Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
by a criminal defendant or by his counsel for the sole propose of aiding the accused and his counsel in the preparation of his defense”). Appropriately, the attorney-client privilege “extends to interpreters, and to clerks and agents employed by the attorney ... in the business committed to his [or her] charge . . . .” Goddard v. Gardner, 28 Conn. 172, 175 (1859); see id., 175-76 (while recognizing privilege extends to certain court personnel and agents of attorney, court refused to extend privilege to protect communication overheard by attorney’s son, where son was “in no way connected with the case or with the parties” and had “no interest in, or connection with, the professional business of the attorney”); see also Pagano v. Ippoliti, 245 Conn. 640, 650 n.12, 716 A.2d 848 (1998) . B In the present case, the parties do not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that agency is provable only by principals conduct and not by subjective beliefs of those dealing with alleged agent
B. holding that the lack of evidence of the alleged principals control over the alleged agent precludes the finding of an agency relationship
C. recognizing that statements made by agent on behalf of principal to principals attorney may be protected by principals attorneyclient privilege
D. holding that a principal is bound by a contract entered into by the principals agent on her behalf if the agent had authority to bind the principal
E. holding that it is the principals conduct attitude and knowledge that determines whether an agent had apparent authority
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.