Criminal Law Case Study: Joffrey

This essay presents a legal argument defending Joffrey Baratheon against a manslaughter charge in an Irish court. The case centers on the death of his mother, Cersei, who refused care despite Joffrey's attempts to provide it. The essay analyzes the relevant Irish law on homicide and manslaughter by gross negligence, focusing on the four-stage test established in R v Adomako (1994). It argues that Joffrey's actions, while potentially morally questionable, did not meet the legal threshold for gross negligence manslaughter. The essay contends that Cersei's refusal of care and subsequent complications, including pneumonia, were the substantial causes of her death, not Joffrey's omissions. The conclusion advocates for a retrial, emphasizing the lack of evidence demonstrating Joffrey's actions as a substantial cause of death and the absence of intent to cause harm.

CRIMINAL LAW
Arguing for the accused ( Joffrey )
Student
[Pick the date]

Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................2
Issues in the case.........................................................................................................................................2
The relevant law..........................................................................................................................................4
Application of the law to the relevant facts................................................................................................6
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................8
Bibliography................................................................................................................................................9

Introduction
The assignment aims to prepare a legal submission on behalf of the accused in the following
case. The person has been accused of manslaughter in the case. Manslaughter is a legal term
which is used for homicide and it is a crime that relates to killing a person but without malice
aforethought and this crime is less culpable than murder1. It is different from killing as in
manslaughter, there is no prior intention of the criminal to kill the person and he does not create
a deadly situation intentionally2. This assignment is prepared in consideration of the criminal law
applicable in Ireland.
Issues in the case
The case is related to a person named Joffrey Baratheon who has been convicted of Cersei
Baratheon’s (his mother) manslaughter. Since Cersei was old, infirm and was suffering from
advanced primary progressive multiple sclerosis, so Joffrey Baratheon’s wife Margaery
Baratheon invited her to live with them and she took her care as she was a qualified nurse. But,
Cersei would refuse food and drink, would refuse to allow her to be cleaned and often times
would refuse her prescribed medication. Margaery was at her wit’s end and implored Joffrey
to try to assist his mother. Initially, Joffrey was reluctant as she did not like his mother much,
but later he realized his moral duty as a son and attempted to feed and clean her and give her
medication. But, Cersei put a condition on him that she will eat and drink only when Joffrey
will get rid of his wife. This enraged Joffrey and he left her to rot. When Cersei’s brother
arrived to see her, he found her condition very bad and hospitalized her. Following admission,
Cersei initially made progress in response to treatment, but unfortunately while in hospital she
developed pneumonia and later Cersei Baratheon died.
Now, the issues that the jury has raised are that the legal cause of death of Cersei Baratheon was
Joffrey Baratheon because he failed to perform his moral duty as a son. He neglected the
condition of his mother which caused her death. Thus, Joffrey Baratheon has been found guilty.
1 Roger Kirby, Ian Franklin and Jenny Vaughan, 'Manslaughter And Preventable Harm' (2015) 6 Trends in Urology &
Men's Health.
2 'A New Test For Involuntary Manslaughter In California: Criminal Law. Homicide. Manslaughter. Degree Of
Negligence Required For Involuntary Manslaughter' (1956) 8 Stanford Law Review.

Now, the aim is to save Joffrey Baratheon from conviction by ordering a re-trail (which has been
denied to him) on the ground that the acts or omissions of the accused were not a substantial
cause of the death of Cersei Baratheon.

