Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
at trial by the State was far more than Reynolds accepts. In addition to the evidence Reynolds has noted, the State also introduced expert testimony from a medical examiner demonstrating that the injury to Reynolds’ hand was inconsistent with his explanation of the injury; testimony from a neighbor of the victims who saw Danny Privett sitting on Reynolds’ car, which was parked at the victims’ residence the night the crimes were committed; microscopic and DNA analysis of a pubic hair found at the crime scene matched a hair sample taken from Reynolds; Reynolds’ admission during an interview with law officers that he had a heated argument with Danny Privett; eyewitness testimony corroborating the circumstances surrounding the argument between Reynolds and Danny Privett; evidence that ) . Based on the foregoing, we conclude that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that evidence of prior uncharged sexual conduct with the victim is admissible to corroborate the victims testimony
B. holding that evidence that the defendant had stalked threatened and assaulted the victim his exgirlfriend was evidence as to the nature of the defendants relationship with the victim and that it was relevant to establish motive
C. holding that case involving evidence such as eyewitness testimony placing the defendant at the scene acknowledgment by the defendant of a dispute with the victim and theft of the victims purse and dna evidence suggesting that the defendant had engaged in sexual relations with the victim could not be deemed entirely circumstantial
D. holding that before a defendant is entitled to introduce evidence of the victims character for violence there must be sufficient evidence to support a finding that the victim was the first aggressor and that once the defendant testified that he was attacked and cut by the victim without provocation before using the victims utility tool to stab the victim the defendant was clearly entitled to question the victim about past acts of violence reflected in court documents from the state of oregon
E. holding that uncharged sexual acts committed upon the same victim are admissible to show the conduct of the defendant toward the victim and to corroborate the evidence of the offense charged in the indictment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.