Thanks for posting this; a new source (to me) that clarifies a bit why it's going to take so long. What I'm gathering from this source is that LE believe they have the killer's DNA based on the sheer amount they've collected from the crime scene, but for now it's 'somewhere in there' in the vast mix of undifferentiated DNA evidence they collected [a mix belonging to victims, family members, killer, etc.]
That would explain why they think they "have enough evidence to convict" the killer, but also why they think they "have a long way to go" and "have a year's worth of work right now" (also quoted from that article).
They still decline to state what sort of DNA evidence they have. But that raises the possibility then (to me) that LE might NOT have the more obvious DNA usually associated with sexual assault. Hair and touch DNA might abound and would be much more of a tangle to sort out (whether victim, family member, killer, or someone else). But semen evidence would stand out (if this were a sexual assault) as most definitely belonging to the killer and therefore that sample would be easily differentiated from the outset for test-matching with POIs. And LE wouldn't need to run a POI sample against "plenty of DNA" hoping to get a hit. Yet from the sound of things (in this article), it appears they are running each POI's DNA sample against *multiple* less-differentiated DNA crime scene samples hoping to get a hit. (See BBM below.)
Wlfi article link:
http://tinyurl.com/y6wqukch
