With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the totality of the evidence would permit a rational jury to find willfulness in this case beyond a reasonable doubt. (1) Cassese’s Background The evidence indicated that Cassese was a sophisticated investor, who traded regularly through seven active brokerage accounts. More important, he was the chief executive officer of a publicly traded corporation, Computer Horizons Corporation. From these background facts, a rational jury could reasonably infer that Cassese possessed, at least, a general awareness that trading on nonpublic information, while not absolutely proscribed, is, nevertheless, strictly regulated. See United States v. Peltz, 433 F.2d 48, 52 (2d Cir.1970) (noting SEC’s zealous policing of insider trading); see also United States v. Dixon, 536 F.2d 1388, 1395 (2d Cir.1976) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Simon, 85 F.3d 906, 911 (2d

A: recognizing that all things are presumed against a wrongdoer
B: recognizing that chief executive of a publicly traded corporation can be presumed to know that public filings are highly regulated
C: recognizing that determinations of whether there are grounds for equitable tolling are highly fact dependent
D: recognizing that jurors are presumed to follow instructions
B.