U.S. High Court Halts Execution of Inmate Claiming Rare Health Defect

Missouri death row inmate Russell Bucklew (46 years old) was found guilty of double murder (one of the men he killed in front of the mans children), kidnapping, and rape. He was supposed to be put to death Wednesday (yesterday) but was given a stay of execution. The request for stay of execution was filed just days before the execution was to take place, even though he has had this medical condition for years. Literally in the last hours before the execution was to take place, his lawyers claim he has a condition called cavernous hemangioma and that the execution of a person with this condition could lead to undue suffering from a lethal injection. With one hour left until the execution, the court agreed and stopped it.

So ATS .... what do you think??

- Are you buying the killer/rapists claim that he has this condition and that he'd be in too much pain if he was put to death?

- Should the court have allowed the execution to go on? He's a rapist/kidnapper/multiple murderer and if he's in pain, then good! ??

- Should the court have stopped he execution because we are supposed to be civilized and compassionate even when putting people to death ??

- Should this not even be a question because we shouldn't have the death penalty at all, or at least not unless there is a serious reason for it like it's for self defense of other inmates and prison workers?

- Should we have multiple ways of using the death penalty so there are choices for different situations ... like we should just have this guy face a firing squad ... that kind of thing?

- Something else??

For the record, I will once again state that I am against the death penalty unless there is a serious reason for it, like if the other inmates and prison workers are put in danger by keeping the killer alive .... or if by keeping him alive he has 'followers' who would take hostages and/or kill if he's not released. Things like that. Otherwise, I'm against the death penalty.

U.S. High Court Halts Execution of Inmate Claiming Rare Health Defect

Bucklew's lawyers argued that malformed blood vessels in his head and neck could rupture under stress, causing the drugs administered during execution to circulate improperly and cause him undue suffering. The condition is called cavernous hemangioma.

"Bucklew's unrebutted medical evidence demonstrates the requisite sufficient likelihood of unnecessary pain and suffering beyond the constitutionally permissible amount inherent in all executions," the panel wrote.

Missouri's corrections department said in court papers that Bucklew's condition dates back many years and he did not have to wait until days before his execution to raise the issue. He has undergone surgery while under anesthesia, and there is no reason to believe anesthesia would be ineffective prior to administering the lethal drugs, the department said.

Information on Cavernous Hemangioma

Cavernous hemangioma, also called cavernous angioma, or cavernoma ... is a type of blood vessel malformation or hemangioma, where a collection of dilated blood vessels form a tumor. Because of this malformation, blood flow through the cavities, or caverns, is slow. Additionally, the cells that form the vessels do not form the necessary junctions with surrounding cells and the structural support from the smooth muscle is hindered causing leakage into the surrounding tissue. It is the leakage of blood, known as a hemorrhage from these vessels that causes a variety of symptoms known to be associated with this disease

USA Today - Execution of Missouri Death Row Inmate Halted Again

Bucklew told The Guardian newspaper this month that he was fearful about what he would experience.

"I'm sick about it not working on me," he said. "I'm afraid that it's going to turn me into a vegetable, that I'd be brain-dead. You saw what happened down in Oklahoma."

Former Cape Girardeau County prosecutor Morley Swingle has called Bucklew "a pure sociopath."

TIME - Russell Bucklew Lethal Injection Halted With One Hour To Go

Russell Bucklew, who murdered a man in front of his children, shot a cop and raped and kidnapped his ex-girlfriend, has said a birth defect could cause him tremendous pain during an execution, that would violate the Eighth Amendment‘s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

Bucklew’s unrebutted medical evidence demonstrates the requisite sufficient likelihood of unnecessary pain and suffering beyond the constitutionally permissible amount inherent in all executions,” the court wrote.

“We also conclude that the irreparable harm to Bucklew is great in comparison to the harm to the state from staying the execution.”

I heard about this this morning on CSPAN radio, this is dumb in my opinion. The man is going to die anyways, so what if it causes a bit of pain on him before so. He shouldn't have raped and killed people. I'm sure his victims weren't exactly feeling peachy while he was killing them. Though I honestly believe this is just a stall tactic to keep him alive.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

He dished out pain and suffering ... kidnapping, raping, killing ... killing a father in front of the mans children. But in the end, the killer himself is afraid of pain and death ...

