6-years, 1-month, 15-days into Samantha’s abduction (Part 2)

abducted Christmas, child abduction, left behind parent, parental abduction, parental alienation, parental child abduction playbook, parental kidnapping, Adriana Coronel Tenorio, Adriana Howitt Coronel, Ari Coronel, Ari Coronel Tenorio, Ari Howitt, Ari Howitt Coronel, Commercial Hotel, complicity, Daniel Duncan Howitt, Danny Howitt, DJO Global, Donjoy, Elizabeth Farquhar Duncan, Isaias Palomeque, Isaias Palomeque Vergara, Isaias Uzziel Palomeque, Kenneth Duncan, Merry Christmas, Mexico, Mirriam-Webster, Shona Howitt, Shona Howitt-Sinclair, Shona Sinclair, UK. California, US Senate

Thursday, December 25, 2014: People I have never met before continue to call me out of the blue and offer whatever assistance they can to help the situation on both sides of the border. Even a handful of Adriana Coronel Tenorio’s (AKA Adriana Howitt Coronel, Ari Coronel, Ari Coronel Tenorio, Ari Howitt, Ari Howitt Coronel) friends that bailed on her have reached out to help in the effort. People in the UK, same thing. Members of the California and United States Senate, the Mexican court systems and so on.

Then there are people like Danny Howitt (AKA Daniel Duncan Howitt, Elizabeth Farquhar Duncan, Kenneth Duncan), Shona Howitt-Sinclair (AKA Shona Howitt, Shona Sinclair, Owner of the Commercial Hotel in Cuminestown, Scotland), Isaias Palomeque (AKA Isaias Uzziel Palomeque, Isaias Palomeque Vergara, Project Manager at DJO Global) and the entire Coronel-Tenorio family. Since August 6th, Danny and Shona have been given all the information to actually make more informed decisions to help put an end to this and they have chosen to do nothing. So be it. Then there is Palomeque, home-wrecking extraordinaire. Like I said a few days ago, you really need to work hard to compile the resume of absolute douchebaggery like he has.

Which leads me into the Mirriam-Webster definition of complicity. An individual is complicit in a crime if he is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite potentially being able to stop it from happening, either directly or by contacting the authorities. The offender is a de facto accessory to the crime, rather than an innocent bystander.

Complicity is a doctrine that operates to hold persons criminally responsible for the acts of others. Complicity encompasses accessorial and conspiratorial liability. Accessorial liability is frequently referred to as accomplice liability.

An accomplice is a person who helps another person commit a crime. Accomplice liability involves primary actors who actually participate in the commission of the crime and secondary actors who aid and encourage the primary actors. The aid can be either physical or psychological. The secondary actors are called accomplices.

To be deemed an accomplice, a person must assist in the commission of the crime by “aiding, counseling, commanding or encouraging” the principal in the commission of the criminal offense. Assistance can be either physical or psychological. Psychological assistance includes encouraging the principal to commit the offense through words or gestures or mere presence. It is not necessary that the accomplice’s acts cause or contribute to the principal’s committing the crime. In other words the prosecution need not prove that the accomplice’s acts were either a proximate cause or cause in fact of the crime.

The prosecution must show that the defendant provided assistance, and intended to assist the perpetrator. While substantial activity is not required, neither mere presence at the scene of the crime nor even knowledge that a crime is about to be committed count as sufficient for accessorial liability. Many situations arise where no conspiracy exists but the secondary party is still an accomplice.

The doctrine of innocent agency is a means by which the common law attaches criminal liability to a person who does not physically undertake some or all of the offence with which they are charged. A person acts through an innocent agent when they intentionally cause the external elements of the offence to be committed by a person who is themselves innocent by reason of lack of a required fault element, or lack of capacity. A person who uses an innocent agent is subject to the same liability as if they were the one who committed the act.

Merry Christmas everyone. And for all those involved in Samantha’s abductions, my gift to you is a hot seat. Enjoy.