Jeff Smith is angry at liberals. He's angry at immigrants. He's angry at visible minorities and thinks they should go back to wherever they came from. Jeff is American, lives in Detroit, and operates a small business: a drone racing school. After a busy day teaching drone enthusiasts to pilot unmanned aerial vehicles and to send drones on small autonomous missions, he chats anonymously with white supremacists on social media about ridding North America of undesirable immigrants and progressive politicians. One evening, Jeff writes a witty post describing a fantasy assassination of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a frequent target of vitriol in Jeff's online community. Jeff's post is disseminated widely. The next morning a swarm of twelve laptop-sized drones situated in Ottawa and piloted from multiple laptops in the US. drop small packets of explosives near Trudeau as he is biking to work. Thankfully, the packets miss the Prime Minister and fail to detonate. Canadian Department of Defence personnel down the drones with an electromagnetic weapon, disassemble them, and learn that three are controlled by a laptop owned byJeff Smith. The attack is front page news across Canada, and Canadians are outraged. Canada is a State Party to the ICC Treaty and has now opted in to the Kampala amendments. Canada refers the situation to the ICC prosecutor to investigate. Global Affairs Canada provides the ICC prosecutor with the anonymous anti-Trudeau social media posts they attribute to Jeff and with evidence that a laptop owned by Jeff controlled three of the captured drones. Question 4 (1 point) Identify any or all potential defences for Jeff from the below options: 0 a} Another individual, not Jeff, was operating the drones from Jeff's computer 0 b) Jeff's computer was hacked and the attack on Trudeau was launched by the hacker O c) The attack never materialized so there was no crime of aggression 0 d} A, B and C are all potential defences for Jeff