Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
- C - Police interrogated defendant three different times on October 28 before he confessed to the West Windsor crimes. When the police brought defendant to the station at 8:30 a.m., they informed him of his Miranda rights, and he signed a waiver. Defendant ate lunch at around 3:00 p.m. The first interrogation began at 3:37 p.m. At this first interrogation session, the police again read defendant his rights, and he signed another rights form. The interrogation lasted a little over an hour, at which point defendant started to cry and asked for a half-hour “to think.” The interrogation ceased, and the police returned defendant to his cell. By requesting “time to think,” defendant was not invoking his right to silence. See State v. Bey, 112 N.J. 123, 138-40, 548 A.2d 887 (1988) (Bey II) . Although the police granted defendant the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding a suspects request for some time to think alone was not an invocation of the right to silence
B. holding request to lie down and think about what happened  not a clear invocation of the right to silence
C. holding defendants request to lay down and think about what happened did not constitute invocation of right to silence as not every break in questioning compels renewed administration of the miranda warnings
D. holding that fresh miranda warnings are necessary after right to silence has been invoked
E. holding that defendants request to call his mother to get an attorney was an invocation of miranda rights requiring that further questioning must end
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.