a finding that [the defendants] were participants in a conspiracy to operate a lottery and to conceal that operation from local law enforcement agencies,” there was “no warrant for a finding that they were ... parties to a conspiracy with [the charged] purpose” of evading the payment of federal taxes on lottery operators); Teffera, 985 F.2d at 1087 (noting that courts have found that, although evidence "may be probative of [a] defendant’s knowledge that he was ‘caught up in a situation involving criminal activity,' ” that is "not sufficient to show that [the] defendant knew of the specific conspiracy charged by the government” (quoting United States v. Nusraty, 867 F.2d 759, 765 (2d Cir.1989))); cf. United States v. Stanchich, 550 F.2d 1294, 1300 (2d Cir.1977) (Friendly, J.) (<HOLDING>). 5 . See United States v. Dellosantos, 649
recognizing both aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties and aiding and abetting conversion holding that mere negative acquiescence  in the criminal conduct of others even with guilty knowledge is not sufficient to establish aiding and abetting holding it was not a surprise or unfair to the defendant for the state to pursue a theory of aiding and abetting at trial when the charging document did not refer to aiding and abetting recognizing aiding and abetting conversion recognizing aiding and abetting trespass