Bodies Found Stacked Like Firewood In Garage Of Maryland Funeral Home

Apparently the Chambers Funeral Home & Crematorium in Riverdale, Maryland had more bodies for its crematorium than it could handle, so it stored them in the garage–stacked in piles, with fluids leaking out. A state investigator discovered the stash during an inspection, although to be fair he was warned by an employee, “Don’t get upset about all the bodies in there.”

“Funeral home accused of stacking bodies in a garage” [CNN]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Covertghost says:

    You know, Funeral Homes used to be a good front.

    Until everyone started investigating what they actually did…

    • JulesNoctambule says:

      Having read the article on fonts just before this, I misread ‘front’ as ‘font’ and was momentarily very confused!

  2. osiris73 says:

    Aside from any health risks, what’s the big deal? They’re just carcasses. I couldn’t care less what happens to my body when I’m dead. My wife wants me to cremate her simply so she can have ashes for me to incorporate into the concrete for a large yard gnome. She thinks that would be hysterical.

    • SybilDisobedience says:

      I have no particular reverence for my dead body either – like you say, I won’t be around, I don’t care what happens to me – but that’s not the case for many people. Grieving people don’t want to think about their loved ones’ carcass rotting away in a garage. There’s also the health code aspect of it. I mean, leaking fluids? That’s unpleasant and, I’d imagine, fairly unsanitary.

    • ben says:

      You might not care about what happens to your body, but plenty of people (I’d guess most) care what happens to the bodies of their loved ones.

    • burnedout says:

      that. is. awesome. I wish we had upvotes here…

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Way to respect other people’s beliefs.

      • RvLeshrac says:

        Do we respect the voices in a schizophrenic’s head? No? Then why should we respect the voices in a religious person’s?

        • Theodore the Proud says:

          Money was paid to the funeral home for a service; I don’t think the funeral home sold the families on the idea that the body would be stacked in a pile and left there. Do you?

          Leaving behind your personal issues with religion (I think you’re looking for places to complain about religion at this point), the funeral home is failing to deliver services that were paid for.

        • Rectilinear Propagation says:

          So it’s OK to defraud someone as long as they’re religious or their request was made for religious reasons?

          • osiris73 says:

            I say yes. They’re both cases of paying for something you’ll never actually receive anyway, right? ;)

            • Kid Awesome says:

              Wow, why’s everyone being such a jerk today?

            • Rectilinear Propagation says:

              They’re both cases of paying for something you’ll never actually receive anyway, right?

              No, that makes no sense. I don’t think you understood my question. I asked it if is OK to defraud someone if the reason they’re asking for something is religious. For example: asking for an all beef hot dog because you keep kosher.

              It makes not sense to say that you’ll never receive a hot dog or a burial just because you want a certain kind.

              • bwcbwc says:

                I think Osiris… point was that if you’re gullible enough to believe in a religion (paying (through virtue, deed and donation) to get into paradise) , then you’re gullible enough to deserve to be fooled by a funeral home (paying to get your loved ones treated with respect)…

                From my point of view, no one “deserves” to be fooled. And as far as religion and the afterlife go. I take more of a “wait and see for myself” approach rather than try to try to convince anyone who has chosen to rationalize that self-consciousness implies an existence that extends beyond the life of the containing body. There is a strong emotional appeal that an afterlife would have for any mortal, and it’s pointless to argue with a believer (or a non-believer for that matter) when there is no evidence available for either point. The only evidence we have is that IF an afterlife exists, there is a (nearly?) insurmountable barrier to communication between our life and that one.

        • ben says:

          What does that even mean? No one’s saying that “voices” of any kind have to be respected. People should be respected and their loved one’s bodies should be treated with respect as well.

    • aloria says:

      OK, I am totally stealing your wife’s gnome idea for myself. Actually, my mom might like that as well. Maybe we can get all our expired relatives made into gnomes!

    • Bohemian says:

      There is a clear public health risk from a pile of rotting corpses. This is part of the reason why we have body disposal laws. Then there is the likely fraud issue. I am sure this funeral home took money from the families of these people and signed a contract stating they would do a cremation etc. in trade for that money.

      It makes me wonder what the families were told or were they given ashes that were not their loved one?

