That Clark You Remember
A
My husband is having an early-morning reflection on whether it should really be co-conspirator, or just conspirator. Your thoughts?
10:03 AM - May 04, 2024
Avatar Avatar Avatar
0
5
6
TheVoice OfGrumpyOldAge
A
In response to That Clark You Remember.
A conspiracy requires more than one person to be an actual conspiracy. Without any co-conspirator(s) it is just an unrealized fantasy or a delusion.
10:48 AM - May 04, 2024
0
1
Bob - Garden is Life
A
In response to That Clark You Remember.
It does seem the "co-" is redundant. One cannot be a conspirator without being a co-conspirator.

"Unindicted conspirator" doesn't seem to lose any meaning and "unindicted co-conspirator" doesn't seem to add any more specific meaning.

Dictionary.com agrees it's redundant.
10:37 AM - May 04, 2024
0
2
Cyndi Brown she/her
A
In response to That Clark You Remember.
There's a difference as far as the law. A co conspirator would be upper level management who aids and abets the main man. Or whatever it calls itself. I am also not an expert in law.
10:31 AM - May 04, 2024
0
1
Bren
A
In response to That Clark You Remember.
I'm at the whole shebang stage of it all. I know that's not the proper but it's true.
10:30 AM - May 04, 2024
0
1
hal
A
In response to That Clark You Remember.
Co-conspirator when you're referring to someone specifically in relation to someone else? E.g. "🍊💩🤡's unindicted co-conspirator"?
10:08 AM - May 04, 2024
0
2

 

{{ notificationModalContent }} {{ promptModalMessage }}