Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
statutory sodomy, and it does pot consist of an attempt to commit the latter offense. Thus, first-degree sexiial misconduct as defined by section 566.090 does not satisfy any of the subparts of section 566.046.1(2) and therefore is not a lesser included offense of first-degree statutory sodomy. Our holding is consistent with State v. Greenlee, 327 S.W.3d 602, 621 (Mo.App. E.D. 2010), in which this Court held that first-degree sexual misconduct, as defined by section 566.090 is not a.lesser included offense of first-degree statutory sodomy because the former requires proof of “lack of consent.” Id. Ward’s argument is based entirely on the principle that a person under the age of fourteen can never legally consent to any kind of sexual activity. State v. Stokely, 842 S.W.2 Mo.banc 1965) ; State v. Baker, 276 S.W.2d 131, 133 (Mo. banc
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that motive is circumstantial evidence of intent
B. holding that mistake as to the age of the victim is no defense to statutory rape
C. holding that intent and motive play but little if any part in statutory rape
D. holding that very little  evidence is necessary to raise a genuine issue of fact regarding an employers motive any indication of discriminatory motive  may suffice to raise a question that can only be resolved by a factfinder
E. holding 404b evidence admissible under intent exception but not motive exception where motive not contested
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.