When does a victim become an accomplice or were they always a accomplice and never really a victim? This is a subject for discussion because I haven’t researched the answer. Let’s create a hypothetical situation. Let’s say, for the sake of our discussion, that two people are attacked by some person or persons. Victim #1 dies, but Victim #2, although appearing to have been attacked as well, survives. When pressed by investigators for a description of the attacker(s) or better still to provide the identity of the attacker(s) Victim #2 refuses to cooperate.
Victim #2 recovers from the attack while Victim #1 is buried. Victim #2 resumes everyday life without so much as offering condolences to the family of Victim #1 and all the while the killer remains free. Victim #2 surely remembers something, but offers nothing. At what point does Victim #2 go from being a victim to aiding and abetting in the commission of a murder?
If Victim #2 is too afraid to cooperate with law enforcement that implies that Victim #2 knows who the attacker was? It seems as though you can only really fear something if you know who you are dealing with and what the consequences of going against that person might be. All the while Victim #2 allows the attacker(s) for roam around free to strike again.
One alternative is that Victim #2 was never really a victim at all. Victim #2 took one for the team in order to set up Victim #1. If that is the case, Victim #2 is probably Accomplice #1. Of course the Attacker(s) may have used Victim #2 to get close to Victim #1 and then tried to eliminate Victim #2 as a potential witness by turning a single homicide into a double homicide.
I don’t really have an answer, just a lot of questions and I’ll leave flat circles out of the discussion for now.