The common theme of each of the symposium articles following this introductory presentation is that the effective prosecution of white collar crime requires rules and techniques that will allow the government to deal with groups of persons rather than with individual defendants. The principal rationale given for rules that establish group criminal responsibility is that with more than one actor involved in the crime, there is a greater chance that the crime and perhaps other crimes will be committed. Under the 'group danger' rationale, defendants can be joined together for trial; each defendant is responsible for crimes committed by codefendants; and evidence of one defendant's activities may be admissible to prove the guilt of another. Because of the harsh consequences of the application of the 'group danger' rationale, although it is justified in some circumstances, weak definitions of a conspiracy proposed in the Model Penal Code and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) have been criticized. New remedies have also been proposed for dealing with white collar crime, notably the RICO sanction of mandatory forfeiture of ill-gotten gain to the Government. The application of this concept is being questioned on a number of legal grounds. One of the symposium papers following this article deals with another legal issue pertinent to the prosecution of white collar crime, namely, the relationship of the conspiracy doctrine to the corporate defendant. Particular issues examined are whether two corporations possess the legal capacity to conspire with one another through a single agent who acts on behalf of both corporation entities and whether acquittal of the corporate agents through whom the corporation is alleged to have conspired requires acquittal of the corporate entity itself. Thirty-four footnotes are provided.