The correct answer is: He did not expect that he would make a profit or avoid a loss; He had reasonable grounds to believe that the information was widely known; He would have bought the shares anyway.

Three general defences are available under the Criminal Justice Act 1993, s.53 - not expecting a profit or avoidance of loss (i.e., an honest belief is sufficient, even if unreasonable); reasonable grounds to believe that the information had been disclosed widely (i.e., an honest belief is not enough); would have dealt in those securities anyway (e.g., to pay off an urgent debt). The other two situations will not help Paulo, as it is irrelevant that other people comitted the same offence, and one of the basic principles of criminal law is that ignorance of the law is not a defence.