Problem
X and Y get into an argument in a bar. P tells X, "please do not fight Y. Y is a trained martial arts fighter and will put you in the hospital." This comment angers X who now is determined to fight Y to demonstrate that X is not afraid of anyone. A crowd gathers to watch the fight. P despite P's opposition to X fighting Y attends the fight although remains silent during the fight. P despite P's silence is hoping that X wins the fight and that P's presence will inspire X. to prove that X can win a fight against Y. It is a crime for individuals to engage in an unlicensed fight and this fight is unlicensed. The police learn about the fight and X is able to flee before being arrested. X signals a taxi and tells the taxi driver to get X home as quickly as possible because X fears arrest as a result of participating in an unlawful fight. The drivers states the driver is "always eager to assist a fugitive fleeing the police." The taxi driver starts driving X home and after one-half mile traffic is so bad that X decides to walk home.
Is P liable as an accomplice (accessory before the fact/principal in second degree based on P's statement to Y? Explain your answer
A. Is P liable as an accomplice (principal in the second degree) based on P's presence during the fight? Explain your answer.
B. Is the tax driver an accessory after the fact? Explain your answer.
C. Assume that Y dies as a result of a knife wound inflicted by X during the fight. Would the salesperson who sold X the knife be held liable as an accomplice (accessory before the fact/principal in second degree) under the test established by Judge Posner in the Fountain case in the textbook If X told the salesperson that X wanted to "kill someone with a knife during an unlawful fight that was scheduled tomorrow?" Explain the reason for your answer.
D. Assuming P is responsible as a principle in the second degree (accomplice) Could P be charged with first degree murder if X intentionally stabs and kills Y during the fight