On June 22, 2009, The California Supreme Court, reversed a decision by the Court of Appeal, stating that a person who knowingly aids and abets criminal conduct is guilty of the intended crime and any other crime the perpetrator actually commits that is a "natural and probable consequence of the intended crime." The aider and abettor is not required to have actually foreseen the perpetrator's crime but "whether judged objectively, it was reasonable foreseeable."