This guide is maintained as a current resource for September 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Learn how the criminal courts in England and Wales handle trials with multiple defendants. This guide explains joinder, joint indictments, jury directions, severance, evidence handling, and defendants' rights in multi‑defendant criminal trials.
Criminal cases sometimes involve more than one defendant accused of related offences. When this happens, the court must carefully decide how to conduct the trial so that justice is done fairly and efficiently for all parties. Trials with multiple defendants raise particular legal and practical issues, especially where each person's involvement or level of responsibility differs. This article explains how such trials are managed in England and Wales, what procedural rules apply, how evidence and jury directions are handled, and the rights and responsibilities of defendants, legal representatives and judges.
Introduction
In the criminal courts, a trial is the process by which guilt or innocence is determined. Most serious cases in England and Wales are heard in the Crown Court before a judge and jury. When multiple defendants are charged in connection with the same set of events or a single incident, the court may decide to try them together in a joint trial. Whether to try defendants together or separately is a matter for judicial discretion, guided by legal principles designed to balance efficiency with fairness. This article explains the key issues.
What is a Joint Trial?
A joint trial is when two or more defendants are tried in the same proceedings for one or more offences. Judges permit joint trials when the facts and evidence overlap significantly between defendants and it would be practical and economical to hear the matters together. This is sometimes called joinder of defendants and counts. The legal basis for joinder is that offences can be tried together if they are founded on the same facts, part of a series of similar offences, or sufficiently linked in time, place or circumstance.
In practice, this means a single indictment can list multiple counts against multiple defendants, and they will be tried before the same judge and jury rather than in separate trials. Trial judges and prosecutors usually prefer joint trials where appropriate to avoid duplicating evidence and witness testimony.
When Are Joint Trials Appropriate?
The court considers several factors when deciding whether multiple defendants should be tried together:
1. Commonality of Facts and Evidence
A joint trial is more likely where each defendant's alleged offence arises from the same incident or series of connected events, and the evidence against them is interlinked. In such cases, it is efficient to present shared evidence only once to the jury.
2. Complexity and Number of Defendants
If the case is highly complex or involves many defendants, the judge may consider whether a joint trial would overwhelm the jury or risk confusion. In some circumstances, the prosecution may elect to reduce the number of defendants, or the judge may order separate trials for some individuals.
3. Prejudice and Fairness
The central consideration is whether a joint trial would be unfair to any defendant. If evidence admissible against one defendant would unduly prejudice another, or if co‑accused will present conflicting defences that cannot fairly be considered together, the judge may order severance (a split into separate trials).
4. Practical Considerations
Practical logistics such as courtroom space, jury management and the rights of each defendant to be present and represented are also factors. Trials with many defendants may require accommodation planning, including separate docks and technology for video links where necessary.
What Happens During a Joint Trial?
In a joint trial, the normal stages of a criminal trial apply-arraignment, evidence presentation, submissions and verdict-but with additional layers of management to protect fairness.
1. Jury Directions
In multi‑defendant trials, the judge will give structured directions to the jury. These directions explain how to consider the evidence against each defendant separately. The jury may be told that they can convict some defendants and acquit others, and how to approach evidence that applies only to specific individuals.
2. Evidence and Confessions
Evidence that is strictly relevant to one defendant but not to another can still be admitted. Judges manage this carefully, with clear instructions to the jury about how it should consider that evidence in relation to each defendant. A recent case from the Court of Appeal confirms there is no general discretion to exclude evidence strictly relevant to one defendant merely because it may prejudice another; instead, careful directions are essential.
3. Separate Defences
Each defendant has the right to their own defence and legal representation. Co‑defendants may present different versions of events or assert defences that do not align-sometimes referred to as “cut‑throat” defences. Where this occurs, the judge must consider whether fairness requires separate trials or tailored jury instructions.
Severance: When Joint Trials Are Split
If continuing with a joint trial would be unfair, a defendant, the prosecution, or the judge may apply for severance, meaning separate trials for some defendants. Common reasons include:
- Fundamental conflicts between co‑defendants' cases.
- Evidence admissible against one defendant but prejudicial to others.
- Significant differences in the strength or type of evidence.
Severance aims to protect the right to a fair trial while balancing the need to avoid unnecessary duplication.
Managing Logistics and Fairness
Joint trials raise logistical challenges beyond legal principles:
- Courtroom Resources: More defendants require larger secure docks and potentially separate rooms for legal teams to meet privately with clients.
- Witness Attendance: Witnesses may need to give evidence once rather than in multiple trials, reducing inconvenience and delay.
- Jury Understanding: The judge plays a key role in ensuring the jury understands how to consider separate charges and parties.
The ability to accommodate defendants by video link for parts of the trial where physical presence is not essential has also been used in large multi‑defendant cases, helping manage space and health considerations.
Rights and Responsibilities of Defendants
Every defendant in a joint trial has:
- The right to be present during proceedings.
- The right to separate legal representation.
- The right to have evidence and arguments presented on their behalf.
- The right to receive clear jury directions tailored to their situation.
If a defendant feels they have been unfairly prejudiced by a joint trial arrangement, this can be raised during the trial or on appeal.
Common Questions About Joint Trials
Can more than two defendants be tried together?
Yes. There is no fixed limit; as long as the statutory and procedural requirements for joinder are met, multiple defendants can be tried in the same proceedings.
Does a joint trial mean the same evidence applies to all defendants?
Not necessarily. The prosecution must show how evidence applies to each defendant, and the judge directs the jury on how to consider that evidence distinctly for each individual.
Is separate legal representation required?
Each defendant has the right to their own legal representation. In some cases, however, the same firm may represent multiple defendants if there is no conflict of interest.
Key Takeaways
Trials involving multiple defendants are a recognised feature of the criminal justice system in England and Wales. The courts use joinder principles to decide when defendants should be tried together, balancing efficiency with fairness. In joint trials:
- All defendants are arraigned and tried before the same judge and jury.
- The judge gives careful jury directions to ensure each defendant's case is considered separately.
- Severance may be ordered if a joint trial would be unfair.
- Evidence and jury instructions are managed to avoid prejudice.
This approach allows the criminal justice system to resolve interlinked cases efficiently while upholding defendants' rights to a fair trial.
