Who Dunnit? Gangs, Joint Enterprise, Bad Character and Duress

In cases where it is alleged that an offence is perpetrated by a gang, but where there is no definitive, eye-witness evidence of involvement, the prosecution’s case often rests upon the presumption that a person, by dint of their prior association with ‘known gang members’, and hence their understanding of and commitment to the aims, purposes and modus operandi of the gang, is engaged in a ‘joint enterprise ’ to perpetrate that offence. The charge of joint enterprise is often supported by a submission of evidence of the defendant’s ‘previous bad character’. However, because of the lack of any generally agreed definition of gang involvement, the complex patterns of association in gang-affected neighbourhoods, the sometimes questionable relevance of the evidence deployed to support a submission of previous ‘bad character ’ and the fact that the alleged perpetrators are not infrequently subject to some degree of implicit or explicit coercion or duress, establishing the defendant’s actual culpability is fraught with difficulty and there is, therefore an ever-present danger of injustice. In this article I explore the patterns of association between young people in gang affected neighbourhoods and the ways in which the law and policing practice understands, and sometimes misunderstands these relationships. I then suggest a set of definitions which could help to clarify the actual nature and degree of an individual’s association with a youth gang