With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". on the grounds that a jury could have found Shin guilty based on any of three alternate theories: (1) [Shin’s] knowledge, when she prepared the fraudulent loan applications at issue, that they would ultimately be submitted to [J.P. Morgan] Chase; (2) [Shin’s] aiding and abetting of her co-conspirators in committing these offenses; and (3) the fact that [] these offenses were committed in the scope and in furtherance of the wire fraud conspiracy and the acts were reasonably foreseeable consequences of the conspiracy. (App. 1298-99.) We agree. See 18 U.S.C. § 2(b) (“Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as principal.”); United States v. Lopez, 271 F.3d 472, 480 (3d Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S.

A: holding criminal conspiracy is sustained where the commonwealth establishes the defendant entered into an agreement to commit or aid in an unlawful act with another person with a shared criminal intent and an overt act was done in furtherance of the conspiracy a coconspirator may commit the overt act and conspirators are liable for acts of the coconspirators committed in furtherance of the conspiracy
B: holding that in a conspiracy case venue lies where the conspiracy agreement was formed or in any jurisdiction where an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy was committed by any of the conspirators
C: holding that the criminal act of one conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy is attributable to the other conspirators for the purpose of holding them responsible for the substantive offense 
D: holding that a prosecution for a criminal conspiracy may be brought in the county where the unlawful combination is formed or in any county where the overt act is committed by any of the conspirators in furtherance of the unlawful confederacy
C.