What is the test for an aider and abettor of intimidating a witness?

When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, we determine whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have found all the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576.)

Defendant was found guilty of intimidating a witness as an aider and abettor. Conviction as an aider and abettor requires that the defendant have knowledge of the perpetrator's unlawful purpose and the intent to commit, encourage, or facilitate the crime, and that he actually aids, promotes, encourages, or instigates the crime. (People v. McCoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111, 1116-1118.) As an aider and abettor, a defendant may be guilty not only of the target crime, but also of any other crime that is the natural and probable consequence of the target crime. (People v. Prettyman (1996) 14 Cal.4th 248, 267.) To be guilty under the natural and probable consequence theory, "The jury must decide whether the defendant (1) with knowledge of the confederate's unlawful purpose, and (2) with the intent of committing, encouraging, or facilitating the commission of any

Page 9