In SEC V Switzer Et Al

In SEC v. Switzer et al., Switzer overheard a conversation while in a public place and, based on the information heard during the conversation, formed a group to purchase stock in a corporation that subsequently showed a substantial profit. When the SEC brought charges of insider trading against Switzer, the court said:

A) since Switzer was not a direct participant in the conversation, he could not be prosecuted as a tippee.
B) Switzer was not a tippee because he did not know that the information overheard was material and nonpublic.
C) the insider that Switzer overheard was guilty of a breach of his fiduciary duty to his company because he spoke about the company in a public place.
D) the insider that Switzer overheard was guilty of a breach of his fiduciary duty to his company and was guilty of insider trading because he was telling his wife material and nonpublic information.