Death row inmate files federal lawsuit following botched execution

By Lee Peck

Click here for updates on this story

    MOBILE, Alabama (WALA) — His lawyers are calling him “The only living execution survivor in the United States.” Death row inmate Alan Miller — was set to be executed September 22nd for killing three people in a workplace shooting spree in 1999.

With time running out — Miller’s execution by lethal injection was called off at 11:30 p.m. after Holman Prison officials were unable to find access to his veins — but it’s not for lack of trying.

In a newly filed lawsuit — Miller says he was poked and prodded for 90 minutes in what’s being described as a “botched” execution.

In the lawsuit — Miller’s attorney’s claim medical professionals have always had difficulty accessing Miller’s veins — which is why he elected death by nitrogen hypoxia — a method the state originally said could be available for use, but last Thursday — Alabama Corrections Commissioner Jon Hamm said they could not carry out an execution by nitrogen hypoxia — and was prepared to use lethal injection. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately clearing the way for the execution.

In his lawsuit — Miller says he was tortured as Holman Prison staff repeatedly tried to find access to his veins — first in his arms, then his hands. It goes on to say they even eventually tried his right foot — saying as they inserted the needle it felt like “he had been electrocuted, and his entire body shook in the restraints” — believing they hit a nerve.

Eventually going back to his arms — before the unidentified men began “slapping the skin on his neck… Mr. Miller physically recoiled out of intense fear of the men trying to insert a needle in his neck.”

The state’s request for another execution date — has Miller’s attorney’s asking the judge to ban the State from executing him by any method other than — nitrogen hypoxia. Otherwise, Miller’s attorney’s claim it gives the state complete freedom to stab Miller with needles as many times as they can before the clock strikes midnight.

Meanwhile, the State has until October 11th to respond — why Miller’s motion should not be granted.

Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff Alan Miller’s Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint. Upon consideration of the motion the State has to respond in writing why the Plaintiff’s motion should not be granted.

Please note: This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.