My questions are: 1. Would embalming someone's body before an autopsy is done affect the outcome of the autopsy? 2. Would the embalming process get rid of where lividity might have been on the body? 3. Would the embalming make any bruises on the face or body more apparent? 4. Would the embalming change the appearance of where a rope had been around someone's neck? Would it made any marks around where the rope had been disappear? And would it have made only an indentation on the neck show up? 5. Would the embalming process change the results of the autopsy exams of the heart and lungs?
1. Embalming can affect an autopsy somewhat because the internal organs get punctured in the process...it's still possible to determine a cause of death however it's more difficult
2. It would get rid of some lividity yes.
3. It shouldn't affect the brusing.
4. The rope marks should still be there even after embalming. The neck might fill out a little during the process but the marks will still be there.
5.The lungs and the heart would be punctured form the process so that would change how they examine them.
Thank you for your reply and answers to my questions. The reason I asked these questions is that my 10 year old brother was found "hanging" in 1968. He had been reported missing the evening before; and the next morning he was found down the street from our home. The area had been searched throughout the night; the last search being at 4:00 a.m. Glen was not there during any of the searches; but then just a few hours later; his body was found. Glen was on his knees, with the toes of his shoes pushed into the ground. The rope had been looped twice around his neck and tied loosely in the back. The first police officer or officers to arrive on the scene made statments such as "The rope wasn't tight enough to kill him" and to my father "That rope is not what killed your boy". But then when the homicide detectives and investigators took over; they ignored everything that was suspicious and immediately beginning calling Glen's death an "accidental" death. They would not investigate Glen's death as even a possible homicide. Several months ago, I got a copy of records from the ME's Office; only to find out that it's not even the autopsy report. I found out that just 3 hours after Glen's body was found; it was sent to be embalmed. And that it was done without the required signed release from someone in Glen's family for Glen's body to be embalmed before an autopsy could be done. My family and I and people we knew saw bruises around Glen's mouth at the funeral home. 3 or 4 small, roundish bruises on one side of Glen's face (under the cheekbones) and one larger, roundish one on the other side. My father said they looked like someone had had a hand over Glen's mouth. But even this was ignored by the detectives and investigators. And apparently even by the assistant ME who performed only a preliminary autopsy. If the embalming process would not have affected the bruising; then they were still there and clearly seen by the person who did the embalming; and the assistant ME.
Wow thats really a shame that happened. Back then funeral homes did not have the same regulations that they do now. Now they would get in huge legal trouble if they did that.
It makes me wonder how many deaths that were ruled as natural, accidental, or suicide; were actually not. It's just not right. I can understand that back then there weren't the advances in investigation, forensics, etc. But people still had eyes to see with. And they could see when things didn't look right. The least that should have been done in those cases was to keep the cases open with the hopes of future investigations and advances in forensic testing, etc. If there is just one thing about a case that doesn't fit together; one thing that just doesn't look or feel right; then that death is a suspicious death. The case should not simply be closed.
1. Embalming would make it more difficult to find traces of things in the blood, but where it was considered a hanging the bruising would be there, also when you hang you die by either asphyxiation or by breaking your neck. Usually if you asphyxiate the face will be blue and the tongue would be hanging out. If you break your neck it is instant death.
2. It would get rid of most of it seeing that it didn't have time to set in but bruises will still be there.
4. It would make them more apparent if someone has trauma to an area and it is embalmed it will swell.
5. To a point but at an autopsy everything is dissected anyway so a medical examiner could see if there were any abnormalties to the case.
After reading your case report, I am a funeral director and it seems to me that your brother did indeed tie the rope around his neck and probably jump from the tree or where he was and broke his neck but the rope let go and that would probably be why he shoes were dug into the ground and the bruises on his face where also there.
