I need some opinions. I have a situation where the account involved in the suspicious activity is a joint account. The primary is the one coming to the branch and conducting the suspicious activities (structuring). I feel that because the joint owner has the ability to reap the benefits of the activity that they should be included as a suspect as well especially seeing as they are the spouse. Should I include the joint owner as a suspect?

If they are not the individual actually conducting the transactions, I generally do not include them as a suspect. If I feel the need to mention the spouse I usually do that in the narrative, and include all of their identifying information. You may want to call FinCEN's helpdesk and get their opinion and document what you were told.

I also focus on the person that is doing the suspicious activity and as the suspect and in the narrative I mention that it is a joint account with Jane Doe.

^What she said.

Opposite for me.
On a Joint account I always put both parties as suspects.
The Narrative tells the story of who did the transaction.

As you note, you're seeking opinions; there is no official guidance.

Prior thread

This is a case by case decision for me. If I feel that the spouse is involved then I include as suspect, if not then I include them in the narrative as part of a description of an account. I feel that way any person reviewing the form that decides to investigate will not be surprised to see a joint owner.