There are a few things concerning this case which surprised me:
1. At the beginning
(first week?)
Police stated Samantha's disappearance was not suspicious
(But maybe in case of adults Police take voluntary disappearance into consideration?)
2. Police stated??? that there was no danger to the public.
But nobody was arrested then.
3. Suppression of the accused's name.
It took media rage to lift it.
(Oh well, it was reported the accused asked his lawyer not to uphold it)
4. The lawyer stated that the accused had no drug problem and no mental health problems as well.
But the reason of name's suppression was reported at first as MH issues.
5. Disappearance of the accused's family.
(No family members appeared in Court when the accused was there.
In fact, nobody close to the accused appeared in Court)
6. No extensive searches of the whole area of this forest/bush.
7. The death of Samantha's dog
(Very strange IMO)
8. The Police stated firmly that it was "deliberate murder", not hit and run.
But asked the public about a damaged car.
(But maybe a hit, causing death and concealment of the victim's body counts as "deliberate murder"?)
All these factors made me somehow surprised
But, I guess, all these will be made clear (for me) during the trial.
JMO