      • GuyGuidoEyesSteveDaveâ„¢ says:

        I seem to recall this question coming up after the Haiti earthquake and they found it’s not the disease fest people think it is, but mostly a morale thing.

        While the odor can be overpowering, health officials sought to dispel worries about the spread of disease. Pan American Health Organization officials — speaking from Washington — stressed dead bodies are not a significant contagion danger, and cautioned against rapid mass burials or cremations.

        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34874495/ns/world_news-haiti_earthquake/

    • edicius is an acquired taste says:

      I’ve always wanted my ashes to be added to a batch of plastic used to make Transformers.

      Somehow, I don’t think Hasbro would go for that.

    • MostlyHarmless says:

      Oh the fun things I am going to do to your wife’s dead body in front of you. I mean, shes dead right, who cares?

      /psychopath argument killer.

      • osiris73 says:

        Are you going to do it before or after I turn her into a gnome? Actually, I don’t care either way. And I know she’d feel the same way too. You may as well be doing it to a side of beef. Hell, go ahead and marry it too, while your at it.

        • Excuse My Ambition Deficit Disorder says:

          nice…like the garden gnome idea…just make sure she’s telling everyone they are number one…mooning them…or…both.

      • gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|* says:

        that could also have been /psychopath killer’s argument

    • Starsmore says:

      One of my in-laws wanted to be cremated and made into an etch-a-sketch so the various grand & great-grandkids could still play with her.

      • katsuyakaiba says:

        …that is the coolest thing I have ever heard. I so want that done to my body!

      • ergasiophobiac says:

        I wish that could actually work. :( The dust in Etch-A-Sketches is iron, and people leave behind much less responsive to magnets carbon when they burn.

    • 1kamaz says:

      Ultimately, we’re all going to end up as fertilizer/CO2. Rot in a wooden box 6 ft under, in some basement, or be cremated – it’s all the same. I’m all for cremation, though, since it’s the cheapest and most efficient way to dispose of a body, except I don’t want anyone to have my ashes. I’d want mine tossed away. I don’t really care where.

    • thisistobehelpful says:

      Well, the health risks are the big deal. Any religious arguments are secondary to the rotting human corpse disease problem.

    • HoJu says:

      Let’s see how much your opinion changes when your mother dies…. or your child.

      • 1kamaz says:

        Honestly, mine wouldn’t change one bit. You are turning your child’s or your mother’s body to be destroyed. You are not planning a burial where you will be coming to pay respects. The way I see it, it makes no difference how the body is handled from the point you dropped it off for cremation until it ends up in the oven. However it’s handled, you’ll get exactly the same ashes back, so while the practice does raise a health concern, the funeral home was keeping its obligation to the customers.

        • guroth says:

          If someone does some perverted things to the body then you might get some extra stuff in the ashes.

          • 1kamaz says:

            I’m not talking about deviant behavior, and I strongly doubt there is a person that would do anything perverted to days old cadaver. By handled I meant the storage conditions. The funeral home lost its license due to health violations, not ethical issues. They promised the relatives ashes of their loved ones and that they eventually delivered.

    • icedteagirl says:

      I don’t know. I get that they’re just bodies, and are going to rot anyway, but they are the bodies of other peoples loved ones. I know that I would be unhappy and upset if someone I cared deeply about had recently died and their body was stacked carelessly in a garage instead of being treated with respect like it should. Yeah it’s not a “person” anymore, just a shell, but it once WAS somebody’s loved one, and should be treated as such.

    • Brunette Bookworm says:

      It depends. If the funeral home was paid to cremate bodies and failed to do so, that’s a problem. What about the families whose dead loved ones were stacked in there, were they still waiting for cremains back or did they get false cremains back?

      This article has more detail in that it was a health code violation and that the bodies donated for science are to be treated respectfully so it sound like code violations combined with contract violations

      http://www.news8.net/news/stories/0510/733004.html

  3. eccsame says:

    Since it was only “temporary”, who’s really a victim here? It’s not like you have any need for dignity when you’re dead. They should’ve just burned them two at a time and split up the ashes evenly.

    • ghostberry says:

      If it was a free service im inclined to agree, but they charged, so i guess the question is, can you do a chargeback on your card for failure to burn body? :)

  4. profmonster says:

    And tonight, on a new episode of Hoarders, what happens when the hoard keeps shrinking: should you take a cosmic hint, or add more bodies?

