Apparently, according to a (probably biased, but this seems factual) blogger who was following the trial as it happened, there was a shoe print in blood on the floor, and this evidence was never typed or analyzed or otherwise investigated.
This is yet another indication that no significant investigative work was done once they had their man. It doesn’t matter, they think. We already know who did it.
You can add the shoeprint to four other items of proof I previously identified for believing that someone else was present when TA was killed.
Unfortunately, if that shoe print belonged to a third party that will probably never be proven at this point. Ugh.
Update: I thought I might summarize in this post, in one place, the reasons for believing that someone else may have been involved, and present at the crime scene, and with Jodi Arias in her rental car in the aftermath of the murder, under circumstances suggesting threat or coercion. Let me know if I’ve left anything out. Feel free to comment, of course. That’s what we at Lawyers on Strike are here for, at least this week.
1. The improbability of a lone woman attacking a larger and more powerful man with a knife.
2. The lack of a criminal record or any other fact from JA’s background that would even suggest the capability of such a savage killing.
3. The odd route she took to her next destination after leaving the murder scene.
4. The smell of cigarette smoke in the rental car when it was returned when it appears to be undisputed that Jodi didn’t smoke.
5. There are people who think that a photograph of TA shows a reflection in his eyes of someone else.
6. There is a shoe print in blood at the scene that was never identified.
7. Jodi Arias said for a long time that two others were there and did the killing.
8. Incredibly, with all that the possibility of someone else being there was never investigated by the police, so it’s a completely open question.