Life without parole in Wisconsin, like life without parole in many other states, has proven to be a cruel joke. It's a punishment which, for the longest time, was unknown in Wisconsin until the late '80s. In 1982, the Dane County Board of Sentencing found that life without parole is cruel and unusual punishment.
The court's ruling stated, "In order to satisfy that 'cruel and unusual punishment' canon, the state must demonstrate that the punishment denies the convicted individual 'the basic right of personal security and physical integrity.'"
In the state of Wisconsin, the decision has led to more prisoners serving life without parole and higher rates of recidivism. It was a ruling which forced the state to look at the issue. The result of that change is that prisoners are now serving life without parole which, by Wisconsin law and constitution, is not life without parole.
"In order to satisfy that 'cruel and unusual punishment' canon, the state must demonstrate that the punishment denies the convicted individual the basic right of personal security and physical integrity." - Dane County Circuit Ct. of Sess. Ch. 1079 (1982).
However, the "basic right of personal security" doesn't include a right to die in peace. A convicted individual's body may be violated without any injury to the mind. That is cruel (and unusual) and unusual punishment. To violate the body without any injury to the mind is not cruel (except in the mind of the offender). In the case of inmate rights in Wisconsin, as elsewhere, the punishment must meet the test of cruelty and unusualness.
In the state of Wisconsin, however, a life term with no possibility of parole has been found to be cruel (except in the mind of the offender) and unusual. In fact, as early as 1979, the Wisconsin Criminal Sentencing Review Commission has identified a lack of opportunity for release as "cruel and unusual." And in 2002, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections issued an advisory stating that "the lack of opportunity for release is both unusual and cruel in the sense that the lack of opportunity for release may cause suffering not typically associated with punishment."
Wisconsin courts have found that inmates have legal rights to have a parole hearing. And the Wisconsin Courts have stated that prisoners have a right to a hearing in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, even though they are on parole. Thus, prisoners still have a right to an appeal. There is no question that life without parole violates a person's basic constitutional rights. And, Wisconsin is a different country than 1973, when the Eighth Amendment was adopted. And today, a person's basic rights are not necessarily the same as those in 1973. There has been a constant evolution of rights, and that evolution continues today.
The evolution of rights is not simply that of the Court of Human Rights, but a more sophisticated and informed public, with more knowledge and better research, has evolved that has influenced the Court on human rights.
That is what has led to an evolution of rights, not a creation of rights as was often claimed for centuries by people who did not want to go through that evolution.
In fact, many in the Human Rights movement that have worked to realize an evolution of rights believe that an originalist view is the most progressive way to realize rights.
That is why the Human Rights group of prisoners have formed a movement of people who are on the front lines of the rights movement.
The court's ruling stated, "In order to satisfy that 'cruel and unusual punishment' canon, the state must demonstrate that the punishment denies the convicted individual 'the basic right of personal security and physical integrity.'"
In the state of Wisconsin, the decision has led to more prisoners serving life without parole and higher rates of recidivism. It was a ruling which forced the state to look at the issue. The result of that change is that prisoners are now serving life without parole which, by Wisconsin law and constitution, is not life without parole.
"In order to satisfy that 'cruel and unusual punishment' canon, the state must demonstrate that the punishment denies the convicted individual the basic right of personal security and physical integrity." - Dane County Circuit Ct. of Sess. Ch. 1079 (1982).
However, the "basic right of personal security" doesn't include a right to die in peace. A convicted individual's body may be violated without any injury to the mind. That is cruel (and unusual) and unusual punishment. To violate the body without any injury to the mind is not cruel (except in the mind of the offender). In the case of inmate rights in Wisconsin, as elsewhere, the punishment must meet the test of cruelty and unusualness.
In the state of Wisconsin, however, a life term with no possibility of parole has been found to be cruel (except in the mind of the offender) and unusual. In fact, as early as 1979, the Wisconsin Criminal Sentencing Review Commission has identified a lack of opportunity for release as "cruel and unusual." And in 2002, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections issued an advisory stating that "the lack of opportunity for release is both unusual and cruel in the sense that the lack of opportunity for release may cause suffering not typically associated with punishment."
Wisconsin courts have found that inmates have legal rights to have a parole hearing. And the Wisconsin Courts have stated that prisoners have a right to a hearing in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, even though they are on parole. Thus, prisoners still have a right to an appeal. There is no question that life without parole violates a person's basic constitutional rights. And, Wisconsin is a different country than 1973, when the Eighth Amendment was adopted. And today, a person's basic rights are not necessarily the same as those in 1973. There has been a constant evolution of rights, and that evolution continues today.
The evolution of rights is not simply that of the Court of Human Rights, but a more sophisticated and informed public, with more knowledge and better research, has evolved that has influenced the Court on human rights.
That is what has led to an evolution of rights, not a creation of rights as was often claimed for centuries by people who did not want to go through that evolution.
In fact, many in the Human Rights movement that have worked to realize an evolution of rights believe that an originalist view is the most progressive way to realize rights.
That is why the Human Rights group of prisoners have formed a movement of people who are on the front lines of the rights movement.