For my story, a group of people are caught in the act of kidnapping by police. One of them surrenders immediately out of fear, and the police get the drop on him first. This gives the others just enough time to get away, and in chase that follows, the others end up breaking several traffic laws, as well as destroying some of the evidence, that can be linked to them, most likely by arson. Now the first guy who surrendered can be charged for the kidnapping, or attempted kidnapping and conspiracy to kidnapping, but can be be charged with the crimes of the others, during the chase, if he surrendered before the others took off and the chase started? Can he argue that he didn't know the others would commit those crimes after he surrendered is would a judge still charge him with those crimes of his co-conspirators, even though he was technically in custody at the time?
The surrenderer did not commit the crimes that the gang committed during the chase. He cannot be charged with their commission. He might be charged with conspiracy to commit them, but: Speeding, running red lights, crashing into police barriers, exchanging fire with the police (and maybe killing them, or innocent by-standers)...these are all offences that would be committed in the heat of the moment, and conspiracy would be a tough gig. The offences that he might be charged with would be: Attempted kidnapping. Conspiracy to kidnap. Resisting arrest (depending upon how instantly he surrendered - if he delayed the police enough for the others to get away, it could be argued that his surrender wasn't instant enough)
Some cities have laws stating that if a person is proven to be in a gang, he or she can be tried for the crimes of the gang. So while in most cases he would not be charged with the additional crimes, it depends on the situation.
Okay thanks. I can have him surrender immediately then, and the police have to subdue him first cause he surrendered first, but this gives the others a bit of time to get away, but it's not his fault intentionally.