Lissie1975; thank you for your post. According to what you wrote, if Glen's death had been the result of asphyxiation; his face would have been blue and his tongue would have been hanging out. Glen's face was not blue, and his tongue was not hanging out. You also wrote that hanging would have left bruising on the neck; but there was no mention of any bruising on Glen's neck. The only thing noted by the assistant M.E. who performed the preliminary autopsy; was an indentation on Glen's neck. You wrote that embalming would make any bruising more apparent if there was traums to the area. If the assistant M.E. wanted to provide proof that the rope had caused Glen's death; shouldn't he have noted some kind of bruising on Glen's neck where the rope had been? But he didn't. You also wrote that it seems to you that Glen "did tie the rope around his neck and jumped from the tree or where he was and broke his neck but the rope let go". The rope was a rope swing that had been put up by kids in the neighborhood to swing from. The end of the rope swing was very low to the ground. The other end was tied to a tree branch. Glen could not have jumped from the tree; and there was nothing around his body for him to have jumped from. Glen's neck was not broken, and the rope did not let go. Glen was found in a kneeling position. The end of the rope swing had been looped twice around Glen's neck and tied loosely in the back. It was still around Glen's neck when his body was found. The first police officer or officers to arrive on the scene made statments that the rope was not tight enough to have killed Glen; and they told my father "That rope is not what killed your boy". If Glen had been conscious or alive when the rope was looped around his neck; he could have and would have stood up to save himself. I should add here that I contacted Cold Case over a year ago and they did a review of Glen's case. I still have the written statements from them that Glen's death is a suspcious death, that there are many dynamics about his death that lead them to believe that foul play did occur, and other such statements. But even with that; they closed the review of Glen's death. Injustice again. Glen was a 10 year old boy who was terrified of the dark. He would not have stayed out all night in the dark and cold (not even zipping up his jacket). He would not have waited until the searchers (calling his name and nickname) left the area, and then gone to play in the dark and cold on the rope swing. NO, someone put him there under that tree and the rope around his neck sometime after the last search of the area at 4:00 a.m. Again, I say that LE and the assistant M.E. did not prove that Glen's death was an accidental death. The assistant M.E. did not prove that it was the rope that had killed Glen. The only thing he proved was that there had been a rope around Glen's neck; but not that it was even tight enough to kill Glen.
Originally posted by Lissie1975: 1. Embalming would make it more difficult to find traces of things in the blood, but where it was considered a hanging the bruising would be there, also when you hang you die by either asphyxiation or by breaking your neck. Usually if you asphyxiate the face will be blue and the tongue would be hanging out. If you break your neck it is instant death.
2. It would get rid of most of it seeing that it didn't have time to set in but bruises will still be there.
4. It would make them more apparent if someone has trauma to an area and it is embalmed it will swell.
5. To a point but at an autopsy everything is dissected anyway so a medical examiner could see if there were any abnormalties to the case.
After reading your case report, I am a funeral director and it seems to me that your brother did indeed tie the rope around his neck and probably jump from the tree or where he was and broke his neck but the rope let go and that would probably be why he shoes were dug into the ground and the bruises on his face where also there.
Lizzie1975, you seem to know alot. where did you get all this info?
I am a funeral director, I have worked in this field for 14 years and have seen many things with deceased individuals. I try to help people get closure on deaths of their loved ones.
If the assistant M.E. wanted to provide proof that the rope had caused Glen's death; shouldn't he have noted some kind of bruising on Glen's neck where the rope had been? But he didn't.
Ok I didn't fully understand how he was found, after reading your post, I am wondering if he was on the swing and you know how kids go around to get dizzy by going in a circle,you kind of wind the rope up and then spin. What I am wondering is if he had pulled his feet up to use the swing got tangled in the rope as he was spinning, and it became looped around him and he fell, onto the ground with the rope tight around his neck to put enough pressure on it to asphyxiate himself, and died, then slumped backwards after death the body would go limp releasing the rope somewhat. Do you understand what I mean?
Did you ever try Dr. Baden on HBO? On the show autopsy?
