Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
sense impression exception is that substantial contemporaneity of event and statement minimizes unreliability due to defective recollection or conscious fabrication. There is no per se rule . indicating what time interval is too long under Rule 803(1).... ” United States v. Hawkins, 59 F.3d 723, 730 (8th Cir.1995) (alteration in original) (quotations and citations omitted), vacated on other grounds, 516 U.S. 1168, 116 S.Ct. 1257, 134 L.Ed.2d 206 (1996). In Hawkins, the defendant argued that the district court abused its discretion in admitting the victim’s “911 call because the contents of the tape are inadmissible hearsay” and contended that the victim had time to fabricate her story. Id. at 730. We held that the victim’s “statements from the 911 tape were 60-61 (N.D.Ill.1991) ; Bemis v. Edwards, 45 F.3d 1369, 1372 (9th
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding railroad workers statement to police made after he had walked approximately 100 feet admissible as a present sense impression
B. holding that under certain circumstances statements on a 911 tape may be admissible as a present sense impression
C. holding statement made twentythree minutes after event admissible as a present sense impression
D. holding that tapes of two 911 calls the first 2 to 3 minutes after the shooting and the other approximately 16 minutes after shooting were sufficiently contemporaneous with the event and therefore admissible as present sense impressions
E. holding statements on 911 tape admissible as present sense impression where call was made almost immediately after the defendant left the store after a shooting incident
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.