With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (emphasis in original). If the answer is yes, the jury verdict of guilty cannot be set aside. See id. This standard of review draws no distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence. Indeed, the law recognizes that a guilty verdict can be based entirely on circumstantial evidence, see United States v. MacPherson, 424 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. Sept. 13, 2005); United States v. Morgan, 385 F.3d 196, 204 (2d Cir.2004), and that elements going to the operation of a defendant’s mind, such as willfulness, can often be proved only through circumstantial evidence, see United States v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88, 143 (2d Cir.1998); United States v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d 1294, 1314 (2d Cir.1987); see also United States v. Crowley, 318 F.3d 401, 409 (2d Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, a reviewing court must examine the

A: recognizing that parties had right to trial by jury in trespass action but holding that parties waived that right under cr 3804 by not filing a demand for a jury trial
B: holding that the sixth amendments guarantee of a trial by jury requires the jury to base its verdict only on the evidence presented at trial
C: recognizing the right to waive a jury trial
D: recognizing mens rea issues as especially suited for resolution by a trial jury
D.