I would really like to believe this, but I feel that if it were true that death had been called by the ME based on concrete evidence, this would have been stated. But it wasn't. Instead, there was the comment by the police officer (now missing) that they built the case piece by piece by piece by piece, and that there are presumptions they can make that people are dead, such as no activity in the bank accounts, etc.
Do I think for one second that if LE had a qualified ME/Coroner to state that evidence found inside the home has now been positively ruled by a lab as being from a deceased, and the deceased's blood was a match to



, that LE would not have stated this during their press conference? No I don't. Sorry news.talk, no offence to you or your beliefs, knowledge, or opinions, but I just can't fathom that.
And if LE would perhaps not say this because of some kind of reasoning that an accused has already been arrested and murder charges have been laid, if the evidence was a fact such as the above, well they still have to show the proof during trial, they don't have to elaborate on the 'who', or 'what', or 'how', and give their case away, but I am sure they would have stated the facts. But instead, the officer (is it Andrus?) said:
and the Amber Alert was cancelled, and the missing persons case was officially a homicide. They could not very well charge someone with murder and yet still have the AA in effect.