The relevant law
Law of homicide in Ireland
The law which is applicable here is the ‘law of homicide in Ireland’. This law consists of two
parts, one consists of the provisions, rules, punishments for the murder and the other one talks
about the manslaughter3. Within the law related to manslaughter, there is a voluntary and an
involuntary manslaughter. In the voluntary manslaughter, the following categories of the cases
apply4:
 The accused acted under provocation when the deceased was killed.
 The accused inflicts excessive force against the deceased person in self-defense.
 Under the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, if the accused pleads successfully for the
diminished responsibility as an answer to a charge of murder.
In the involuntary manslaughter, the following categories of the cases apply5:
 When the accused kills another person by a dangerous and unlawful act i.e. he performs a
criminal offence and poses a risk of bodily harm to the other person, then in this case, the
tort does not suffice and the level of danger is judged in an objective manner.
 The person is accused of manslaughter by gross negligence that involves a high risk of
the substantial personal injury due to the negligent act or omission of the accused. In
Lipman, R v [1969] CA6, D and V took drugs and D thought that snakes were attacking
him, so to kill them, he crammed eight inches to sheet down the throat of V and he was
held guilty of manslaughter because he was negligent.
Law related to manslaughter by gross negligence
Talking about the manslaughter by gross negligence, the accused faces the conviction when the
prosecution is able to successfully prove that the accused was negligent by the ordinary
3 'Criminal Law. Involuntary Manslaughter. Causal Connection Between The Unlawful Quality Of The Act And The
Homicide' (1928) 41 Harvard Law Review.
4 Stephen P. Garvey, 'What's Wrong With Involuntary Manslaughter?' SSRN Electronic Journal.
5 Sean E Quinn, Criminal Law In Ireland (1st edn, Irish Law Pub 1993).
6 'Cases - Murder - Mens Rea' (Sixthformlaw.info, 2017)
<http://sixthformlaw.info/02_cases/mod3a/cases_32_murder_mens.htm> accessed 6 January 2017.

standards, due to that negligence, the victim dies, the degree of negligence was very high and it
also involved a very high level of risk to the person and it was likely that it will cause substantial
personal injury to that person7.
In the present law related to manslaughter by gross negligence in Ireland, the mental element
that is necessary for this crime is that the accused should have an intention to do the act i.e. he
should have an intention to kill the person8. Also, in cases of the special duty to act, if the
accused omitted something which could have prevented the death of the deceased, then it was an
important element in this law. The law says that the accused should not be held responsible for
manslaughter unless he had in his mind, the intention or the idea to cause the bodily harm to the
person9.
In R v Adomako (1994)10, the four stage test was identified to test the gross negligence
manslaughter. These stages are:
1. There must be an existence of a duty of care by the accused to the deceased.
2. The breach of the duty should have happened.
3. The results of that breach should be a cause that significantly contributes to the death of
the victim.
4. The characteristic of the breach must be gross negligence, and therefore it will be
considered as a crime.
7 John G Thompson, The Law Of Criminal Procedure In Ireland.
8 P. Balen, 'Gross Negligence Manslaughter: Wayne Jowett (Deceased)' (2004) 10 Clinical Risk.
9 Claudia Carr and Maureen Johnson, Beginning Criminal Law (1st edn, Taylor and Francis 2013).
10 [1995] 1 AC 171.

Application of the law to the relevant facts
In the present case, the accused Joffrey Baratheon is blamed for manslaughter of his mother
Cersei Baratheon. Therefore, the Law of homicide applies here. The jury has raised the point that
the legal cause of death of Cersei Baratheon was Joffrey Baratheon because he failed to perform
his moral duty as a son. He neglected the condition of his mother which caused her death. This
means that the Law related to manslaughter by gross negligence applies here because any person
is accused of manslaughter by gross negligence when there is involvement of the substantial
personal injury due to the negligent act or omission of the accused.
To prove that Joffrey Baratheon is guilty, there must be presence of the ‘negligent conduct’ or he
must have ‘omitted’ something that caused the death of his mother.
The word ‘negligently’ in this case talks about the failure to examine the situation before
embarking on a course of action. It also means that the accused did not pay proper attention
while acting on an issue thus; he did not realize that what could be the potential harmful causes
because of the behavior that he showed. Therefore, being negligent simply means that the
accused failed to take the required precautions against the possible harm as he could not examine
the situation carefully. But, Joffrey Baratheon was not negligent as he allowed his wife to
take care of his mother when she was ill, he even allowed her to stay in the house because
her condition was bad. She was arranged for medications, food and proper diet. Therefore,
there is no evidence of ‘negligent behavior or act in this. Joffrey Baratheon paid proper
attention while acting on an issue of his mother’s poor health and he realized that it was his
moral duty as a son and attempted to feed and clean her and give her medication. Hence, he
cannot be accused of acting negligently in response to Cersei Baratheon’s poor medical
condition.
Then, the accused was under a positive duty to act because he was related to the deceased as a
family member. So, it was his duty to take care of the deceased. Joffrey Baratheon has
successfully performed his duty to act in response to his mother’s condition. He acted positively
and obliged his duty by attempting to feed his mother, cleaning her, giving her the
medications till the time his mother enraged him by putting an unreasonable demand.

