Wrong flaw. Winning a bet with stolen money doesn’t increase the amount stolen, but (A) doesn’t mention intent at all. The stimulus, meanwhile, presents the outcome of someone’s action and concludes they intended to produce that outcome, so (A) doesn’t match.

Wrong flaw. (B) tells us that a person knows two pieces of information that can support a valid inference, but we don’t know whether they are capable of drawing that inference. The stimulus, meanwhile, presents the outcome of someone’s action and concludes they intended to produce that outcome, so (B) doesn’t match.

(C) presents the outcome of someone’s action (disappointing Jerry) and then incorrectly concludes that they intended to produce that outcome. The stimulus also presents the outcome of someone’s action and concludes that they intended to produce that outcome, so (C) matches.

No flaw. If the rain broke the dam, and the broken dam flooded the fields, then the rain caused the flooded fields. We want an answer choice that concludes someone did something on purpose, so (D) doesn’t match.

No flaw. If the power plant raised the water temperature, and the raised temperature caused a decrease in fish, then the power plant caused a decrease in fish. We want an answer choice that concludes someone did something on purpose, so (E) doesn’t match.