Crim Law Question - Conspiracy versus Aiding and Abetting?

[TimBeConfused]

Hey guys, my crim law exam is tomorrow.  I'm just trying to clear something up.  Are there situations where you can aid and abet a crime but not be liable under conspiracy?  The professor asked the question in class when we were discussing it, but we never resolved it.  Its clear that it can work the other way, but I can't think of a way that there would be aiding and abetting without an agreement to engage in a criminal enterprise as well?

Thanks for your help!

[UnbiasedObserver]

Hey guys, my crim law exam is tomorrow.  I'm just trying to clear something up.  Are there situations where you can aid and abet a crime but not be liable under conspiracy?  The professor asked the question in class when we were discussing it, but we never resolved it.  Its clear that it can work the other way, but I can't think of a way that there would be aiding and abetting without an agreement to engage in a criminal enterprise as well?

Thanks for your help!

IIRC, an accomplice must:

1) Provide Assistance
2) Intend to provide assistance
3) Possess MR for the underlying crime

A conspiracy needs:

1) An agreement;
2) Possess the MR for the underlying crime;
3) An overt act.

You can provide assistance without the other person even knowing about it, and satisfy the other elements for an accomplice, so it's possible.

[UnbiasedObserver]

I just thought about it and here's an example (and supposedly it's a real case):

A woman walks into a bar to ask for directions, or something of that nature.  2 guys won't let her leave and they do hideous acts to her, in front of everyone.

Some people cheer them on.  Encouragement in many states is providing assistance, so these people are liable. 

There was NO agreement to do the crime.  Yet they're aiding and abetting, i.e., they're accomplices.

I hope this helps at least a little!  Good luck!