Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
including law enforcement and the State of Illinois Department of Insurance....” (R. 51, Superseding Indictment, Count One ¶ 5.) The indictment further alleges that Segal “knew and believed that NNIB’s PFTA was not operated properly and according to the requirements of the law and the Code....” (Id.) By implication, then, the Government pleads that Segal knew he was violating a legal duty, satisfying one definition of “willful.” See Ratzlaf v. United States, 510 U.S. 135, 141-42, 114 S.Ct. 655, 126 L.Ed.2d 615 (1994). Furthermore, we note that in denying motions to dismiss indictments or in affirming these denials, courts have held that § 2(b)’s “willfully” language need not be plead explicitly in the indictment. See United States v. Krogstad, 576 F.2d 22, 28-29 (3d Cir.1978) ; United States v. Grubb, 469 F.Supp. 991,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that although the indictment did not track the exact language of the statute the indictment when read as a whole sufficiently stated facts which support every element of the crime charged and apprised defendant of the specific charge against him
B. holding that  willfulness need not be expressly stated in the indictment charging a violation of 18 usc s 2 where the indictment simply stated that the defendant caused a false audit report to be submitted and did not specify a charge under  2a or  2b
C. holding that because the bank had no duty to report defendants structured transactions these transactions did not constitute material facts within the meaning of 18 usc  1001 consequently defendant may not be held criminally liable under 18 usc  2b for causing the bank to fail to disclose a material fact
D. recognizing that the government need only prove that crime occurred reasonably near the date stated in the indictment
E. holding that the fact of prior convictions under  924e need not be charged in an indictment and proven to a jury and also that the government need not charge in an indictment and prove to a jury that a defendants prior conviction constitutes a violent felony under  924e
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.