[求助]OG 21题题目的意思不理解

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

(B)    if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food

(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food

(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior（B）

(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior

这句话前面说Defense attorneys有时说他们的client的不好的行为是消化了什么东西的反映，后面说但这些Defense attorneys说那些行为是因为食物过敏，他们的client就没有对他们的行为责任。

我感觉这里前后是举例的关系，可是为什么用but连接呢，让我犹豫了很久

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

这道题的逻辑是这样的，如果守卫者认为犯罪者的犯罪行为是饮食导致的话，那么假如这个逻辑：饮食——〉犯罪成立的话，“罪犯”就不用为他们的犯罪负责。

而这个逻辑这个暗示着罪犯不该被抓入监狱

我还是不明白为什么原句用but.按楼上的说法，逻辑中并没有转折的意思，那么为什么要用but呢？

还有OG说but之后的clause石修饰defense attorneys, 而不是perpetrators,这是怎么看出来的？

请高手指点，谢谢。

没人回答么？