Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
are proper....” Pope, 94 So. at 869; see also Pait v. State, 112 So.2d 380 (Fla. 1959). A trial court’s limitation on voir dire is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Pope, 94 So. at 865. Defense counsel attempted to question potential jurors as to whether “a girl could come to court and lie?” and whether “a girl can come to court and lie about being raped?” and about a “rape charge.” The court prohibited references to “a girl” and “rape charge” because they seem to refer to the facts of the case. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by placing these reasonable limitations on voir dire. Counsel’s ability to determine the fairness of jurors was not restricted by this limitation. Any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Blevins v. State, 766 So.2d 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) .
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that comment by prosecutor in closing argument that defense counsel did not produce evidence of the defendants innocence was not a comment on the defendants failure to testify
B. holding that reversal for a new trial was required where jury instruction relating to fraud was incorrect
C. holding that the trial courts actions in sustaining the defendants objections were sufficient to remedy any possible harm resulting from the mere asking of the three questions by the prosecutor
D. holding that once counsel was appointed defendant spoke to the court through counsel and thus the court was not required to respond to defendants request for a speedy trial
E. holding that reversal was not required where the trial court prevented defense counsel from asking hypothetical questions to illustrate the difficulty of proving a defendants innocence
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.