okay, this seems like it is going to degenerate into a pointless quibble over what an "accomplice" is, since the shit article has no discussion of the evidence or lack thereof. not interested.
at least you seem to have some idea of a general duty of responsibility. for example, it would be disingenuous for a chop shop to continue to accept, daily, a number of cars exceeding the legitimate resale market and of which a large number are later reported stolen. you probably understand that, so i don't really care about the rest.