  5. moore850 says:

    the “who cares” argument sorta falls apart when you consider that perhaps certain religions require certain burial rights, etc. so yeah, you probably can’t just leave them lying around. Also, it’s an enormous health risk to the general population.

    • Nigerian prince looking for business partner says:

      and states have strict guidelines for transportation, handling and storage of human remains.

    • grapedog says:

      If I’m not influenced by someones need to believe in imaginary beings while they are alive, I certainly won’t be influenced by their desire to heed some imaginary beings burial rights after their dead.

      • Darrone says:

        Wouldn’t you be a little pissed off if your family PAID to have stored in a stack? Yea, your dead, but they’re still alive, right? Do you give a crap about them?

        • osiris73 says:

          How can someone give a crap about the people they leave behind if they’re dead? Being dead and all kinda prohibits caring about ANYthing. And if YOU believe your just a lump of meat after you die, then they should respect your beliefs about being a lump of meat and treat you as such.

          • admiral_stabbin says:

            I wouldn’t buy steaks that had been stacked up all leaky like in a garage. I also wouldn’t want that to be done to my grandma.

      • Rectilinear Propagation says:

        No one’s saying you have to care, they’re pointing out that it’s the “who cares” argument that’s stupid since many religions have rites for the dead.

        Lots of people are religions and many religions have burial rites so yeah, it is stupid to act all surprised that there are people who care about what happens to the bodies of their loved ones after they die.

      • citrus538 says:

        Since you are so dismissive of other people’s beliefs, you should understand perfectly when people are not impressed by your skepticism.

        • Billy says:

          So, you’re not dismissive or skeptical in my personal belief in the invisible pink unicorn?

          • partofme says:

            I’m skeptical, not dismissive. But you have a lot to learn about skepticism and worldviews. Most of the leading ideas in math and physics came from… somebody’s imagination! It’s like my general relativity professor said, “I can come up with a mathematical world full of fairies and unicorns. So long as the result it spits out at the end is a real number and that number matches the experiment, you’ll believe it!” So yes, I’ll be skeptical of your unicorn, but not dismissive. You and grapedog? Dismissive asses.

            • ecwis says:

              Good luck with your life.

              • partofme says:

                Thanks. I’m glad someone appreciates that it’s hard to ask questions… and then actually wait around for answers. It’s also pretty tough to hold two opposing ideas at the same time. But that’s a critical component to learning, right?

                • Billy says:

                  You dismissive ass ;)

                  I did wait around for answers.

                  • partofme says:

                    I didn’t actually mean that about you. Honestly. I was talking about people in general who claim to be skeptical, but then don’t do any of the things that are necessary.

            • Billy says:

              How dare you…You skeptical ass!

              But all joking aside, you realize that just because, “Most of the leading ideas in math and physics came from… somebody’s imagination!” doesn’t mean a hill of jack. It’s the verification and testing of the whole thing that really stands for something (and that’s what your professor was getting at). I mean, you don’t really lend any credibility to 2+2=5, do you? Unless, of course, the result it spits out at the end is a real number and that number matches the experiment (and in the case of 2+2=5, it doesn’t).

              This is how science and math works. Ask your professor.

              • partofme says:

                It does mean a hill of jack. Because the mathematical world that I live in (every day, that’s the nature of the research degree) is, unfortunately, just a set of things that we think should probably be true. And then you can take those things that we think should probably be true, arrange them together in shapes of unicorns, and sometimes they pop out the right number! Sometimes, you have to arrange them together in shapes of fairies! Sometimes, no matter how hard to try to arrange them in a way that makes sense, it simply does not have any physical analog. Just because we use the mathematical models that work and discard the mathematical models that don’t doesn’t mean that any of those models are, at their core, any less than a figment of our collective imagination. A tool that lets us compute things and approximate things. And the sooner you realize that your worldview is based on things that are based on unicorns, the sooner you’ll be a better skeptic and less dismissive.

                • Billy says:

                  Arranging things in the shapes of unicorns and fairies doesn’t make them unicorns or fairies. It doesn’t prove unicorns or fairies. It proves that math can make a shape of unicorns or fairies. In the same way, if I put a horn on a horse, it doesn’t prove unicorns.

