Susan Burdett's brother wants police to reopen the inquiry into her murder in 1992.
"Basically, Teina Pora did not kill my sister, but somebody did. The police should reopen the case and find out who did," Jim Burdett says.
He was responding yesterday to news that there is no plan to retry Malcolm Rewa a third time for the killing. Rewa - who is serving a life sentence for raping Ms Burdett and 24 other women - and Mr Pora are the only people who have been charged with the rape and murder of the 39-year-old.
Yesterday, the Privy Council indicated it would recommend that Mr Pora not be put on trial again. Earlier this month, it quashed his convictions, ruling that new evidence he suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome disorder made his confessions to the crimes unsafe.
The Crown submitted that it was not in the public interest to retry Mr Pora, not because it lacked a case against him but because he had already served more than 20 years in jail.
It also said there was no exceptional circumstances to justify trying Rewa a third time for murder.
Mr Burdett said reopening the case made it a straightforward issue. "You don't have to worry about retrials or stays of proceedings. You hunt around until you find the suspect with sufficient [evidence] and you bring him to trial."
Both Ms Burdett's mother, Mary, who died last year, and Jim Burdett believed she would have fought her attacker.
"She was no shrinking violet," Mr Burdett said. "The baseball bat she was killed with was hers; she kept it beside her bed for self-defence and she would have used it given half the chance."
The police were satisfied that all relevant facts had been considered, Assistant Commissioner Malcolm Burgess said in a statement.
"As is normal for any historic inquiry, any new information which becomes available would be assessed to determine what, if any, further investigative steps are required."
Tim McKinnel, the former police officer who took up Mr Pora's case more than four years ago, wants Rewa retried.
"My view is that the wrongful conviction of an innocent man might be exceptional circumstances and we will look at that over the next few weeks."
He said he and Mr Pora's legal team were thrilled and relieved by the Privy Council recommendation not to try Mr Pora again, "but we are mindful that this is not justice for Susan Burdett's family. We hope to see that through to a proper resolution as well".
Criminal profiler Dave Henwood, the key prosecution witness against Rewa when he was convicted of the Burdett and other rapes, told the Herald in 2012 he was certain Mr Pora was not involved and that the murder charge against Rewa failed only because Mr Pora had already been convicted.
Evidence and criminal procedure specialist Scott Optican said the Crown faced the same problem of presenting sufficient evidence today against Rewa as it did in 1998.
"It would be natural to consider the quashing of Pora's conviction for Susan Burdett's murder - and the Crown's decision not to retry him - as an exceptional circumstance justifying the reopening of the murder case against Malcolm Rewa, the only other suspect in the case," said Dr Optican, an associate professor of law at Auckland University.
"But it would really only be exceptional in the sense of satisfying a natural public desire to want someone held accountable - if at all possible - for the Burdett murder.
"The quashing of Pora's conviction by the Privy Council doesn't make the murder case against Rewa any better, or make his conviction for murder any more likely, at this point."
Rewa was convicted at a second trial in 1998 of raping Ms Burdett but juries in two trials could not decide whether he murdered her.
Rewa attempted to explain the presence of his DNA in her body by claiming he was having an affair with her.
