bourbon vs scotch in murder‑scene cocktails: which masks the taste of blood better?

so i’ve been mixing a “black river” with 2 oz bourbon (wild turkey 101) and a splash of absinthe when i thought, why do detectives always note the victim’s last drink?

compare bourbon (high rye, 45% abv, often labeled 101) to scotch (single malt, 40% abv, cask #112) in the context of a crime scene.

‑ bourbon tends to mask iron‑like metallic notes, making blood taste less obvious – like the “smooth talker” killer who bluffs with charm. ‑ scotch’s smoky peat (islamic 12‑yr) actually highlights iron, so it’s the “loud” perp who leaves a trail.

personal anecdote: i once used a drambuie‑infused scotch in a “dead‑man’s fizz” and the victim’s family could actually taste the copper after the autopsy, lol.

question: if you were the forensic bartender, which spirit would you serve to hide a homicide? drop your thoughts, and feel free to throw in a recipe – i’ll upvote the most twisted one. tbh, i think bourbon wins, but scotch lovers will scream at me rn.