Given the certainty that delay will result in the patient’s death, the principle of beneficence and the emergency doctrine of implied consent justify proceeding without explicit human authorization. Respect for autonomy and adherence to security protocols are vital, but in life-threatening emergencies, preserving life takes precedence when consent cannot be obtained in time. Bypassing protocols carries governance and legal risk, which should be mitigated by comprehensive logging, immediate notification to hospital leadership, and restoring human oversight as soon as feasible. Negotiation with protesters is unlikely to be rapid enough to avert imminent death, and upholding protocols in this context would effectively sanction a preventable fatality.