Joint Enterprise laws and their disproportionate impact on children over time

5th May 2026

Joint Enterprise: A view over time, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies and APPEAL, April 2026

The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies and APPEAL recently published a report analysing trends in multi-defendant homicide prosecutions in England & Wales from 2005 to 2024, based on Home Office and Crown Prosecution Service data (the “Report”)[1]. The Report provides comprehensive longitudinal evidence on how joint enterprise laws operate in practice, including findings on the disproportionate impact on children in the justice system (particularly those in Black, Brown and Racialised communities).

Details

The Report identifies that multi-defendant homicide prosecutions have grown over time, with three or more defendants now charged in nearly 10 per cent of homicide cases (compared with 3 per cent in the early 1980s)[2]. As it relates to children:

  • 30 per cent of children aged 10–13 convicted of homicide over the last two decades were convicted as part of a group of four or more defendants (compared with less than 10 per cent of adults aged over 25)[3];
  • over half of children under 16 convicted of murder between 2010 and 2024 were recorded as secondary suspects (the highest proportion of any age group)[4];
  • the average minimum term for life sentences for under-18s has risen from 7 years (in 2002) to 15 years (in 2021), with at least 14 children receiving minimum terms of 15 years or more in 2021 alone[5];
  • secondary parties remain subject to the same mandatory minimum terms as those who directly carried out the offence (in other words, secondary status is not a mitigating factor in sentencing)[6];
  • Black people convicted of homicide are three times more likely than white people to be convicted in a group case of four or more defendants[7] (and the Report highlights that this ethnic disproportionality is caused by ‘gang’ narratives and racialised assumptions in prosecutorial decision-making)[8]; and
  • the 2016 Supreme Court judgment in R v Jogee[9] has not led to a sustained reduction in secondary suspect prosecutions[10].

Commentary

Based on the data analysed in the Report, children in the youth justice system in England and Wales are more likely to be drawn into multi-defendant homicide prosecutions as secondary parties than adults, and they face (increasingly) severe sentencing consequences when convicted. Practitioners should be alive to this, as well as the risk of “youth gang violence” narratives in prosecutions, particularly when working with Black, Brown and Racialised children.

Practitioners should also be aware of the following reforms recommended by the Report:

  1. narrow the scope of complicity laws to require a material contribution to an offence[11];
  2. introduce mandatory pre-charge reviews (to articulate each defendant's individual conduct, role, and intent)[12]; and
  3. create a separate sentencing framework recognising secondary status as a formal mitigating factor[13],

as joint enterprise continues to feature across forums for reform, including the Law Commission Homicide Review and the Westminster Commission on Joint Enterprise[14]. For further information, please see our legal guides on Fighting Racial Injustice which are designed to equip practitioners with knowledge and strategies for identifying and challenging racism facing Black, Brown and Racialised children and young adults in the criminal justice system. 

 

Footnotes

  1. Section 1 (About this report: Data and approach) - the Report
  2. Section 3 (Multi-defendant cases in the new millennium) – the Report
  3. Section 4 (Sentence inflation and convictions of young people; Children’s homicide convictions) – the Report
  4. Section 4 (Sentence inflation and convictions of young people; Children’s homicide convictions) – the Report
  5. Section 4 (Sentence inflation and convictions of young people; Children’s homicide convictions) – the Report
  6. Section 4 (Sentence inflation and convictions of young people; Sentence inflation) – the Report
  7. Section 4 (Ethnic disproportionality in multi-defendant convictions) – the Report
  8. Section 4 (Sentence inflation and convictions of young people; Sentence inflation) – the Report
  9. R v. Jogee (Ameen Hassan) [2016] UKSC 8 – key outcome of this case is that a secondary party must have assisted or encouraged a crime in order to be liable for it, and had to intend or assist to encourage it. The law previously allowed secondary parties to be liable for a second crime arising in the course of a first by foreseeing it might happen
  10. Section 6 (Supreme Court judgement; no sustained impact)
  11. Section 7 (Conclusions and looking forward; Narrowing the scope of the law)
  12. Section 7 (Conclusions and looking forward; Prosecution oversight and accountability)
  13. Section 7 (Conclusions and looking forward; Proportionate sentencing)
  14. Section 7 (Conclusions and looking forward; Narrowing the scope of the law)