                  If you are getting at skepticism=agnosticism and dismissive=atheist, and that I should be more of a skeptic because you might (or “sometimes” as you say) get some proof of what you are talking about, you are absolutely right. On the other hand, are you willing to accept any outlandish premise without any evidence just because it came from someone’s mind? As a scientist, it should be an anathema to you.

                • Billy says:

                  Arranging things in the shapes of unicorns and fairies doesn’t make them unicorns or fairies. It doesn’t prove unicorns or fairies. It proves that math can make a shape of unicorns or fairies. In the same way, if I put a horn on a horse, it doesn’t prove unicorns.

                  If you are getting at skepticism=agnosticism and dismissive=atheist, and that I should be more of a skeptic because you might (or “sometimes” as you say) get some proof of what you are talking about, you are absolutely right. On the other hand, are you willing to accept any outlandish premise without any evidence just because it came from someone’s mind? As a scientist, it should be an anathema to you.

                  • partofme says:

                    I think I need more spacetime than the consumerist comments will allow.

                    Mathematics is very pliable, able to shape unicorns and fairies, yes. These unicorns and fairies are exactly the backbone of your worldview. But to take it one step further, the math itself is unicorns and fairies. It is, as I said, “a set of things that we think should probably be true”. And it just so happens that when we shape those smaller unicorns into bigger unicorns, they sometimes spit out answers that match experimentation. Sometimes they spit out nonsense. But mathematically, we can’t eliminate the nonsense without eliminating the things that happen to work. So we wave our hands and say “don’t look at that part too much”. Take a set theory class or an analysis class if you want examples. Both provide plenty.

                    I’m not really making those equations. They don’t quite hold. Though I do need to accomplish some real work this evening, so I won’t really discuss them. As far as that other hand? No. I’m willing to attempt to understand most any outlandish premise because someone thinks it’s true. It just might not fit in my worldview with any functional role.

      • pecan 3.14159265 says:

        It has nothing to do with religion. You’re a complete asshole if you think that the dead shouldn’t be treated with respect just because YOU don’t think they should be. It doesn’t matter whether the person had religious preferences – the LIVING are the ones who have to deal with this. It is NOT okay for anyone to take advantage of ANYONE’s grief, or to defraud them, regardless of what they believe or don’t believe.

        • HoJu says:

          In other words: when you’re the last person on Earth, THEN you can decide what to do with all the bodies.

    • edosan says:

      Don’t forget their families probably paid a ridiculous amount of money for a burial or cremation.

  6. SkokieGuy says:

    The bodies had been donated to science and after they were used in studies are given to a funeral home for cremation.

    It’s far cheaper to cremate in bulk, rather than fire up Ol’ Smokey for one body at a time, like they would do (hopefully) for a private, individual cremation (where they are being paid way more, no doubt).

    The real crimes here are the lack of dignity for the deceased, especially in light of their wishes to help others through their donation, and the biohazard from the fluids.

    They should have been stored in refrigerated storage, like at a morgue.

    • osiris73 says:

      Really? Dignity? They’re dead.
      I just feel sorry for the people who have to see my dead, fat, bloated, naked, ass oozing fluids on the garage floor.

      • SkokieGuy says:

        Okay, I’m in the mood to nibble on some troll bait.

        Perhaps you saw the flag-draped caskets of troops being returned from overseas?

        Think of the money we could have saved letting the soldier’s ‘carcasses’ rot where they died!

        Perhaps you’d like to make this suggestion to the military as a cost-savings measure?

        • osiris73 says:

          Sounds like a good idea.

          Look, funerals are never for the dead person, they’re for the people left living who have to cope with missing them and living without them. Of course soldiers should be honored for their service and sacrifice, but their body is not them. What’s left is the idea of them, and that’s what should be honored. Like the various war memorials we have.

          More to the point, would a real, honorable soldier want to have is corpse honored for doing what they were meant to be doing? Its like a passerby who lifted a car off a child who says no, I’m not a hero, I’m just a person doing what any person should do in the same situation. Its called being a human being. My wife and I do nice things for people all of the time and do it anonymously. We don’t WANT to be recognized for doing what’s right. If it’s right, it’s right and recognition of such an act isn’t necessary.

          So how do you like trolling yourself? You seem a natural.