USA Today - Execution of Missouri Death Row Inmate Halted Again

Bucklew told The Guardian newspaper this month that he was fearful about what he would experience. "I'm sick about it not working on me," he said. "I'm afraid that it's going to turn me into a vegetable, that I'd be brain-dead. You saw what happened down in Oklahoma.""

So yes, I'm sure this is a last minute stall tactic for facing death (and afterlife judgement).

The medical information says that his condition could possibly cause the blood to run slower in parts of his body. I'm not a medical expert but from what I see the major organs that the kill-drugs need to get to would still have the drugs needed for death.

I'd be interested to see what a doctor, without any skin in the game, would say. As I said, I'm not a medical expert. That's just my armchair observation.

he killed a father in front of his children. the children are now grown up. let the children decide.

a reply to: FlyersFan

- Are you buying the killer/rapists claim that he has this condition and that he'd be in too much pain if he was put to death?

Well, I would never take an individual's word on whether or not they had a medical condition, if I was a court of law. Fortunately, I wouldn't have to. There should be no shortage of medical records as evidence/expert testimony to attest to the convict's condition.

- Should the court have allowed the execution to go on? He's a rapist/kidnapper/multiple murderer and if he's in pain, then good! ??

Well, no, not good, at least, not inherently good. I suppose this depends on why you execute people - I'll address that question further on, but no, "he's in pain, therefore he can suck it" is not a legitimate reason to kill the convict.

- Should the court have stopped he execution because we are supposed to be civilized and compassionate even when putting people to death ??

In short, yes, with a caveat to be discussed below.

- Should this not even be a question because we shouldn't have the death penalty at all, or at least not unless there is a serious reason for it like it's for self defense of other inmates and prison workers?

I... what? You've framed this question interestingly. I would say leadingly, but I'm not sure I would be correctly. This particular case may not be a question of whether or not we (of course, I'm using some vague version of the royal we, not being an American) feel the state has the right to kill people, but yeah, that should focus into our conversation. At the very least, if we're going to be killing people we do, as above, have a duty to do it in the most humane way possible, but I would argue that the non-negligible chance of "calling it wrong" makes the prospect of the death penalty very, very unattractive, never mind the higher costs there associated. The lengthy appeals process is very, very expensive, and tends not to be quite so lengthy in life imprisonment cases, because a truly guilty prisoner has that much less incentive to fight the system. This is, however, a very different question than the actual matter of this particular case.

- Should we have multiple ways of using the death penalty so there are choices for different situations ... like we should just have this guy face a firing squad ... that kind of thing?

You shouldn't have any ways, but I guess if you're going to insist upon it, then yes, you should either have multiple techniques, or one penultimate technique for which the mechanism of death is the same level of suffering regardless of medical conditions - I hear nitrogen asphyixiation is a commonly-toted mechanism.

The man was sentenced under the laws of that state. If they cannot inject him, let him hang from a rope or fry in the chair then.

I'll bet he never considered his victim's medical conditions when he murdered and raped.

he killed a father in front of his children. the children are now grown up. let the children decide - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

They did. Victims families always have the decision on prosecuting the death sentence or life in prison.

The people in Mo want this guy dead so his clock is ticking. Remember the death penalty lawyers get $208 an hour from the taxpayers for these cases-(they do here anyway)they could care less for this scum-just drag it out to the max. Stop-the stars are not in the right place for my client-who ever he is-we can kill him tomorrow after I cash in one more time.

originally posted by: FreshKale
You've framed this question interestingly. I would say leadingly, but I'm not sure I would be correctly.

Naah .. nothing is in that question that is 'leading'. It was simply supposed to be asking if we shouldn't have a death penalty for anyone unless absolutely necessary to protect innocent people who have to deal with the death row person. I thought i worded it okay ... but apparently that thought didn't get across. Feel free to say 'no' to that and put your own in. It's not like the questions are locked in stone ... it's just a chat forum.

I know how to solve this little problem; Tree + rope.
This guy should not be allowed to walk the earth any longer.

Prisons wouldn't be full if we'd stop taking it so easy on convicted violent criminals.

It's a sad state of affairs when the easiest way to guarantee you'll have a warm bed, 3 meals a day, and free medical care is simply to commit a heinous crime.

Unreal. This guy.... Sheesh.

Kill him regardless of his condition. He cared nothing when he was killing and raping. So why should others care about his "condition"

Let his victims remaining family members know that justice is not blind (liberal) and put this guy down like the dog he is.

On the lighter side: when I first read the title I was so hoping to read about some Stan Lee styled superhuman that let's electricity flow passively through his body that he could not be out to death. Trial and error type of thing.

