CRIMINAL LAW 1

Art 16.  Who are criminally liable. — The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave
felonies:
1.   Principals.
2. Accomplices.
3. Accessories. 
The following are criminally liable for light felonies:
1.   Principals
2.   Accomplices.

 Accessories – not liable for light felonies because the individual prejudice is so small that penal
sanction is not necessary
 Only natural persons can be criminals as only they can act with malice or negligence and can
be subsequently deprived of liberty. Juridical persons are liable under special laws.
 Manager of a partnership is liable even if there is no evidence of his direct participation in the
crime.
 Corporations may be the injured party
 General Rule: Corpses and animals have no rights that may be injured.
Exception: Defamation of the dead is punishable when it blackens the memory of one who is
dead.

Art 17. Principals. — The following are considered principals:

1.      Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;
2.      Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;
3.      Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it
would not have been accomplished.

Par. 1 - Principals by Direct Participation

“Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act”
Requisites of Principal by Direct Participation
1. Participation in the criminal resolution
 Conspiracy
– Is unity of purpose and intention
- Not a felony, but a manner of incurring criminal liability
Establishment of Conspiracy
 One must have intention to participate in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of the
common design and purpose
 Proven by overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy either by:
a. Actively participating in the actual commission of the crime; or
b. Lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by:
i. being present at the scene; or
ii. exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to
executing the conspiracy
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 Not mere knowledge or approval; not mere presence at the scene of the crime at the time of
its commission
 It is not necessary that there be formal agreement; as long as same purpose and were united in
its execution
 In the absence of a previous plan or agreement to commit a crime, the criminal responsibility
arising from different acts directed against one and the same person is individual and not
collective; each participant only liable for acts committed by himself
 Must prove beyond reasonable doubt
 Conspiracy is implied when the accused had a common purpose and were united in execution.
 Unity of purpose and intention in the commission of the crime may be shown in the following
cases:
 Spontaneous agreement at the moment of the commission of the crime
Ex.
i. Acceptance of the challenge by the two accused and their concert of
attack clearly showed a community of purpose and design
 Active Cooperation by all the offenders in the perpetration of the crime
Ex.
i. Manner in which the accused cooperated in the perpetration of the
homicide shows that they were moved by a common motive and that their
intention was to accomplish death
ii. Announced the holdup while the rest took the personal effects of victims
 Contributing by positive acts to the realization of a common criminal intent
 Presence during the commission of the crime by a band and lending moral support
thereto.
 While conspiracy may be implied from the circumstances attending the commission of
the crime, it is nevertheless a rule that conspiracy must be established by positive and
conclusive evidence.
 There may be conspiracy even if there is no evident premeditation
 Where there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all
- A conspirator should be liable for the acts of another conspirator even though such acts differ
radically and substantially from that which they intended to commit
 Conspirator not liable for the crimes of the other which is not the object of the conspiracy or is
not a logical or necessary consequence thereof
Ex.
i. People v. Umali – where the allies of the defendant committed robbery,
which was not the object of conspiracy, it was held that defendant was not
liable therefor, but only for crimes which were the objects of the
conspiracy
ii. Other defendants not held liable for the killings of persons not covered by
the conspiracy
iii. When the conspirators selected a particular individual to be their victim,
and another person was killed by one of them, only that person who killed
another person would be liable therefor
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 A person in conspiracy with others, who had desisted before the crime was committed by the
others is not criminally liable
Ex.
i. As soon as the aggression was started by his co-conspirators, he ran away
and called for help = an act of desistance from taking an active part in the
aggression
 When there is conspiracy, it is not necessary to ascertain the specific act of each conspirator
 When there is conspiracy, the fact that an element of the offense is not present as regards one
of the conspirators is immaterial
Ex.
i. Multiple rape – each rapist is liable for another’s crime because each
cooperated in the commission of the rapes perpetrated by the others
Exception:
1. In parricide – the element of relationship must be present as regards all
the offenders
2. in the crime of murder with treachery – all the offenders must at least
know that there will be treachery in executing the crime or cooperate
therein.
Ex.
Juan and Pedro conspired to kill Tomas without the previous plan of
treachery. In the crime scene, Juan used treachery in the presence
of Pedro and Pedro knew such. Both are liable for murder. But if
Pedro stayed by the gate while Juan alone killed Tomas with
treachery, so that Pedro didn’t know how it was carried out, Juan is
liable for murder while Pedro for homicide.
 No such thing as conspiracy to commit an offense through negligence. However, special laws
may make one a co-principal.
Ex.
i. In cases of criminal negligence or crimes punishable by special law, allowing or
failing to prevent an act to be performed by another, makes one a co-principal
ii. Under the Pure Food and Drug Act, a storeowner is liable for the act of his
employees of selling adulterated coffee, although he didn’t know that coffee was
being sold.
 Conspiracy is negatived by the acquittal of co-defendant.

