What are the consequences of a conversation between a murder suspect and his accomplice discussing how to escape from the scene of the crime?

It will be noted that these conversations occurred between conspirators almost immediately after their efforts had eventuated [191 Cal.App.2d 234] in murder, while the police were hot on their trail and they were intent on covering up. Each conspirator was bound by the acts of his confederates, even though they were dictated by the exigencies of the moment, if within the general scope of the conspiracy; for instance, evading or resisting arrest falls in this category. 'By many authorities, the principle is announced that escape by the perpetrators of a crime in general is part of the conspiracy to commit the crime [citations]; and consequently that the act or declaration of one of the conspirators committed or made by him respectively during the time of such escape is binding upon each and all of the conspirators; from which it should follow that at least during the time that appellant herein was engaged in making his escape from the scene of the robbery he was liable for any act which was committed by his aider and abettor in the commission of the crime.' People v. Corkery, 134 Cal.App. 294, 296, 25 P.2d 257, 258.