How does "Accessory After The Fact" work? Elder Abuse case.
Location: California
At what point does someone's actions constitute Accessory After The Fact in cases of elder abuse, where they're not the abuser, but have protected and/or sheltered the abuser?
The situation: A family friend's grandfather was the victim of severe elder abuse (repeated physical assault and financial abuse of over $50,000) by the adult daughter of his romantic partner at the time. She had been living in the man's home along with the partner. At some point the partner left the home, knowing the abuse was taking place, leaving her daughter there who continued to abuse the man. The abuse escalated to the daughter monitoring his cell phone and email, effectively cutting off his communication with his family members and not allowing him to go to work (he owned a store). She was running his credit cards to the max buying things online and forcing him to make deposits in her bank account. This most intense period lasted nearly a month during which time he was severely beaten and psychologically and physically tortured.
The family was frantic and reached out to the mother/partner, who was safely living in a vacation rental the grandfather owned in another town. She lied to them and said she didn't know what was going on, and they'd need to ask the man directly. (Which was obviously not possible because the daughter was controlling the communications.) Finally they gave up on getting help from the mother/partner and the family contacted the police who assisted in an extraction of the man from his own home - but the man was so beaten as well as brainwashed by her that he wouldn't let the police deeper into the house to make an arrest on that day. The abuser was hiding in a back room. He had emerged from the house with massive injuries to his head and body but the police said if he barred them from entry and seemed in control of his mental faculties they could not go get her. The family took him to the ER to be treated, but he would not make a statement to the police until many days later when he finally began to understand what had happened to him. He also thankfully obtained a restraining order against the abuser.
In the meantime, the abuser was able to flee to an adjacent county and took up residence in a condo owned by her mother where she had been living prior to moving into the man's home earlier in the year. The police reports resulted in charges, and two felony arrest warrants, but they were not issued until almost a year later. During this whole time, the woman has been living in her mother's condo. She is a fugitive. The mother has continued to allow her to remain sheltered in her property, paying her bills, as her daughter does not have a job. My friend's family is desperately trying to keep the ex-partner from re-entering the grandfather's life, and hopeful that the daughter will be arrested and convicted... some day, and somehow. They've been told that in order for an arrest to happen, she would be contacted by law enforcement at some point, say while having her ID checked during a traffic stop, who will discover the warrants - but to the best of their knowledge she never leaves the condo, and they've been told by the Sheriff that they can't enter the property without a search warrant - so it's like a stalemate, essentially, while this criminal lives safely protected in her mother's property.
Of course it would all be easy if the mother would turn her daughter in, contact law enforcement herself, and let them into her condo - basically stop protecting her. But this seems to be out of the question, as it's now been almost two years since she escaped and she's successfully lived in hiding with her mother's assistance.
Can the mother of the abuser (ex-partner of the grandfather) be charged with Accessory after the fact? What proof would be necessary? Would the family have to provide certain evidence to the DA? How does it work? They are fairly confident that once the abuser is arrested, she will certainly see prison time. But the mother seems equally criminally exposed and guilty of a crime, or am I totally not understanding the law? The mother maintains that she is also a victim (of her daughter's abuse) and was only trying to protect herself. She is very problematic and I don't have time here to get into her personality defects but they are many. They do not, however, cancel out her actions (or inactions) in the eyes of law, I hope.
Thank you very much for any thoughts on this.