2. That the culprits “carried out the plan and personally took part in the execution, by acts which
directly tended to the same end”
 The principals by direct participation must be at the scene of the crime, personally taking part,
although he was not present in the scene of the crime, he is equally liable as a principal by
direct participation.
Exception:
Conspiracy to kidnap and kill – only one of the conspirators kidnapped the victim and after
turning him over to his co-conspirators for execution, he left
 The acts of each offender must directly tend to the same end
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 One serving as guard pursuant to the conspiracy is a principal direct participation

 If the second element is missing, those who did not participate in the commission of the acts of
execution cannot be held criminally liable, unless the crime agreed to be committed is treason,
sedition, or rebellion.

Par. 2 - Principals by Induction

“Those who directly force or induce others to commit it”
 Principal by induction liable only when principal by direct participation committed the act
induced
Ways of becoming principal by induction
1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime; by using
a. Irresistible force
b. Uncontrollable fear
2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime
a. Giving of price or offering of reward or promise
b. Using words of command
Requisites:
1. That the one uttering the words of command must have the intention of procuring
the commission of the crime
2. That the one who made the command must have an ascendancy or influence over
the person who acted
3. That the words used must be so direct so efficacious, so powerful as to amount to
physical or moral coercion
4. The words of command must be uttered prior to the commission of the crime
5. The material executor of the crime has no personal reason to commit the crime

Requisites in order that a person may be convicted as principal by inducement:

1. Inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime
 To constitute inducement, there must exist on the part of the inducer the most positive
resolution and the most persistent effort to secure the commission of the crime
 A thoughtless expression without intention to produce the result is not an inducement
 Inducement may be by acts of command, advice or through influence or agreement for
consideration
 Words of advice or influence must have actually moved the hands of the principal by direct
participation
Ex.
i. Person who persuaded and inexperienced boy of tender age to steal jewels
ii. Father compelled 3-yr old son to hurl stone at another boy
2. Such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material
executor
 Without such inducement, the crime would not have bee committed or materialized
 Inducement must precede the act induced and must be so influential in producing the
criminal act that without it, the act would have not been performed
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 Price given to the principal by direct participation after the commission of the
crime, without prior promise to give a price or reward, could not be an inducement
 Depends upon whether such words are spoken under conditions which give them a direct
and determinative influence upon the mind of the principal actor

Forms of Inducements
1. By Price, reward or promise
2. By irresistible force or uncontrollable fear
3. Commander has the intention of procuring the commission of the crime
4. Commander has ascendancy or influence
5. Words used be so direct, so efficacious, so powerful
6. Command be uttered prior to the commission
7. Executor had no personal reason
4. Imprudent advice does not constitute sufficient inducement
5. Requisites for words of command to be considered inducement:
6. Words uttered in the heat of anger and in the nature of the command that had to be obeyed do
not make one an inductor.