          • partofme says:

            Since trolling is now fashionable, I hope you never again get any reward or recognition for doing right. I can probably count the days you’d survive on my toes.

            • osiris73 says:

              Are you intentionally being obtuse? Is your sense of sarcasm faulty? Either way I’m done with you.

              • partofme says:

                No on both accounts. I’m pointing out that behavioral reinforcement is a key mechanism identified by leading atheists like Richard Dawkins for how society has built a set of ethics, morals, and yes, that thing called religion. To completely ignore the effect of behavioral reinforcement, be it self-reinforcement or derived from society, in the growth and sustenance of society would be remarkably naive (or, ya know, in your own opinion of yourself). In that, we can easily understand that since we humans are in a large sense visual creatures, we easily associate the sense of a person with their corpse. If then, we take a person who is supposed to provide a positive reinforcement of doing things well and let visibly horrific things happen to their corpse, the result is inevitably negative reinforcement (or at the very least, less positive).

              • ChungkingXpress says:

                I’m just curious at this point having skimmed through a lot of the responses you’ve been involved with…has anyone yet pointed out the vague irony in that your username is osiris yet you have a rather flippant if not totally dismissive attitude as to how corpses should be handled?

      • pecan 3.14159265 says:

        Just because people are dead doesn’t mean you shouldn’t treat their bodies with respect, for the sake of relatives and family members. Just because the bodies were donated to science doesn’t mean they deserve to be put somewhere like a stack of neglected newspapers.

        • Bohemian says:

          Even more so. They made their last statement one of helping by allowing their bodies to be used for science or a medical school. Nobody deserves to have their remains treated like this after they die. These people took an extra step to try to do something to benefit society after their death, we really should be returning the favor and make sure they were not left to rot in a garage.

          • osiris73 says:

            I could be wrong, but many people who donate their body to science don’t cling to a religious belief system. If they did, they wouldn’t be sending their body off to a medical school and would instead be having their bodies dealt with accordingly.

            • JuliB says:

              I’m a clinger (reluctantly after 25 years of being an atheist) and have considered donating my body to science. Sweeping statements are frequently a bad idea.

            • pecan 3.14159265 says:

              You’re wrong and right about that. Certain middle eastern and Asian religions have strict guidelines as to how the body is to be handled, and especially in Asian religions there is an emphasis placed on the physical body remaining whole because it is believed that the person’s body needs to remain whole in order for the soul to move on.

              Now, I can tell you that Christians more or less don’t believe this. Christians, regardless of denomination, pretty much believe that your soul is not attached to the body anymore after death, and the body remains while the soul moves onward – what happens to the body after that is not something that directly affects what happens to the soul. Christians would not necessarily have any problems donating their own bodies to science, at least not from a religious standpoint.

              • osiris73 says:

                I understand that many religions and philosophies have specific burial practices. But I believe you’re incorrect about what Christian burial beliefs are… or at least *should* be according to the doctrines of their major sects. Cremation is either disallowed or greatly frowned upon among most Christian sects and has been since their beginning. This stems from the belief that when Christ returns, he will literally raise them from their graves and into their bodies. If there’s no body to resurrect, they cannot be resurrected. This may not be the case these days, however. Which is an equally fun topic to discuss – how people pay attention to the convenient parts of their religion and not the parts that are, well… not so much. Why was their religion right 500 hundred years ago, but very little of what was practiced then, is not now? And those people 500 years ago would consider the current version a heathen. But I digress….

                • pecan 3.14159265 says:

                  I was referring to donation to science, in which Christians most likely would not oppose it based on religious principles.

                  • osiris73 says:

                    And that’s what I was referring to as well. Christian bodies were to be in pristine condition upon death to ensure proper resurrection. Having your head cut off before burial was a huge deal back in the day. That ensured that you were not going to heaven. Donating your body to science meant various forms of mutilation and subsequent cremation.

                    • pecan 3.14159265 says:

                      It’s important to note that the Bible does not specify any “rules” about cremation.

                    • osiris73 says:

                      There are lots of things the bible doesn’t specify, and yet there are suuuuuure a lot of dictates as to what one can and cannot do coming from those who are placed in charge of interpreting it for you.

