So many people making assumptions about the blood and lack of blood trail. its been noted that the Lizzy Borden murder with the hatchet had much less blood than people would normally expect.
Here is link to a discussion.
"The only blood evidence found was on and beneath the victims and spatter cast off from the murder weapon. There was no testimony about trails of blood, either in the form of footprints or as blood dripping from the murder weapon. There was actually very little blood spatter found around Abby's body, especially since she received several more hatchet blows than Andrew. The important point to be made is that there was relatively little blood spatter in both Abby and Andrew's murders, certainly a lot less than most people expect. Based upon that, maybe the expectations are incorrect, since the point was proven not once, but twice."
So while it was reported that it was a bloody crime scene the following day, it may not have been a bloody during the killings, just spatter, killer was wearing gloves, got spatter on his clothes, and the blood soaked into the mattress and blankets. But seems like common sense that it would take a while for blood to cover the floor.
Once again at the sake of being trolled it seems this could have involved a lot of planning and knowledge combined with the audacity of the risk also suggest work of serial killer. Although its all just speculation at this point, and I think I'll just follow news for updates.