Murder Without Bruises

I must agree with Anna in that I did not read anywhere in the text that the King was stabbed in the heart with the spit although it is safe to assume that such an act occurred. I was intrigued by Lightborn's desire to kill Edward II, but not leave bruises on his body.  This was surprising to me because there really hasn't been much action until this final act of the play. I expected that with all the built-up hatred, the members of the royal court would have planned some extravagant and vengeful murder of the King to prove to his weakness and utter defeat. I was hoping for a sword fight or something (maybe the King would finally have the guts to fight back), rather than a bracketed statement that mentions his inevitable death. This thought brings me back to my question about why Lightborn did not want to leave bruises on the body of the King. Everyone knew he was no longer King and probably guessed that he would be killed, so why did his murder have to be a quiet, secretive act? It's not like Lightborn and Matrevis would be blamed because everyone wanted him off the throne. Stabbing Edward II with a burning spit seems quite violent indeed, but there were other ways to kill him off that probably would have made a stronger statement for those who wished to take over the throne.