Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
v. Grimes, 173 F.3d 634, 637 (7th Cir.1999). Crimes against vulnerable victims also warrant additional punishment because the criminal’s choice of such victims evidences an “extra measure of criminal depravity.” United States v. Castellanos, 81 F.3d 108, 111 (9th Cir.1996). Further, the vulnerable victim enhancement serves the special needs of vulnerable victims by creating a greater level of societal protection for those who are most in need of such protection. See United States v. Randall, 162 F.3d 557, 560 (9th Cir.1998). Section 3Al.l(b)(l) of the Sentencing Guidelines provides that: “If the defendant knew or should have known that a victim of the offense was a vulnerable victim, increase [the offense level] by 2 additional levels.” We have explained the applicat 5 (9th Cir.2000) ; United States v. Randall, 162 F.3d 557, 560
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that prosecutors statement that crime shouldnt go on was simply a way of saying that defendant had engaged in criminal conduct and should not be permitted to continue that criminal conduct
B. holding a sleeping victim of sexual abuse was particularly susceptible to criminal conduct
C. holding a car salesman who was obligated to go on a drive with assailants was particularly susceptible to criminal conduct
D. holding that criminal conduct on premises was not foreseeable
E. holding persons known to have fallen for telemarketing scams previously were particularly susceptible to criminal conduct
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.