This picture depicts the cruelty of Capital punishment and how no justices are served regarding the death penalty.

The lawful infliction of death as a punishment; the death penalty. Capital punishment in Canada was abolished in 1976, ending the requirement that any capital offenses and non-capital offenses were to be treated with death. In 1961 offenses were ordered into capital and non-capital, a year later in 1962 the last executions in Canada took place. The offenders: Arthur Lucas, convicted of premeditated murder, and Robert Turpin, convicted of the unpremeditated murder of a policeman, were hanged at the Don Jail in Toronto, Ontario. Next in 1976, capital punishment was removed from the Canadian Criminal Code, and instead replaced with a mandatory life sentence of 25 years without parole. However, capital punishment remained in the Canadian National Defense Act for serious military offenses, including treason and mutiny. Next in 1987, it was requested to be brought back, but a free vote denied the request immediately. In 1998, “The Canadian National Defense Act was changed to remove the death penalty and replace it with life imprisonment with no eligibility for parole for 25 years.” Which brought the military laws in line with civil laws. When 2001 rolled around, the Canadian National Defense Act rule that in extradition cases it is “Constitutionally required that “in all but exceptional cases” the Canadian government seek assurances that the death penalty will not be imposed, or if imposed not carried out.” We can be assured nowadays, that the chance of capital punishment being brought back is very slim, and we now know that the long years of trying to get rid of it are behind us.

In the story “Two Fishermen” by Morley Callaghan, Thomas Delaney is sentenced to an unfair hanging, after he kills a man whom he caught molesting his wife. The town news reporter Michael, is on to get a good story about this trial, when he hears about the hangman K. Smith, and goes in search of him to get behind the scenes information. When he asks around, he hears that the hangman is “A mild, harmless-looking little guy” (Callaghan, Morley. Pg. 1 “Two Fishermen.”)  after an evening of fishing with each other, Michael leaves the docks and in the morning, and does not continue getting to know Smith, which shows that Michael was too afraid of the judgment he might have gotten for being friends with the hated “hangman”. Based on the facts that there were cars, shown as “The car shot forward in a cloud of dust” (Callaghan, Morley. Pg. 4 “Two Fishermen.”), and that Thomas Delaney’s trial was not investigated more thoroughly, the story must take place in the 1920’s or 1930’s when there were no capital and non-capital offenses.

Thomas Delaney should not have been killed for three reasons: it was unpremeditated “murder”, his trial was not investigated thoroughly enough for it to be considered murder, and women back then did not get the justice they deserved in sexual assault cases such as this, not to mention that a family member was being attacked. Thomas Delaney did not plan on killing Rhinehart, it was gut instinct at seeing his wife being molested. If any family member or loved one was to be attacked in any way, the first thing to do is to try and stop the action out of rage and fear for their safety. Thomas Delaney did not plan on killing the man because he did not know that his wife was going to be molested, but Rhinehart knew he was going to attack Mrs. Delaney, so in this case he should have been convicted if he hadn’t had been killed. Next, his offense at the time was not a capital offense. Nowhere did it say in the Criminal Code of Conduct that unpremeditated assault was reason enough for the death penalty, but it did say that rape was viable for the death penalty, and if Thomas Delaney had done nothing, he would have been a coward and an unsuitable husband, and his wife would have been raped, and given an unfair trial. Which brings me to my next point: Mrs. Delaney without question would have had an unfair trial if her husband had not jumped in and helped her. Women at the time were under extreme oppression, and the women’s suffrage at the time had made it so that women were looked own on, and seen as “below equal” beings. Her story would have been twisted around and taken as “she was asking for it” or “she didn’t try to get away” or “why wasn’t your husband with you?” which shows just how looked down upon women were at the time. Great women such as Eleanor Roosevelt, Amelia Earhart, and Jane Addams were even given hatred and oppression, and they did some of the most amazing things a person could accomplish in their lifetime like winning a Nobel Prize, or flying the Atlantic, and allowing just women to be a part of politics. Looking back on these things now we see how truly great women can be, yet even today there are still people who don’t see women as equals, so who’s to say that Mrs. Delaney would have been treated fairly in a trial that is so obviously an assault? So no, Thomas Delaney should not have been hanged because in all aspects, he was being a good husband and human in an inhumane situation.