Multiple perpetrator rape in the courtroom

Criminal justice system responses to rape are multiple and connected by intricate feedback loops. This complexity is particularly evident during a trial, and is likely to be heightened when a rape case involves multiple perpetrators (Lees, 2002). It is also likely that such cases will pose additional challenges for research and practice, compared to those involving single perpetrators. Multiple Perpetrator Rape (MPR) has been receiving increasing research attention in recent years, but this has mainly focused on describing the offence and beginning to understand offender motivations and victim experiences (e.g. Franklin, 2004; Horvath & Kelly, 2009; Ullman, 1999; Woodhams, Cooke, Harkins & da Silva, 2012). However, very little is known about the way in which such cases are handled by the courts. The study reported here focuses on understanding how already complicated processes for prosecuting rape are adapted or not for MPR cases. A sample of 33 MPR cases that were prosecuted in England and Wales between 2006 and 2011 were identified from publically available records including Proquest, West law and Lexus library. Content analysis was used to identify variation in the offences the accused were charged with, the sentences given, and a range of other features of the cases. The final element of the exploratory study was to examine how judges responded to presiding over MPR trials. Discussion focuses on the implications of the findings for police and prosecutors dealing with these offences and also the potential impact upon complainants in such cases.