I cannot believe there is still nothing new in this case!
I have believed for a very long time that the prosecution simply does not have enough evidence to build a good case against DH.
If he is saying nothing at all, or perhaps saying he knows nothing about the deaths, possibly they really have nothing to go on.
At a superficial level it does seem that he must be guilty or know who is guilty, but I am willing to consider the possibility that he really has no idea what happened.
We assume that the birth certificate being located at his sister's home is evidence of guilt, but maybe not. It could be nothing stranger than Karlie leaving a suitcase there and it just sat in the garage, forgotten for years because she never returned to claim it. After all, if DH or his sister knew they were dead, wouldn't they have removed evidence like that?
It does seem that the police have never charged the sister with anything and I imagine she was thoroughly grilled about whatever she knew, yet that seems to have drawn a blank.
We also assume that DH having Karlie's ATM card is evidence. But again, maybe not. Maybe has just had it because she had given it to him to use to get her some money out or buy something and after she vanished he simply kept it and used it until the money ran out.
The other piece of seemingly damning evidence against Holdom is the phone pings that showed he was in the general areas the murders are assumed to have happened at the assumed times of the deaths.
Yet really, the police cannot prove exactly when or where either murder occurred at it seems quite likely to me that these roads were very frequently travelled by DH.
Similarly with HP (wheelchair), no charges have been brought against her. Clearly they have not been able to prove her involvement with either the bank or Centrelink.
So that avenue of investigation seems to be grasping at straws.
To me it seems that the phrase "evidence delay" really means "we don't have much".
It also has not helped that the media have so often muddled their facts in order to get out a quick, sensational story.
Please don't misunderstand me. I am not saying DH didn't kill them, nor am I seeking to defend him.
I know a lot of people here passionately want to believe he killed them and that he is a monster.
I understand that.
However, I am just saying that the whole case is based on extremely flimsy and circumstantial evidence and I personally doubt it can ever end in a conviction unless there is a confession - from someone.