Thank you again, Lissie1975. It is nice to have someone like you who tries to bring closure to families who have lost a loved one. The thing about whether Glen could have been on the rope swing and going around in circles to get dizzy; that lot of land had been searched several times beginning in the evening (before Glen was found dead the next morning); while there was still some daylight out. Glen was not there during any of those searches. He simply was not there during any of the searches for him; up until 4:00 a.m. Glen would not have been out playing in the dark. He was not out playing at that time of morning; and neither were any other kids. I would think that if a kid wanted to get dizzy by spinning on a rope swing, they would do it by standing on the knot at the end of the rope swing. The knot was there for the kids to stand on while swinging from the rope swing. If they did that; they would have been holding onto the rope and there wouldn't have been any slack to get wrapped around their neck. There is no way that a rope would just wrap around a kid's neck if they fell off of a rope swing, and then tie itself in the back. Glen's body wasn't slumped backwards. He was in an upright position; kneeling position. And I would think that if a person slumped with a rope around their neck; the weight of that would make a rope tighter around the neck; not looser. Another thing I wanted to add to your previous post is on how you wrote "Embalming would make it more difficult to find traces of things in the blood". Which is probably why the blood sample was taken from Glen's body before his body was sent to be embalmed. If the assistant M.E. made sure that was done before Glen's body was embalmed; wanting an accurate result of the blood testing; why wouldn't he have also wanted to make sure to do an autopsy before Glen's body was sent to be embalmed? Why wouldn't this assistant M.E. want to do an autopsy on an unembalmed body to see where any lividity would have been on the body; to determine how long this boy might have been hanging; and to prove that this victim did indeed die in the position he was found in? It's still strange to me that immediately after Glen's body was found; it was sent to a hospital for an M.D. to declare him dead; by an ambulance for the first funeral home ( the same funeral home where Glen's body was sent, without the required signed release by any member of Glen's family) to be embalmed before an autopsy was done. After the M.D. at the hospital declared Glen dead; Glen's body was sent to the M.E.'s Office for a blood sample to be taken; and then taken to the first funeral home (which no one in my family selected or signed a release for) to be embalmed. All of this just 3 hours after Glen's body was found. There was a rush to have Glen's body embalmed; but then after the embalment, his body was sent back to the M.E.'s Office, but sat OVERNIGHT awaiting autopsy. The rush should have been to do an autopsy, not an embalment. Someone made sure that Glen's body was embalmed before an autopsy could be done; and it was done without the required, signed release by a member of Glen's family for it to be done. While my family thought Glen's body was at the M.E.'s Office; it was really at a funeral home being embalmed before an autopsy could be done. And if the assistant M.E. wanted an accurate result of the test for any possible alcohol in Glen's blood; why didn't he mention any tests for toxins or anything else? Why just alcohol?
Originally posted by Lissie1975: I am a funeral director, I have worked in this field for 14 years and have seen many things with deceased individuals. I try to help people get closure on deaths of their loved ones.
COOL! if your a Director than why do you bother to come and talk to us. aren't you like really busy?
Originally posted by Lissie1975: Why am I in here, gee sitting here at the funeral home can get kind of boring when there isn't much to do. So this is how I pass the time!
COOL! if your a Director than why do you bother to come and talk to us. aren't you like really busy?
Snicker, Snicker....Sure funeral directors are busy, but if Lissie is anything like me, she watches Mike Roe on the tube talking about other people's so-called dirty jobs, only wishing she could tell the world just how truly filthy her job is! ....At least that is how I feel!
The embalming process its self would not remove the bruise but after the complete restorative process it will remove the bruises. But the embalming fluid can lighten the bruises. I don’t know how other stated prepare their bodies but here in FL we like the deceased to look as natural as possible. We will do everything we can to give the skin a natural appearance. In a case like that and many others the funeral home will not get the body until the medical examiner release the body.