Effects of Acquittal of Principal by direct participation on liability of principal by inducement

1. Conspiracy is negated by the acquittal of the co-defendant.
2. One cannot be held guilty of instigating the commission of the crime without first showing that
the crime has been actually committed by another.
 But if the one charged as principal by direct participation be acquitted because he
acted without criminal intent or malice, it is not a ground for the acquittal of the
principal by inducement.

Par. 3 - Principals by Indispensable Cooperation

“Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would not
have been accomplished”
Cooperate
- means desire or wish in common a thing
- not necessarily mean previous understanding
Requisites of Principal by IC:
1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is, there is either anterior conspiracy or unity of
criminal purpose and intention immediately before the commission of the crime charged;
 Requires participation in the criminal resolution, that is, there must be conspiracy
 Concurrence with the Principal by DP is sufficient; because the cooperation is indispensable
to the accomplishment of the offense
 Cooperation through another act (includes negligence)
2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act, without which it
would not have been accomplished.
 Cooperation must be indispensable
 If not – offender is only accomplice
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 If cooperation of one of the accused consists in performing an act necessary in

the execution of the crime committed – he is principal by DP
Ex. Held the victim while the other was stabbing
 Act should be different from the act of the principal by DP
Ex.
i. U.S. v. Javier – act of cooperation is forcible taking of the girl to the place
where rape was committed (rape)
ii. U.S. v. Lim Buanco – certification that the check was entitled to payment
(estafa)
iii. Accused grabbed the waist of deceased and placed his hands around it,
thereby pinning the arms; co-accused then stabbed the deceased

 Collective criminal responsibility

 when the offenders are criminally liable in the same manner and to the same extent
 the penalty is the same for all
o Principals by DP
o Principal by Induction (except that who directly forced another to commit a crime) and
Principal by DP
o Principals by IC with Principals by DP
 Individual criminal responsibility
 when there is no conspiracy
 each of the participants is liable only for the act committed by him

Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those persons who, not being included in Art. 17,
cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.
 Quasi-collective criminal responsibility
 Principals and accomplices
 Accomplice (Accessory before the fact)
 Cooperate by previous or simultaneous acts
 Mere instruments who perform acts not essential to the perpetration of offense;
 Does not enter into conspiracy
 If there was no such agreement and decision, but knowing the criminal design of
others, malefactor merely concurred in their criminal purpose, there is only community
of design
 Penalty one degree lower than that provided for the principal in consummated felony
 Common with conspirator: they know and agree with the criminal design
 Accomplice come to know about it after the principals have reached the
decision, only then they agree to cooperate in its execution
 Merely concurred in criminal purpose
 In case of doubt as to whether the participation of the offender is principal or accomplice
 There being no showing of conspiracy and extent of participation is uncertain; or
 Participation not disclosed (arson)
 Accused liable as accomplice
Requisites of Accomplice:
CRIMINAL LAW 1

1. That there be community of design; that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct
participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose;
 There must be principal by DP which originates the criminal design
Ex.
i. Driver of taxi cab, knowing that his co-accused were going to make a hold-
up, permitted the use of cab driven by him and waited for them =
accomplice
ii. Juan was choking Pedro. Then Tomas ran up and hit Pedro with a bamboo
stick. Juan continued to choke Pedro until he was dead. Tomas is only an
accomplice because the fatal blow came from Juan.
iii. Lending a dagger to a killer, knowing the latter’s purpose.
 An accomplice has knowledge of the criminal design of the principal and all he does is concur
with his purpose
 But if before the actual commission of the crime, both of them agreed and decided to
commit to it, he becomes a principal
 No knowledge of criminal design = not accomplice
 How an accomplice acquires knowledge of criminal design
 Principal informs the accomplice of his criminal purpose
i. Master told his servant he would abduct a girl and instigated his servant to
induce the girl to leave her home; servant assisted in the commission of the
crime by so inducing the girl; servant = accomplice
ii. People v. Tangbaoan, Crispino revealed to Mariano that he was going to kill
Guilay; Mariano did not leave Crispino after he learned of Crispino’s
intention; he was with Crispino when the latter killed Guilay; Mariano =
accomplice
 Accomplice saw the criminal acts of principal
i. People v. Tamayo, Ramon was choking deceased; Jose delivered a blow
with a bamboo stick on the head of deceased; after the blow, which Ramon
saw, he continued to choke the deceased; blow was the cause of death ,
not choking; Ramon = accomplice
ii. People v. Cagalingan, Alfredo stabbed deceased at the back; Jovito and
Victor stabbed the same deceased while already lying prostrate on the
ground; A person who assails a victim already fatally wounded by another is
only accomplice = Jovito & Victor
iii. Accused embraced the victim and rendered him helpless to stop him from
further hitting the other accused = accomplice, he did not stop his co-
accused from further hitting the victim
 Accomplice intends by his acts, to commit or take part in the execution of the crime
 Act of sending cigarettes and food does NOT prove intention to help in committing
rebellion
 Community of design
 By providing his own house as venue; his presence throughout the commission of
offense, without him doing any activity to prevent or help the victim, show community
of design and cooperation
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 Need not be to commit the crime actually committed

