@Ventura69Von hohem Gras habe ich kein Wort geschrieben, nur von Gras. Egal ob es hoch oder niedrig ist, da kannst du keine Spuren abnehmen, sondern bestenfalls auf einen Radstand schließen, wie
@Bluelle richtig schreibt.
@BluelleWas das Duschen und die Fußspuren betrifft, hier mal das, was Englade dazu schreibt. Ich habe es auch an anderen Stellen gelesen, aber nicht so ausführlich. Und dank Kindle finde ich bei Englade die gesuchte Stelle schneller.
Brown and other technicians worked for a day and a half sealing the house, caulking every window and door, plugging the fireplaces, every place where a crack might allow air in or out. Then they pumped in Superglue fumes and waited for the chemicals to go to work. After giving the fumes the required amount of time, plus a little extra for luck, they rushed in, hoping to find fingerprints they had not been able to detect previously. The procedure failed. However, one system did work: a tried and usually successful method of doctoring a surface with a chemical that would make blood stains fluorescent. Even if the stains were no longer visible to the naked eye, they could be made visible under the right lighting conditions. The first place Brown used the chemical, called luminol, was in the house. Painstakingly, he loaded his cameras with high-speed color film and put them on tripods along the killer’s likely path. Then he set the shutters for thirty-second time exposures. Lastly, he squatted and duck-walked across the floor, spraying the tan-colored luminol liquid from a plastic bottle. As the mist settled, it reacted with the chemical traces from the blood. The killer’s footprints began to glow with a spooky blue-green light. Quickly, Brown tripped the shutters since the luminescence lasts only about fifteen seconds. The result was a series of photographs showing a wavy set of ghostly footprints traveling from the living room to the bedroom and into the bathroom. That confirmed what detectives had suspected: The killer had taken a shower to try to wash off the blood that must have coated him like a second skin. It was a little more difficult to use the chemical outside because stray light could ruin the whole experiment. Brown waited for a dark night and then prepared to spray the chemical around the doorway, the yard, and the driveway. <...>
Once the lights were out and the luminol had been sprayed, the killer’s path showed up just as clearly outside as it had inside, even though it had rained several times since the murders. Footprints led from the door to the driveway and across it to two large trees. They circled the trees several times, as though the person who left the prints had sought to hide behind the trunks. “Maybe he came out and was getting in his car and something spooked him,” one of the investigators suggested. “Could be,” agreed Brown. Interestingly, there was a second set of prints. Instead of going off to the right, the second set led to the left out into the yard. They went out about eight feet and stopped, then went back. Where they stopped there was an area several feet square that was covered by what Brown described as “swishing marks.” The killer walked out into the grass, vigorously rubbed his bloody feet back and forth as though he were using a doormat, then went back to the porch. The size and shape of the prints indicated both sets were made by the same person. To investigators, this meant one thing: The killer had been in the house twice. They theorized he attacked the Haysoms, left, and then came back. They speculated the second trip was to make sure they were dead by slitting their throats.
