From the bloodstains along the corridor, which are a mixture of spatter and smears, the victim must have been able to escape from the room still in an upright position and out through the door. However, the attacker must have followed the victim out and attacked him or her severally along the corridor and the stairway. This is indicated by the spatters of blood along the way which is as a result of the attack and the smears on the walls due to contact with the victims injured head and the blood-stained weapon or hands of the attacker a bit lower. The absence of blood drops on the floor of the room and the corridors indicate that the victim did not have active external bleeding or the attack was so fast the victim was able to escape before active bleeding could be witnessed.The victim was initially attacked inside the suite 203 by someone who was also inside the same room. This is evidenced by the spattering of the blood stain on the wall near the cooking area. The victim however suffered more than one blows while still inside the room as evidenced by the numerous patterns of blood on near the cooking area, at the cabinets and behind the door. With a close attack. The blood spatter could not go far. The spatter also indicate the type of weapon used, it must have been blunt enough to prevent immediate gushing of blood. However, the force must have been strong to cause a blood spatter, and subsequent bleeding as the victim tried to escape. The blood smears inside the room indicate the violent movement of the victim as the attack continued inside the room before he or she was able to get out of the room.The victim must have been in a standing position. This is indicated by the spatter spread. The blood stain on the wall near the cooking area shows a central section which can be inferred to be the victims head and a divergent spatter from this point.