The presence of Peyronie's disease can serve as a potential defence against an accusation of rape. However, it can also facilitate an act of sexual intercourse establishing commission of a rape where it does not act as a defence. We describe two cases of Peyronie's disease where two defendants charged with rape pleaded not guilty on the ground of the presence of Peyronie's disease and they argued that they could not have committed the acts because of the severe bending of the penis. One of them was acquitted, whereas the other was found guilty and was imprisoned for six years for the offence of rape. The reason for the difference is development of the condition at a particular site in the penis with different implications. In one defendant, the fibrosis developed at the ventral site producing a curvature downwards, and in the other the fibrosis developed in the dorsal aspect producing a curvature upwards, which facilitated penile penetration.