We don't know much of the details but what we do know is that if the Met arrested one of their own for abducting and murdering a young white woman and then he was found not guilty it would be one of the worst controversies in their history. So I don't think it's unfair to assume they are of the belief they have well beyond the evidence required for a conviction.
That’s not quite how it works though, is it?
Assuming the Police have enough evidence to convict anyone of anything prior to an arrest being made is a bit bonkers.
Assuming the Police have enough evidence to convict someone of murder before a body is found or an arrest is made is absolutely bonkers.
They will certainly have suspected him but the fact they didn’t arrest him for murder straight away says something too.
I’m playing Devil’s advocate but I just don’t like seeing people saying this or that has or hasn’t happened and that this or that should happen to the peeps because of what is put out in the media. The story will come out when the time is right.