Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
are admissible if they meet one of the exceptions under the Federal Rules of Evidence. FED. RULE EVID. 802. Thus, police investigative reports are admissible in certain circumstances under the business records exception. See Fed.R.Evid. 803(6); see also, United States v. Scallion, 533 F.2d 903, 915 (5th Cir.1976); Harris v. Browning-Ferris Indus., Chemical Svcs., Inc., 635 F.Supp. 1202, 1209 (M.D.La.1986). However, when police reports contain witness statements, and the witness statements are offered to prove their truth, the statements themselves generally are inadmissible. See Ariza v. City of New York, 139 F.3d 132, 133-34 (2d Cir.1998) (witness statements in police investigative report inadmissible as business record). United States v. Dotson, 821 F.2d 1034, 1035-36 (5th Cir.1987) ; United States v. Halperin, 441 F.2d 612,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that hearsay within a police report was inadmissible
B. holding that police report of witnesss statement was inadmissible because witness had not adopted report as accurate when matter was fresh in his memory
C. holding that police officers have a duty to conduct an investigation into the basis of the witness report
D. holding that witness statements in police report inadmissible
E. holding that a department of defense report was inadmissible
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.