Crime mastermind a principal by inducement

Crime mastermind a principal by inducement "May I know if a person would be liable even if he did not actually participate in the crime as when he stood as “mastermind”? Mr. Concerned Citizen of Quezon City Dear Mr. Concerned Citizen of Quezon City,The criminal liability of a person depends upon his participation in the crime. He may be considered principal, accomplice or accessory. According to Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code, the following are considered principals: 1) those who take a direct part in the execution of the act 2) those who directly force or induce others to commit it or 3) those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would not have been accomplished. The first kind of principal is called “principal by direct participation”, while the second is called “principal by inducement” and the last is called “principal by indispensable cooperation”. Accomplices are those persons who not being included in Article 17 (Revised Penal Code), cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous act (Article 18, Revised Penal Code), whereas, accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having participated therein, either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manner: by profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime by concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery or by harboring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal of the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime (Article 19, Revised Penal Code).A mastermind falls under the category of a “principal by inducement”. He is liable as a principal even if he does not appear in the scene of the crime because it is his inducement or employment of force that led the executors to perform the crime. The principal by inducement must intend that his inducement should be obeyed. Mere careless comment made by one who does not possess dominance or moral ascendancy over the offender will not make the former a principal by inducement. To be one, the inducer’s utterances must be of such a nature and made in such a manner as to become the determining cause of the crime. Where the words uttered did not make a great dominance or influence on the offenders or is no longer necessary as the offenders were already determined to commit the offending acts, the utterance will not make the utterer an inducer (People v. Parungo, January 1996, 76 SCAD, Notes and Cases on the Revised Penal Code, Leonor D. Baodo, 2nd Ed, 2002, page 142).We wish to remind you that the above legal opinion is solely based on our appreciation of the problem that you have stated. The opinion may vary when other facts are elaborated.Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net." - https://www.affordablecebu.com/