Accomplice liability in criminal law is mainly about two things: intent and participation. To hold someone responsible as an accomplice, the courts need to see that the person meant to help commit a crime and that they actually took part in it.

Let’s break this down:

1. Intent is Important
A person can’t be considered an accomplice if they didn’t mean to help or encourage the crime. For example, if someone lends their car without knowing it will be used for theft, they probably won’t be charged as an accomplice. So, it's really important to understand how the accomplice thought about the crime to see if they are guilty or not.

2. Participation Matters
How a person takes part in the crime is also crucial. Participation can look different, like helping out, cheering on, or making the crime easier to commit. For instance, if someone is keeping watch while a robbery is happening, that shows they are participating in the crime. The court will look at how involved they were, like if they were there when the crime happened, if they gave tools needed for it, or if their words or actions motivated the crime in any way.

3. Dual Intent Can Be Complicated
The idea of "dual intent" adds another layer. An accomplice might want to help the main person, but their feelings about the crime's results can change, especially if things go wrong during the crime. For example, someone who meant to support a small crime might be held responsible for a much bigger crime if the main person escalates things unexpectedly.

In short, both intent and participation are key to understanding accomplice liability in criminal law. If there’s no clear intent to help and not enough participation, it’s much harder to prove that someone is guilty.