On the contrary, DiNoia has said that there is no heresy. If you want the Vatican's position, that is it.
You see, DiNoia knows full well that there are two kinds of heretics: material and formal. And he didn't distinguish which kind of heresy he was referring to in his response. What he means is, Kerry has not yet undergone formal canonical trial to declare him a heretic, therefore he is not - in the formal sense - a heretic. Is Kerry a material heretic? I bet no one has asked DiNoia that question, and I know he won't answer it if anyone does.
At no point has Fr. DiNoia said Fr. Cole's response was erroneous. Instead, he has called it "sound."
Further, the unnamed Vatican source said Kerry was not going to be excommunicated because you can only incur automatic excommunication for assisting directly in an abortion (that, btw, is not technically true, as canon law lists at least five other ways you can automatically excommunicate yourself). All that means is the Vatican formally recognizes that Kerry has never directly participated in a surgical abortion to anyone's knowledge.
But that isn't the issue, is it? Kerry may well be excommunicate on other grounds - he just isn't excommunicate on the grounds that he directly participated in abortion. All the Vatican did was deny something that no one alleged in the first place.
Both of the responses on Kerry were classic examples of misdirection. The reporters on the story were either too stupid, or too smart to raise the right questions. You see, if they asked the right questions, they would never get insider access at the Vatican again. And everyone knows it. At this point, the reporters are, for their own selfish reasons, just helping Fr. DiNoia cover his tracks.
It is, as Scott Adam eloquently puts it, the Way of the Weasel.