A pair of shoes is recovered from a forest path five hundred meters from a triple homicide scene. Laboratory analysis reveals the shoes carry blood from all three victims. They carry no blood from the shoe owner, who was found injured at the scene. A prosecutor argues the shoe owner committed the murders while wearing the shoes. A defense attorney argues someone else took the shoes and wore them during the attack. Based solely on the blood evidence described, can the shoes alone determine which interpretation is correct — and why or why not?