 It is sufficient that there was a common purpose to commit a particular crime and that
the crime actually committed was a natural or probable consequence of the intended
crime
i. Instead of abduction, they killed the victim; two men remained in the
street standing by the carriage which brought them to the scene of the
crime; where the accomplices consent to aid in the commission of
abduction, they will be responsible as such accomplices for the resulting
homicide
ii. BUT when the owner of the gun knew that it would be used to kill a
particular person, and the principal used it to kill another person, the
owner of the gun is not an accomplice as to the killing of another person

2. That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with the
intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way; and
 Cooperation is only necessary, not indispensable
 By previous acts
i. Lending of dagger or pistol to the murderer, knowing the latter’s criminal
purpose; murderer could have obtained it somewhere else or other person
ii. Rape, pharmacist who, knowing the criminal purpose of another, furnishes
him the drug with which he will put his victim to sleep
 By simultaneous acts
i. Defendant who held the hands of victim and tried to take away the
latter’s revolver, while his co-defendant was attacking him
ii. Three other accused held the victim’s companion to prevent the latter
from rendering any help to the victim
 When the acts of the accused are not indispensable in killing
i. Throwing stones at the deceased; no evidence exists that it inflicted any mortal
injury; form and manner of assistance do not safely disclose that unity of purpose
and design and compulsion by a common motive
ii. Blocking people coming to aid the victim while being assailed
iii. Acted as look-out or guard, absent a conspiracy
 Accomplice merely supplies the principal with material or moral aid without conspiracy with
the latter
i. Going with them, knowing their criminal intention, and in staying outside of the
house while the others rob and kill the victim appellant effectively supplied the
criminals with material and moral aid
ii. Act of one of the accused in inflicting wound upon the victim several times with a
small knife only after the latter had fallen to the ground seriously wounded; merely
a show-off or expression of camaraderie
 Wounds inflicted by an accomplice in crimes against persons should not have caused the death
of the victim
 If he inflicted mortal wound, he becomes principal by DP
 Accomplice if
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 Inflicted wounds after the fatal shot by the PDP

 Deceased was already prostrated on the ground mortally wounded, accused
threw stones inflicting contusions on his body
 The moral aid may be through advice, encouragement or agreement
 But should not be the determining cause of the commission of the crime; otherwise,
would be PI

3. That there be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the person
charged as an accomplice.
 There must be a relation between the criminal act of the principal and the act of the one
charged as accomplice
 Not enough that a person entertains an identical criminal design as that of the principal
 An accomplice may be held liable for a crime different from that which the principal
committed
i. A guilty of murder qualified by treachery; C and D as accomplices of homicide

1. There be a community of design (principal originates the design, accomplice only concurs)
2. He cooperates in the execution by previous or simultaneous acts, intending to give material
and moral aid (cooperation must be knowingly done, it must also be necessary and not
indispensable
3. There be a relation between the acts of the principal and the alleged accomplice

