Can an aider and abettor be held responsible for a crime committed by his confederate?

When "an accomplice assists or encourages a confederate to commit one crime, and the confederate commits another, more serious crime (the nontarget offense),... the accomplice may be held responsible for that nontarget offense... [under] the 'natural and probable consequences' doctrine...." (People v. Prettyman (1996) 14 Cal.4th 248, 259-260.) Under that doctrine, an aider and abettor may be convicted "'not only of the offense he intended to facilitate or encourage, but also of any reasonably foreseeable offense committed by the person he aids and abets.... [He] need not have intended to encourage or facilitate the particular offense ultimately committed by the perpetrator. His knowledge that an act which is criminal was intended, and his action taken with the intent that the act be encouraged or facilitated, are sufficient to impose liability on him for any reasonably foreseeable offense committed as a consequence by the perpetrator. It is the intent to encourage and bring about conduct that is criminal, not the specific intent that is an element of the target offense, which... must be found by the jury.' [Citation.]" (Id. at p. 260.)