I do go back and forth on this issue as it presents many questions within myself when I try to reconcile right and wrong. I really can't be more honest than that I suppose.

On the one hand, my first instinct is to kill the bastard any way you can. If he experiences any sort of pain during the execution... then good. He caused countless amounts of pain to others and he definitely deserves no better than he allowed them. Screw his disease. Screw his pain. And screw his wants as he made the decisions that landed him where he is. Him living for 24 hours at the tax payers expense is 25 hours longer than he deserves.

On the other hand, I look at what I wrote above and think about how animalistic that probably makes me. I then wonder if I am any better than him because of those feelings. I do experience a twinge of shame about feeling like that and I am not sure why. I am not sure if either stance I take would be morally right or wrong.

I know this thread wasn't about how I view the death penalty but I am always curious if others feel the way I do when stories like these come up.

I am really glad that I've never had to be in the position to make these judgement calls. While I am torn between the death penalty I can state that I do not have any sympathy for this man. I think my struggle has more to do with the fear of being as bad as he is concerning the taking of a life. If that makes sense.

originally posted by: Fylgje
I know how to solve this little problem; Tree + rope.
This guy should not be allowed to walk the earth any longer.

I live in a nation without death penalties and let me say this;

I wish we had them. This sort of person won't change, if they get let out they do more harm and end up back in prison anyway. It just costs the taxpayers money to house them and causes grief to innocent folk on the street.

The idea of reforming people like this is a broken one that needs to be cast out and replaced with the hard and inconvenient truth that they don't ever change their ways in prison, they just get worse in there.

a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe
I fully understand what you are saying. I don't feel bad at all that the guy is on death row. But at the same time, we are supposed to be better than the killers are. It's a tug of war and a struggle ... I hear you.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
- Are you buying the killer/rapists claim that he has this condition and that he'd be in too much pain if he was put to death?

That would depend on the outcome of further tests.

- Should the court have allowed the execution to go on? He's a rapist/kidnapper/multiple murderer and if he's in pain, then good! ??

Absolutely NOT! The morality of it aside, if you claim to uphold your US Constitution then that means ALL of it, not just the parts you want to...

United States Constitution - Eighth Amendment

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

- Should the court have stopped he execution because we are supposed to be civilized and compassionate even when putting people to death ??

Yes, as per your US Constitution (above).

- Should this not even be a question because we shouldn't have the death penalty at all, or at least not unless there is a serious reason for it like it's for self defense of other inmates and prison workers?

My own personal belief, and that of much of the western world outside the U.S. is that execution is a barbaric throwback to the Dark Ages that most of us have realised and done away with.

- Should we have multiple ways of using the death penalty so there are choices for different situations ... like we should just have this guy face a firing squad ... that kind of thing?

As much as I detest the death penalty, IF you are going to have it I have to say that a firing squad is probably the most humane. As to giving the condemned a choice, I would say that is barbaric unto itself.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Exactly, it is silly that someone who was capable of dealing out so much pain and suffering resulting in death is afraid of those very things as well. Heck he probably wouldn't even feel CLOSE to the amount of pain that he dealt out. I have no sympathy for this man. Inject him already.

a reply to: FlyersFan

You can get a descent .45 acp round for about 45 cents. I'm sure you could even find a volunteer from the victims family so it wouldn't cost the state much for that part either. No pain, right behind the ear. All this hand wringing for these pieces of human debris. If there is absolutely no doubt that someone committed acts heinous enough to be put to death, it should be swift and final. An alternative would be a 6X6 cell of concrete; Never to leave until dead. I'm fine with that too. But let's stop giving these # heads our concern shall we.

I suppose the doctors want to get him all fixed up so they can kill him when he is better. This should cost the taxpayer a couple hundred grand. But think of the benefit to the hospitals that do the surgery and treatment.

I'll toss out a 3rd option. I'm a firm believer in mob rule, throw him onto the streets with no police protection and see what becomes of him.

Once you kill or rape someone your society protection rights by the police and state should be null and voided.

originally posted by: michaelmcclen
I'll toss out a 3rd option. I'm a firm believer in mob rule, throw him onto the streets with no police protection and see what becomes of him.

I gave you a star for participating my thread .... but I should say I totally disagree with that. Rule by mob mentality is a ticket for disaster ... IIMHO. If you said to put him in the general prison population and let them know his crimes .. that's another story all together.