides them with answers and allows them to begin moving forward. And I think the reason why it moved so quickly was because, you know, he dropped all his rights to appeal and, you know, accepted that life sentence. I mean, at least he did that. I mean, I don't want to give the guy much credit at all. But at least he or his attorneys advised him to do this because at the end of the day, I'm assuming it was the way to get any death penalty off the table. Yeah, I didn't say that in the research, but I'm sure.

that they might have floated that out there as kind of a carrot, right, to get him to plead guilty. So as we wrap this one up, Gibbs, Cindy Wanner's murder was solved through a combination of advanced DNA testing and facial recognition technology. All of that always fascinating to me, right? The technology aspect of crime fighting. Yeah. the forensics part.

I've said it before. If I was 18 years old trying to figure out what I was going to do, I think nowadays I would probably go down that road. Yeah, I think he would. Not something I thought about when I was 18 years old, but it was all about computers back then. You were thinking about other things.

Oh, I was thinking, yeah, I didn't even do the computer stuff I tried to do. There was girls, there was beer, there was partying, there was too much going on.

But there was a lot in the research about this facial recognition, kind of being a developing field, which everything is always developed. Sure it is. We know it is. It has benefits for law enforcement and can help solve cases when used correctly. But apparently there are flaws in this or these developing systems as well. Image quality, camera angles, and lighting can affect whether. the system works the way it's supposed to work there can be false matches missed identifications

and maybe that's why there are some areas and jurisdictions that don't allow it to be used oh i get that because i know when i use my facial facial recognition on my iPhone a lot times and like in the morning i'll hold it up and it'll be like who is this old dude who who the hell are you i'm like hey it's the same guy it was using this last night what do we mean. I just haven't put my face on you. That's right. I haven't used my foundation, my blush, all my tools for the blood to get where it needs to be. I don't know. Oh, yeah. But, you know, maybe that's part of it because, you know, a false match, a missed identification. Yeah. Well, we all know what that could do to somebody's life. Ruin it. It could be catastrophic. Yeah.

And there are privacy concerns as well, which we hinted at earlier. lawmakers are currently trying to regulate this new technology, but the rules very state by state. I do think it's a technology that will continue to be used to help solve murders, you know, in the coming years. But it does sound like it has its detractors, which let's face it, DNA does as well. Oh, I agree, yeah.

You know, in the 10 years we've been doing this podcast, just think about, you know, the fighting over DNA and public databases and, you know, law enforcement using those and all that stuff that's happened. But I do think about the last 10 years, how far we've come. Oh, yeah. It's amazing. It really is.

Yeah, absolutely. And like we always talk about, if you're a killer and you've gotten away with something, I think now in 2006, you've got to be nervous. It would be pretty hard not to be. Yeah. Especially if you knew they had any type of DNA, you'd have to be really, really nervous. But that's it for our episode on Cindy Wanner

and another episode of true crime all the time. So for Mike. And Gibby. We'll talk to you next week. Yeah, we'll see you next week. As always. Keep your own time ticking because that's important. It's always important.

Later, y'all.