Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
accounting firm was not an abuse of discretion because the testimony helped establish Spivak’s state of mind. Under Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403, the district court’s ruling excluding both Bill Feinberg’s testimony and Cohn’s testimony about Joseph Reda’s comments was not an abuse of discretion. An erroneous jury charge is one that misleads the jury as to the proper legal standard or does not adequately inform the jury of the law. See Luciano v. Olsten Corp., 110 F.3d 210, 218 (2d Cir.1997). “Challenged jury instructions are reviewed de novo, but this Court will reverse only if all of the instructions, taken as a whole, caused the defendant prejudice. United States v. Bok, 156 F.3d 157, 160 (2d Cir. 1998); see also Thomley v. Penton Publ’g, Inc., 104 F.3d 26 (2d Cir.1997) .” Hester v. BIC Corp., 225 F.3d 178,186 (2d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that to grant a new trial the error must be more than harmless
B. holding cumulative error not reversible if it is more probably harmless than not
C. holding exclusion was harmless error
D. holding that in order to conclude that federal constitutional error is harmless court must find that error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
E. holding that admission of hearsay constituted harmless error when there was more than sufficient other evidence in the record to support the verdict
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.