I wonder which of the above 4 reasons resulted in the above story no longer working on the link to the story? Luckily NZ Herald still has the link to the
'story' working.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11934368
BR said he stopped talking to the media as he was advised to by the police but they disputed that. SR said she stopped talking to police because they were trying to make her betray her father and the questioning turned into abuse. I doubt LE would have acted in that way as its bordering on the line of trying to coerce a potential witness which if proven true could potentially be totally damaging to the case.
I think in both cases the public comments in the early stages re why are husband and daughter not assisting police and media with their investigations resulted in the above statements to make them look better from the public's perception. Unfortunately both reasons for not talking only made them look a lot worse in my opinion.
Most times suspects and witness's stop talking to LE so they have no chance of tripping themselves up if they have something to hide.
Number 3 seems the most likely reason to me why the site who wrote the story made it disappear.