In a 2003 interview, a Lawrence police detective lamented the growing popularity of crime-scene investigation TV shows.

“In real life, you’re lucky if you get one fingerprint, one blood sample,” then-detective Dan Ward said at the time.

Ward’s concern was that real-life jurors might grow too accustomed to seeing a perfect package of evidence wrapped into a one-hour drama, and that it would cause jurors to be reluctant to convict a defendant in a violent crime if there was little or no physical evidence.

This week, that theory will be tested as jurors begin deliberations in one of the most high-profile crimes in recent Douglas County history. In a case with no fibers, hairs, fingerprints or DNA linking the suspect to the crime scene, jurors will be asked to convict Kansas State University professor Thomas E. Murray, 48, based largely on what a prosecutor has called a “web” of suspicious statements and actions.

In an added pop-culture twist, Murray explained a series of murder-related Internet searches on his computer by saying he wanted to write crime-scene TV shows

Closing arguments in the trial are expected to begin Monday morning. After that, jurors will begin deliberations behind closed doors until they reach a unanimous verdict, or until deliberations break down, which means the case would end in a hung jury, and prosecutors would have to decide whether to re-try it.

Here’s a recap of some of the key testimony and evidence jurors have seen throughout the four-week trial of Murray, who’s charged with stabbing and beating his ex-wife, Carmin D. Ross, in November 2003:

• Police interview: In a videotaped interview hours after the discovery of Ross’ body, Murray told police they’d find Ross’ blood in his car and that they’d find his blood on her clothes and in her home.

He also changed his alibi, first saying he stayed home grading papers the morning of the death, then saying he went driving on Interstate 70.

Murray also said at one point, “I’m having fun with it from the ‘C.S.I.’ perspective.”

• Mysterious shoe print(s): A bloody shoeprint found in Ross’ entryway didn’t match any police officers’ shoes or any of the shoes linked to Murray. A different print on the lip of a sink in Ross’ bathroom could have come from a tennis shoe or a fabric, experts testified.
• Hand injuries: Murray had cuts and bruises on his hand and wrists that he said came from a papercut, playing with his daughter, cutting a pineapple and cleaning gutters.
• Internet searches: A forensic computer examiner testified Murray had searched the Internet for terms including “how to murder someone and not get caught” and “the best way to murder someone.”
• Statements to friends and neighbors: A neighbor of Murray’s testified that before Ross’ death, Murray said life would be better if she weren’t alive. Another friend testified that before Murray had been told how Ross died, he said, “All I see is the blood, all the blood.”
• Early drop-off: a baby sitter testified that Murray dropped off his daughter in Manhattan unusually early the morning Ross was killed.
• DNA analysis: a DNA expert testified a drop of blood found in Ross’ bathroom mixed with her blood could have belonged to Murray, but he couldn’t say conclusively.