Human Rights Advocates: Prisoner’s Rare Medical Condition Risks Gruesome Botched Execution in Missouri

Human rights advo­cates are warn­ing that the impend­ing exe­cu­tion of Russell Bucklew (pic­tured) in Missouri on March 20 presents a ​“sub­stan­tial­ly increase[d] risk of a grue­some and botched execution.” 

Court plead­ings and a March 14 let­ter from the American Civil Liberties Union to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) say that Bucklew suf­fers from con­gen­i­tal cav­ernous heman­gioma, a rare and severe blood-ves­sel con­di­tion that his lawyers and doc­tors say com­pro­mis­es his veins and makes lethal injec­tion inap­pro­pri­ate and poten­tial­ly tor­tur­ous. Bucklew’s med­ical con­di­tion caus­es large tumors of mal­formed blood ves­sels to grow on his head, face, and neck, includ­ing a vas­cu­lar tumor that obstructs his airway. 

Dr. Joel Zivot, a board-cer­ti­fied anes­the­si­ol­o­gist who reviewed Bucklew’s med­ical records for defense lawyers in the case, said his com­pro­mised veins will like­ly pre­vent the pen­to­bar­bi­tal Missouri uses in exe­cu­tions from cir­cu­lat­ing through his blood­stream as intend­ed, risk­ing a ​“pro­longed and extreme­ly painful” exe­cu­tion. Zivot says there is a sub­stan­tial risk that Bucklew’s throat tumor may burst dur­ing the exe­cu­tion and that he will suf­fo­cate, chok­ing on his own blood. 

Missouri first sought to exe­cute Bucklew on May 21, 2014. At that time, his lawyers filed a chal­lenge to the state’s lethal-injec­tion process based on Bucklew’s med­ical con­di­tion, and the ACLU filed a peti­tion in the IACHR seek­ing pre­cau­tion­ary mea­sures — the inter­na­tion­al equiv­a­lent of an injunc­tion — against the exe­cu­tion. The IACHR peti­tion argued that the exe­cu­tion would vio­late inter­na­tion­al human rights pro­scrip­tions against cru­el and inhu­mane treat­ment and torture. 

On May 19, 2014, the Missouri fed­er­al dis­trict court denied Bucklew’s exe­cu­tion chal­lenge and his motion to stay his exe­cu­tion. A divid­ed pan­el of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit grant­ed him a stay of exe­cu­tion so it could con­sid­er his lethal-injec­tion claim, but the full court, sit­ting en banc, vacat­ed the stay. Bucklew then sought review in the U.S. Supreme Court, which stayed his exe­cu­tion pend­ing the out­come of the lethal-injec­tion appeal in the Eighth Circuit. 

While the case was work­ing its way through the fed­er­al courts, the IACHR issued pre­cau­tion­ary mea­sures against the United States on May 20, 2014, request­ing that the U.S. com­ply with its human rights oblig­a­tions under the char­ter of the Organization of American States and the American Convention on Human Rights. The IACHR direc­tive asked the U.S. to ​“abstain from exe­cut­ing Russell Bucklew” until the human rights body could hear his case. 

On March 6, 2018, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reject­ed Bucklew’s appeal and affirmed the dis­trict court’s rul­ing, con­clud­ing that ​“Bucklew has failed to estab­lish that lethal injec­tion, as applied to him, con­sti­tutes cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.” The ACLU then request­ed that the IACHR ​“imme­di­ate­ly inter­vene” to halt Bucklew’s exe­cu­tion, and the human rights com­mis­sion informed the U.S. gov­ern­ment that its pre­cau­tion­ary mea­sures were still in effect.

“This exe­cu­tion should not move for­ward,” ACLU’s Human Rights Program Director Jamil Dakwar told Newsweek. ​“Because the state is pur­su­ing lethal injec­tion, that will most cer­tain­ly cause severe pain and suf­fer­ing which under inter­na­tion­al law is considered torture.” 

Bucklew’s sched­uled exe­cu­tion comes on the heels of two failed exe­cu­tions of grave­ly ill pris­on­ers in which states ignored warn­ings that the pris­on­ers’ med­ical con­di­tions had com­pro­mised their veins and would make it impos­si­ble for exe­cu­tion­ers to set intra­venous exe­cu­tion lines. Nonetheless, Ohio tried and failed to exe­cute Alva Campbell and Alabama called off the exe­cu­tion of Doyle Hamm after fail­ing for more than 2 1/​2 hours to obtain venous access in his low­er extrem­i­ties. Campbell sub­se­quent­ly died of his ter­mi­nal ill­ness and Hamm has sued to bar Alabama from attempt­ing to exe­cute him again. 

On March 15, Bucklew’s lawyers filed plead­ings in the U.S. Supreme Court ask­ing the Court to stay his exe­cu­tion and review his case.