How have courts responded to a jury's question about aiding and abetting?

courts must "help the jury understand the legal principles it is asked to apply." (People v. Beardslee (1991) 53 Cal.3d 68, 97.) Applying that admonition here, it could be said that the trial court, at minimum, should have responded to the jury's conspiracy-related question by stating that conspiracy was not at issue in the case, but that aiding and abetting was at issue, and then referring the jury to the specific aiding and abetting instructions that were given.⁶