Ronald Nussle’s case against the Cheshire Correctional Institution began with the “unjustified beating”, as proclaimed by Nussell, that he received from the corrections officers in his unit. This vicious assault violated Nussle’s freedom from cruel and unusual punishment as outlined in the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Corrections officers are generally not permitted to use excessive force against inmates unless there is an attempt at escape or a severe breach in normal prison operations. Nevertheless, inmate abuse by corrections officers is not an uncommon occurrence within the United States prison systems. Misconduct and excessive use of force when handling inmates within correctional facilities often goes unreported. In fact, …show more content…
The acclaimed journalist provided readers with his first-hand account of the day to day happenings that transpire inside the penal system from a correctional officer’s point of view. Conover wrote the following: “The bottom line was that you could ‘lay hands on or strike an inmate’ if necessary for self defense, to prevent injury to a person or to property, to quell a disturbance, to enforce compliance with a lawful direction, or to prevent an escape” (Conover, 2000). The second-to-last requirement listed by Conover is one of the most significant pieces of information given to newly appointed officers. It can also be the most dangerous if interpreted too literally and practiced without proper discretion. Conover’s prison chief and senior officers essentially had the perception of “absolute authority” ingrained within them. Prison staff in this facility believed that they had the power to “lay hands on or strike an inmate in order to enforce compliance with a lawful discretion” (Conover, 2000). In reality, this would mean that if an inmate didn’t do what a guard wanted in the manner in which he or she wanted the task to be executed, that guard now had the authority to use physical force on the noncompliant