Suppose someone was murdered, and the killer wanted to make it look like a suicide. So he hung the victim from a beam or something. Would the person's neck bruise from the rope even though he was already dead when he was hung?
Yeah, that's what I meant about good and dead. I had a friend and advisor for forensic stuff and she was telling me that even after a few minutes it's pretty obvious if wounds are post- or ante- mortem. Ante-mortem bleeding being scanty and 'surface' and pressure (the rope) causing substantially less than it would against a thumping, active vessel.In fact, post mortem bruising is entirely possible if the force is inflicted shortly after death, although I believe forensics these days can determine the difference.
There are other signs of violent strangulation that occur when a person is alive that don't happen post mortem. The biggest one I can think of off the top of my head are the pin-point hemorrhages in the skin, eyes and internal organs called petechiae. Somewhere around here I have a couple of links if you need them.
Hanging; does the noose always kill when it snaps the neck? Or have there been instances where a victim's neck snaps, but he or she didn't die as a result? Maybe the neck doesn't snap the entire way?
Didn't see it mentioned above but in most cases, death by hanging should also result in a protruding, blackened tongue.
I've not read that, but if true the only mechanism I can think to explain it would be venous congestion. The only way to get that would be asphyxiation where the venous flow is interrupted but not the arterial. In a "proper hanging" with a high cervical vertebral fracture death would occur too quickly for that to happen and in post mortem hanging there also would be no arterial flow. However in a lynching or other short rope hangings this would probably be the rule.