Art. 19.           Accessories. — Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission
of the crime, and without having participated therein, either as principals or accomplices,
take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners:
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery.
3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime, provided
the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is
guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or
is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.
 Does not participate in the criminal design nor cooperate in the commission of the felony
 Crime committed by the principal is not a light felony
 “Having knowledge”
 Must have knowledge of the commission of the crime, and having that knowledge he took
part subsequent to its commission
i. In the absence of proof of his knowledge that the goods were of illegal origin
or fraudulently acquired, he cannot be held criminally liable
ii. If A buys a stolen property, not knowing it was stolen, he’s not liable
 Mere possession of stolen property does not make the accused an accessory where the
thief was already convicted
CRIMINAL LAW 1

- But if there has been no one convicted as thief, the possessor should be prosecuted
as principal for the crime of theft
 Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be acquired subsequent to the acquisition
of stolen property
- Sufficient that after acquiring that knowledge, he concealed or disposed of the
property, thereby depriving the owner thereof
i. A acquired carabaos without knowing that they had been illegally
taken; owners informed A and demanded the carabaos; A returned the
animals to the persons from whom he had bought them; A = guilty as
accessory
 Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be established by circumstantial evidence
 “Commission of the crime”
 Crime committed by the principal must be proved beyond reasonable doubt
i. Where it is doubtful whether a woman killed her husband, as it is
possible that she might have acted in self-defense, the servant who
took part in the burial of the deceased would not make the servant an
accessory in paricide
 “Without having participated therein either as principals or accomplices”
 “Take part subsequent to its commission” (after the crime has been committed)
 Specific Acts of Accessories / Subsequently takes part in three ways:
Par. 1 - By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime
 By profiting themselves by the effects of the crime
i. A person who received property and used it, knowing that the same had been stolen
ii. In murder, one who shared in the reward given for the commission of the crime
iii. Not accessory: received cash for locating a stolen jeep; not fruits or effects of the
crime
 Accessory should not take the property without the consent of the principal
- If he took it without consent, he is a principal in the crime of theft
 A person knowingly acquired or received property taken by brigands is punished
as principal
 Assisting the offender to profit the effects of the crime
i. Sells the property he knows to have been stolen and gives the proceeds of the sale
to thief; guilty of the crime of theft, as an accessory
ii. In kidnapping for ransom, those who acted as runners or couriers in obtaining the
ransom money

Par 2 - By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery
 “Body of the crime” same as “corpus delicti”
- Means that a specific offense was in fact committed by someone
i. Assist in the burial of the victim of homicide; in effect concealing the crime
itself
CRIMINAL LAW 1

ii. Furnishing the means to make it appear that the deceased was armed, by
placing a weapon in his hand when already dead; illustrates destroying the
body of the crime
iii. Mere act of carrying the cadaver of one unlawfully killed is sufficient to
make him responsible as an accessory; when it was buried to prevent
discovery
 There must be an attempt to hide the body of the crime
i. Accused should be acquitted; only evidence against him was he merely
ordered to board the jeep not knowing the purpose of the ride; did not take
part in the killing neither did he profit; he helped removing the bodies from
the jeep and throwing them into the ditch; but there was no attempt to
bury or hide said bodies; evident design of the culprits was to leave them on
the roadside
 Concealing or destroying the effects or instruments of the crime to prevent its
discovery
i. Stolen property = effect of the crime
Received personal property knowing that it had been stolen, for the purpose
of concealing the same; guilty of the crime of theft as accessory
ii. Pistol or knife = instrument of the crime
Received a pistol or a knife, knowing it had been used in killing the
deceased, concealed it; guilty of the crime of homicide as accessory
Destroyed the ladder which he knew had been used by another in climbing
the wall of the house where the latter had committed robbery
 “To prevent its discovery”
- “its” = “crime”
- Concealing or destroying of the body must be done in order to prevent the discovery of
the crime
- What is concealed is the body, effects or instruments; not the principal
- If the principal is concealed, Art. 19 par. 3 is applied
i. CANNOT be classified as an attempt to conceal; bringing the body down the
house to the foot of the stairs and leaving said body for anyone to see

