Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
no report of any property crime, personal crime, or any weapons. The officer agreed that there was “nothing in Dispatch ... to imply that this may be a dangerous situation.” Id. Here, as in Hughes, there was no disturbance call or suspicious activity reported. The similarities end there, however. Before being ordered to stop, Mr. Charles raced up a flight of stairs. He then ran into an officer, and attempted to break the officer’s hold, pulling him down several steps at the same time. It is also a relevant consideration, though not necessarily dispositive, that the officers, upon arrival, encountered Mr. Charles along with several others at the apartment building, late at night, and in' a high-crime area. See Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 147-48, 92 S.Ct. 1921, 32 L.Ed.2d 612 (1972) . Although Mr. Charles’s response to his
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that ones presence in a high crime area late at night without more will not justify an investigatory stop
B. holding that the fact that an investigatory stop took place in a high crime area is pertinent to a terry analysis
C. holding that circumstances created reasonable suspicion for investigatory stop
D. holding that the forceable stop at issue was an investigatory stop rather than an arrest
E. holding that in a high crime area unprovoked headlong flight from police can form the basis for reasonable suspicion under terry
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.