In relation to the cut finger, a common question is :
How can we believe that steve avery would leave blood all over the rav4, but there are no prints in the car ?
The assumption made here is that he wasn't wearing gloves, because of the blood marks, therefore, how can you have blood marks if he has gloves on ??
I have posted before about how it's possible to have no prints in the car meaning he would have worn gloves and still have blood smudges.
Anyone who is familiar with work gloves, there are many that are cloth. Some are completely cloth, and some are leather on the palm/finger area and cloth on the knuckles.
Here's a reference link to give you some ideas of what various work gloves look like for perspective -
https://www.google.com/search?q=wor...anKAhWMRiYKHQKfCSEQ_AUICCgC&biw=2103&bih=1246
Lets go with a very common type, although only the cloth area around the knuckles is of importance, just wanted to show you it's a common design.
If someone has a cut on their knuckle and was wearing the glove, the cloth would begin to absorb that blood. Depending on how bad someone is bleeding , the outside of the glove could eventually absorb enough blood that if you touched that spot on the glove with your finger, you'd get blood on your finger. Likewise if your knuckle came in contact with a part of a car interior, that blood would transfer.
Some have said it appears as if the blood near the ignition was transferred with a Q-tip or maybe cloth rag that avery would have used to absorb blood from, as a means of planting the blood.
But it's also consistent with someone wearing a common work glove like this and having a bleeding knuckle.
So now the "how does he bleed all over the rav4, but not leave any prints" , becomes rather easy to explain via a common glove choice.
No amazingly meticulous cleanup required, but explains that having gloves on that won't leave prints, doesn't mean you can't leave blood stains.