連続レイプ犯 (renzoku reipu-han)

I never say "連続強姦犯", and "連続婦女暴行犯" sounds a bit old to me.

In Google, "連続レイプ犯" is used four times as often as "連続婦女暴行犯" is (233 vs. 86). Without having "連続", "レイプ犯" is used 16 times as often (3,710 vs. 236).

"連続レイプ犯" reminds me of this shocking news among recent ones in Japan, which is sited below. I was more surprised when I heard that my old classmate was working with him!


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-09-14 03:34:30 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Garbled part above:

I never say ¥"連続強姦犯¥", and ¥"連続婦女暴¥行犯¥" sounds a bit old to me.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-09-14 03:38:56 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

For the sentence provided by the asker:

「逮捕された男は連続レイプ犯の可能¥性がある」

I regard ¥"could¥" as a past subjunctive. In case this is a past event, the past tense in ¥"逮捕された¥" would still express that it was past.