                    • partofme says:

                      There are lots of things the constitution doesn’t specify, and yet there are suuuuuure a lot of dictates as to what one can and cannot do coming from those who are placed in charge of interpreting it for you. Your argument proves nothing except that you’ve had a bad experience. Try again.

                    • osiris73 says:

                      Shoot and miss. I haven’t had any bad experiences with any religion. So tell me again what my argument proves?

                    • partofme says:

                      With this new information, a whole load of empty set.

                    • madanthony says:

                      Evidently, the Catholic faith, at least, does not have a problem with cremation:

                      Autopsies can be morally permitted for legal inquests or scientific research. The free gift of organs after death is legitimate and can be meritorious.
                      The Church permits cremation, provided that it does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body.[92]

                    • osiris73 says:

                      Having looked over this site you linked to, I don’t see anywhere stating that these are official beliefs of the Catholic Church. I don’t doubt they are, but there’s a footnote that I can’t find. I’d also like to know when this amendment to the 5th commandment was added.

                    • Yamantaka says:

                      Not sure where you get that “5th commandment” thing. The 5th commandment (depending on your tradition) is “honor your father and mother” (Judaism, Orthodox Christianity, most Protestant denominations) or “you shall not murder” (Catholicism, Lutheranism).

                      Many Protestant denominations don’t actually prohibit cremation or donation of one’s body to science. I can vouch that Catholicism doesn’t prohibit it either. Besides that fact that Christian beliefs aren’t monolithic (similar to what is found in other faiths; hence, the sectarianism of all faiths), most Christians sort of drifted away from the idea of a literal bodily resurrection that is dependent on the preserved/intact remains that one leaves behind. Sure, you can find that… but you can find a lot of other beliefs under the “Christian” umbrella as well.

                      That said:
                      1) If you pay for a service (or, in this case, if your family pays for a service), that service should be rendered as advertised. Even if you take the “respect for the sentimental feelings of others over the remains of their dearly departed” aspect and the “last wishes” aspect out of the equation, if a contract specifies use & disposal of the dead body according to certain terms, then those terms must be — by the contract — fulfilled, lest recourse be sought for a refund and/or damages due to a breach of contract.
                      2) If you cannot properly dispose of a carcass — to the point where the fluids of decay are leaking out in an uncontrolled fashion — you can endanger others in the area. This is why it’s important to monitor and regulate these activities.

                      But, you know, whatever, Troll. Have fun trolling about.

            • pecan 3.14159265 says:

              Also, your use of the word “cling” leaves much to be desired. Religious people don’t CLING to anything. It’s a belief just like not believing in a god is a belief.

      • Cicadymn says:

        Yes, dignity. Just because you don’t have any respect for the dead, doesn’t mean everyone shouldn’t. The body should be taken care of even after death. Handled with the respect and care that it deserves. It doesn’t matter no one is using it anymore.

        Human beings are not just sacks of flesh. Even dead ones.

        • pantheonoutcast says:

          You know what Tibetan Buddhists do with their dead? They carry them up the side of a mountain, dismember them, flay the skin off the body, grind their bones into powder, and leave the pieces to be carried off by vultures.

          This ceremony, known as a sky burial, is done by some of the most deeply religious people in the world. Sacks of flesh – that’s all we are.

          • catskyfire says:

            They do all that, in part because they’ve no place to do burials. And even with all that is done, it’s done respectfully. I watched the ceremony on TV. And even as they’re crunching bones, they do it with solemnity. Not like a group a drunken guys going “Woo hoo, see how this one cracks! Yeah!”

      • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

        I feel like nibbling, too.

        What do you want done with your body when you die? Left where you died to rot, because to hell with everyone else? With the philosophy, your years of actually living would be surrounded by dead bodies. Yeah, I’m really sure that’s what you want…

  7. Clyde Barrow says:

    I knew it, I just knew it. This is “Soylent Green” coming to reality!

  8. klwillis45 says:

    Stack the bodies on the floor.
    Stack the bodies on the floor.
    Stack the bodies on the……FLOOOOOORRR!!!!!!!

  9. clownsRcreepy says:

    Prop me up beside the jukebox when I die…..

  10. pete7919 says:

    I’m not sure how relevant it is, but the bodies were in bags…

    I was picturing just a stack of bodies. For some reason them being in body bags helps me feel a little better.

    • DeVore says:

      Exactly… lest the corpses give each other cooties.

