Here's your #2:
"2. There was no intent to kill the person. (They really hate this option because it totally contradicts their premise that euthanasia is ALWAYS "humane.")"
Your #2 clearly says the intent was euthanasia. Pau's intent was simply sedation, which was justifiable. You are making an unwarranted accusation, that is not supported by facts.
No, the parentheses indicate the dilemma this places the culture of death apologists in.
Let me ask you a VERY SIMPLE question that can be answered with a simple YES or NO:
Do you believe that euthanasia of human beings should be permitted under any circumstances?