Sheryl Ring, Esq., again polluting the internet with some of the worst legal analysis possible.
It doesn't even sound like Baldwin was charged, so Alex Verdugo categorically cannot be an accomplice or an accessory to crime. There was no crime, from a legal perspective - just an accusation. Even ignoring that, the stated facts basically only say that the stuff stopped when everyone else (Verdugo too) entered the room, so he probably wasn't even there during whatever happened. You can't be an accessory to something you didn't even know happened. It's worse though because s/he even considers him being an accomplice to the non-crime, which really would only be possible if he had some form of knowledge about it and let it happen. None of the facts as stated would support that in any way.
Ring says "if the reports in question are accurate, Alex Verdugo was legally culpable in a sexual assault." This is just so irresponsible. S/he must be a terrible actual lawyer.
Ring isn't just jumping to a conclusion, she is jumping to a conclusion and then jumping from that conclusion to other conclusions. We can call this "jumping to delusions" (Copyright Laika 2020).