    • Rectilinear Propagation says:

      It’s weird, but yeah it does help. I guess because otherwise you’re envisioning something straight out of a movie about a serial killer or a psycho or something.

    • Dopaz says:

      It’s only gay if their sacks touch…. Oh wait…

  11. maddypilar says:

    I think the leaking fluid and the smell are the worst parts of this story. I don’t care what happens to me after I die, but I do care about sanitary conditions in places of business.

    • SkokieGuy says:

      They could have wrapped the bodies in a Better Marriage Blanket, to minimize smells?

      • maddypilar says:

        I had to look that up, but sure.

      • Me - now with more humidity says:

        Or those green vegetable life-extender bags…

        /larry the cable guy on/ Forgive me Lord for that joke… /larry the cable guy off/

  12. ShinGetterPoPo says:

    That’s a creepy looking pile of wood too

  13. nbs2 says:

    My grandfather was cremated there. In comparison with some of the other places in the area that I’ve been to for other funerals, I doubt we’ll be be back. The operation just wasn’t quite as….professional… as I’ve seen elsewhere.

  14. lehrdude says:

    Get him a body bag…YEAH!

    • maddypilar says:

      Sweep the leg.

      • admiral_stabbin says:

        Kreese: Fear does not exist in this dojo, does it?
        Karate Class: NO, SENSEI!
        Kreese: Pain does not exist in this dojo, does it?
        Karate Class: NO, SENSEI!
        Kreese: Defeat does not exist in this dojo, does it?
        Karate Class: NO, SENSEI!

  15. Damocles57 says:

    Aside from offending or not respecting the death or burial wishes of the living, this seems to be an issue of failure to follow local health guidelines and maybe breach of contract for which services where charged. I would think the discussions would center on the the consumerist aspects of fee for services and less on the real or imagined burial rights of the deceased. In reality, the customers are the living relatives (or the university) not the deceased unless the person to be cremated prearranged the service. Even then, recourse would be with the estate or the deceased’s guardian.

    I would want to review the terms underwhich a cremation was to have been performed. Could be fraud if the owners’ knowingly accepted fees for services they knew they would not perform. This could also extend to the funeral homes who sent bodies to be cremated if they were aware of the situation. There could be a state investigation into the financial records of the business. Assuming they were charging fees that exceeded their costs AND they were failing to perform the work because of money issues, this tells me that someone has been siphoning off too much money from the business.

  16. dancing_bear says:

    Oh how I long for the past, when Double Downs and the Lady in the Red Bra were daily, cheerful, and exciting news. This is just icky.

  17. KhaiJB says:

    ok this is the third one I’ve read about where they just stacked the cadavers..

  18. joetan says:

    They think this is bad, they should check out my garage.

  19. the Persistent Sound of Sensationalism says:

    I think if the wishes of the living really mattered after death, there would be a lot more hauntings. As such, the only crime of the funeral home was not storing the bodies in cold storage until a time when they could actually cremate the remains. My only wish after death… that my family not have to spend a fortune disposing of my remains.

    • Rectilinear Propagation says:

      Not if they promised people that the cremation would happen within a certain time frame.

  20. chaesar says:

    then burn them like firewood, problem solved

  21. theblackdog says:

    Oh god, this is just south of where I live.

    Keep it classy Riverdale…

  22. Sefford says:

    “but herr oberst, die holocaust ist eine gutes idee because economically we extract so many ounces of jew teeth fillings” -konsumerismus, 1944

  23. Dion_isis says:

    This is truly disgusting, not to mention an enormous health hazard. However, it does not surprise me. Here in California it seems like every other week some funeral home is being investigated for something similar.

  24. P_Smith says:

    Is it going too far to say they didn’t know how to deal with the deadwood?

  25. LaziestManOnMars says:

    How come no one ever says that firewood is “stacked like bodies?”

  26. fuceefacee says:

    I haven’t lived in the D.C. area for many years but Chambers was a well respected family owned business. Too bad they have fallen into such disrepute. In the very early 60′s they had a really catchy radio jingle that went to the tune of “Rock of Ages”.

    Chambers caskets are do fine
    Made of sandalwood and pine
    If you loved ones have to go
    Call Columbus 910
    If your loved ones pass away
    Have them pass the Chambers way