Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
manner. See id. IV Finally, Queen challenges his sentence, contending that the district court,.in adjusting his offense level upward by two levels based on perjury, failed to make findings detailed enough to satisfy the requirements for an upward adjustment outlined in United States v. Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87, 113 S.Ct. 1111, 122 L.Ed.2d 445 (1993). Under Dunnigan, in. order to make an adjustment for perjury, a court must find that all of the elements of perjury were present in the defendant’s testimony. That is, the court must find that the defendant’s testimony was untruthful as to a material matter, and that, the false testimony was willful. Id. at 94-95, 113 S.Ct. at 1116-17. Although “it is preferable for a district court to address each element of the alleged perju Cir.1996) ; United States v. Morsley, 64 F.3d 907,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that evidence of threats or intimidation of a witness is admissible under rule 404b to show consciousness of guilt
B. holding evidence of prior witness intimidation admissible to show criminal intent and guilty conscience
C. recognizing that even evidence of a defendants and a witnesss prior bad acts was admissible to show inter alia the defendants familiarity with the witness
D. holding that extrinsic evidence admissible to determine intent of parties
E. holding on a criminal appeal that prior bad acts evidence is admissible to prove intent to commit the charged crime
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.