In The People (DPP) v O’Donoghue11, the danger of the act was not defined by the jury.
In this case too, the enraged accused cannot be held responsible for putting the deceased
in danger.
The level of risk that was involved when Joffrey Baratheon refused to help her mother was
low as he was not aware that her condition will become so bad. His mother intentionally
did not allow anyone to take care of her or clean her. The risk of death involved was also not
high because in worst condition, she could have got the infection, but she could not have died. In
The People (AG) v Dunleavy12, the taxi driver was accused of killing a cyclist as he drove his car
on the wrong side of the street which hit a cyclist. But it was held that the prosecution needs to
prove that the negligence that he showed was of high degree and there was a high level of risk
involved with that.
But, in Mitchell, R v [1983] CA13, a scuffle happened at the post office where one person pushed
another and the elderly lady got hurt in this. The lady died due to the injuries that she got. The
accused was held guilty of manslaughter. This case can go against Joffrey because when he
stopped taking care of her mother, she developed diseases and dies later. But, the intention of
Joffrey was not to do this which was unlike the intention of the accused in this case. So, he can
be saved on that ground.
In the present law related to manslaughter by gross negligence in Ireland, the mental element that
is necessary for this crime is that the accused should have an intention to do the act i.e. he should
have an intention to kill the person. Here, Joffrey Baratheon did not have the intention to kill
her. His intention was to help her mother in eating, drinking properly and get well soon by
giving her proper medications. Even when he was enraged, he just told her that she is allowed
to get rot if she was not allowing anyone to touch her; she did not wish to take medicines or eat.
He did not say her to “die”. The law says that the accused should not be held responsible for
manslaughter unless he had in his mind, the intention or the idea to cause the bodily harm to the
person.
11 [2006] IECCA 134
12 The People (AG) v Dunleavy [1948] IR 95.
13 'Cases - Murder - Mens Rea' (Sixthformlaw.info, 2017)
<http://sixthformlaw.info/02_cases/mod3a/cases_32_murder_mens.htm> accessed 6 January 2017.

Finally, when she was admitted in the hospital, Cersei initially made progress in response to
treatment, but unfortunately while in hospital she developed pneumonia and later Cersei
Baratheon died. This makes it very clear that the acts or omissions of the accused were not a
substantial cause of the death of Cersei Baratheon. The acts of the accused were directed
towards the betterment of her mother but she willingly refused to take the medicines. She
died because of her unreasonable demand that she had put on the accused and because of
the fact that she was not allowing anyone to take care of her and clean her.

Conclusion
From the above arguments, it can be concluded that the four stage test of gross negligence fails
to apply here. The duty of care by the accused to the deceased existed but it was fulfilled by the
accused. He did not make the breach of that duty. The cause of death was her unreasonable
demand that she had put on the accused and because of the fact that she was not allowing anyone
to take care of her and clean her. Thus, the jury should not accuse Joffrey Baratheon of
manslaughter in this case and should allow him to order a re-trail.

Bibliography
'A New Test For Involuntary Manslaughter In California: Criminal Law. Homicide.
Manslaughter. Degree Of Negligence Required For Involuntary Manslaughter' (1956) 8 Stanford
Law Review
Balen P, 'Gross Negligence Manslaughter: Wayne Jowett (Deceased)' (2004) 10 Clinical Risk
Carr C and Johnson M, Beginning Criminal Law (1st edn, Taylor and Francis 2013)
'Criminal Law. Involuntary Manslaughter. Causal Connection Between The Unlawful Quality Of
The Act And The Homicide' (1928) 41 Harvard Law Review
'Cases - Murder - Mens Rea' (Sixthformlaw.info, 2017)
<http://sixthformlaw.info/02_cases/mod3a/cases_32_murder_mens.htm> accessed 6 January
2017
Garvey S, 'What's Wrong With Involuntary Manslaughter?' SSRN Electronic Journal
Kirby R, Franklin I and Vaughan J, 'Manslaughter And Preventable Harm' (2015) 6 Trends in
Urology & Men's Health
Quinn S, Criminal Law In Ireland (1st edn, Irish Law Pub 1993)
Thompson J, The Law Of Criminal Procedure In Ireland