@ Laceydoiley
Yes plus the main key points to watch are: no body and no murder weapon. Without those two things it’s very hard to convict as it’s all circumstantial. How can you convict for murder if you don’t know a person is definitely dead or how they died.
Without going into too much detail, I have recently been involved in two homicides. In both, the cases headed for trial despite the absence of a body.
In the first, the body was eventually found (hidden in a graveyard - good choice) but was too decomposed after a year to determine the cause of death. The killer was convicted - mostly on phone evidence as they didn't live together but he took her phone after he killed her and sent fake texts to fool people into thinking she was still alive which delayed the murder investigation for over a month. However, his phone was next to her phone from the point after which she was last seen, at addresses she had never been to but he had.
In the second, the two killers put the body in a bath of bleach for three days. They dumped the body somewhere after that, but to date it hasn't been found. They were both recently convicted for murder. Evidence against them largely consisted of the last time he and they were seen on CCTV followed by an undercover officer gaining the trust of one of them who confessed what she had done.
In both cases, the absence of activity post last sighting was used as evidence of death (eg no phone activity, no use of travel or bank cards, no logging onto online accounts, etc plus no visual sightings.
In other words, successfully disposing of blood, DNA, the murder weapon, or even the body still won't necessarily make you safe.