Sufficient evidence supported defendant’s conviction of aiding and abetting the continuous sexual abuse of her daughter where she knew the abuser’s criminal purpose and facilitated his sexual abuse. Defendant was charged with and convicted of aiding and abetting the continuous sexual abuse of her daughter. According to evidence presented at trial, defendant lived with Daniel from the time the victim was six until she reached the age of 16. During this time, Daniel continually molested the victim, the abuse only ceasing when he was arrested after the victim told her friend of the abuse and the friend reported it. Defendant was aware of the activity yet did nothing constructive to halt it. Instead, she kept Daniel in the home, married him, and discouraged her daughter from reporting the abuse. On appeal, defendant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support her conviction. Affirmed. To be liable, an aider and abettor must share the specific intent of the perpetrator, even though the aider and abettor need not be prepared to commit the offense herself nor seek to share the fruits of the crime. A parent may be liable as an aider and abettor if she fails to fulfill her common law duty to protect her child. A parent who knowingly fails to take reasonable steps to stop an attack on her child may be criminally liable for the attack if she did not intervene in order to aid and abet the attack. Here, sufficient evidence and reasonable inferences established that defendant knew the full extent of Daniel’s behavior and, by failing to do anything to stop it, intended to facilitate his sexual abuse of her daughter. It was reasonable to infer from the evidence that defendant was motivated by her selfish desire to maintain her relationship with Daniel when she persuaded her daughter to not report the abuse and that she had no concern for the child.