The evidence against the men comprised the videotape and their own statements. When questioned by the police, the men were so confident that their activities were lawful (because they had consented to them) that they freely admitted to taking part in the activities on the video. Without these statements and the videotape, the police would have had no evidence to present against the men and would have found it impossible to bring any prosecutions.

For the most part, the men were convicted of the standard offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Their defence, that they had all consented to the activities, was denied. Some of the defendants appealed their convictions both to the Court of Appeal and Law Lords in UK and to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, but their convictions were upheld.