A few thoughts.
Regarding the question of the victim's missing remains, if the suspect is indeed guilty, he would likely be, as professionals suggest, a psychopath or sociopath. Therefore toying with others would be likely. When questioned the suspect may have indeed been telling others the truth about where he dropped the victim off. Off of this bridge, off at that bridge, at this place and the other.
Regarding the lack of water in the Jax Beach house, it maybe the case that the home had and older style heat pump AC, and well water was being used. A sprinkler was known to run in the center of the front yard, either way my research indicates water was not missing the entire past 12 years.
A question that seems disregarded in much discussion regarding this case, is why did the victims brother live in the home with the suspect on and off for a decade. Why does this brother and his wife's voter registration show the RH house in JB, as their address as recently as the 2000's. (Google names and /or address)
It seems like some revisionist history could be in play, by family members of both the victim and the suspect. For example, why did the victim's brother live with the suspect for years if the entire family was so sure of the suspect from the time the victim disappeared.
A curious question that comes to mind is why did the suspects father suddenly move from the home to live with his late wife's relatives at about the same time the victim disappeared. What do the members know about the father? What did he do for a living? Was he retired? Did he attend the Church also?
Muddy research indicates a middle aged man (at that time) who lived in the JB house behind the RH house, may have disappeared in the 80's. Someone was told by his daughter in the late 90's that he had just gone back then, and was not heard of. It is unclear as to whether he had another known residence in the interim between living in the jax beach home and going missing.
It seems obvious to me that a murder trial could not go to completion with a guilty verdict on the basis of the shirt dna alone. By this I am suggesting proving the shirt belonged to suspect, with whom the victim was hanging around and staying in the home of, does not by itself that the suspect murdered the victim. The shirt may have been worn by the victim when he was killed by another. I would imagine this is the thinking of the suspects lawyer when she said on the news, that there was no evidence her client killed the victim.
Having been arrested for this crime is no small affair, the suspect is losing career, reputation, possibly his homes etc., Everything. This being the case, I would imagine law enforcement, would feel they were pretty sure before making such an arrest. This combined with the quite lengthy time lapses between, the body being ID'd, the collection of DNA from suspects trash, and then another lengthy time gap before arrest, seems to indicate other evidence is in play. Any guesses as to what they have, and would have had prior to searching home post arrest?
If he is indeed guilty, it may be fortunate if the




charges hold up and put him away, because a murder conviction seems unlikely based on the shirt, and a mismatched vin number.