Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
this assertion and appellant has failed to offer other relevant authority concerning his point of error. See Tex.R.App.Proc. 38.1(f)-(h) (formerly Tex.R.App.Proc. 74(f)). MEYERS, Judge, concurring. The majority either assumes the trial court had the foresight to consider factors this Court would, more than two years later, recognize as important in assessing admissibility of victim related evidence at punishment in a capital murder case or undertakes the appropriate consideration of such factors itself in a kind of silent de novo review to which no one is privy. In either case, I decline to join them. At the time of appellant’s trial admissibility of victim related evidence at punishment was, at the very most, questionable. Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d at 262 (Tex.Crim.App.1998). A majority of the Court in Mosley rendered
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing this rule
B. recognizing that in the context of the open fields doctrine ajlthough the decisions in this state may be somewhat more restrictive than those in other states or than federal decisions no compelling reason has been demonstrated in this case for modifying or overruling them
C. recognizing the uncertain state of federal law in this area
D. recognizing that individualized sentencing has long been a cornerstone to wisconsins criminal justice jurisprudence
E. recognizing our jurisprudence in this area has been somewhat inconsistent and confusing
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.