Par 3 - By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime, provided the
accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of
treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime
a. Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of any crime with
abuse of his public functions
Requisites:
1. The accessory is a public officer
2. He harbors, conceals, or assists in the escape of the principal
3. The public offender acts with abuse of his public functions
4. The crime committed by the principal is any crime, provided is
not a light felony
CRIMINAL LAW 1

i. Abusing his public office, Mayor who refused to prosecute offender is

accessory; thus made it possible for the principal offender to escape
b. Private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the author of the crime – guilty
of: TPMAH
o Treason
o Parricide
o Murder
o Attempt against the life of the President
o Habitually guilty of some other crime
Requisites:
1. That the accessory is a private person
2. That he harbors, conceals or assists in the escape of the author
of the crime; and
3. That the crime committed by the principal is either: (a)
treason, (b) parricide, (c) murder, (d) an attempt against the life of the President, or (e)
that the principal is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime
 “Habitually guilty of some other crime”
 Not an accessory: one who kept silent with regard to the crime he witnessed ad did not report
it
- Such omission is not harboring, or concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal
- Liable as accessory:
i. Went to the authorities and volunteered false information to deceive
prosecuting authorities to aid parties in escaping
ii. Accused was present when her husband was shot; warned her daughter that
she would kill her if she would tell it to somebody; when officers asked
accused she claimed that she had no suspects in mind; accused thereby
concealed or assisted in the escape of the principal
 Accessories’ liability is subordinate and subsequent to that of the principal in crime
 Conviction of accessory possible, even if principal is acquitted
- If the crime was in fact committed but the principal was not criminally liable because of
an exempting circumstance (insanity or minority)
i. Minor stole a ring and Juan, knowing it was stolen, bought it. Minor is
exempt. Juan liable as accessory
 Trial of an accessory may proceed without waiting the result of the separate charge against the
principal
 If the principal charged with murder died before trial, accused cannot be held liable as
accessory under Art. 19, par. 3
 When the principal is not yet apprehended, the accessory may be prosecuted and convicted
 Heavy penalties for accessories in robbery and theft
- P.D. 1612 or Anti-Fencing Law
 General Rule: Principal acquitted, Accessory also acquitted
 Exception: when the crime was in fact committed but the principal is covered by exempting
circumstances.
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 Trial of accessory may proceed without awaiting the result of the separate charge against the
principal because the criminal responsibilities are distinct from each other
 Difference of accessory from principal and accomplice:
o Accessory does not take direct part or cooperate in, or induce the commission of the
crime
o Accessory does not cooperate in the commission of the offense by acts either prior
thereto or simultaneous therewith
o Participation of the accessory in all cases always takes place after the commission of the
crime
o Takes part in the crime through his knowledge of the commission of the offense.

Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability. — The penalties prescribed for
accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses,
ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives
by affinity within the same degrees, with the single exception of accessories falling within the
provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.

 Basis: Ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness of one’s name which compels one to
conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as those mentioned.
 Relationship by affinity between surviving spouse and blood relatives of the deceased survives
even after the death of the deceased spouse
 Nephew and Niece not included – liable as accessory
 Accessory is not exempt, if such accessory: prompted by detestable greed
 Profited by the effects of the crime
 Assisted the offender to profit by the effects of crime
 Only accessories covered by par 2 and 3 are exempted
i. Son helps father bury the body of a person
ii. Grandson, having knowledge of robbery, conceals or destroys the body of
the crime in order to prevent its discovery
iii. Person who harbors, conceals or assists in the escape of his brother who
committed treason
 Public officer who helped his guilty brother escape does not incur criminal liability as ties of
blood constitutes a more powerful incentive than the call of duty
 Concealing effects of the crime to obtain gain
i. Husband conceals stolen property by wife to profit later