Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
officers’ comments were not particularly “evocative.” Id. As such, the defendant “was not subjected/by the police to words or actions that the police should have known were likely to elicit an incriminating response.” Id. Innis clearly establishes that interrogation includes express questioning or its functional equivalent — any words or actions that police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response. Id. at 300-02, 100 S.Ct. 1682. The Supreme Court has provided little additional guidance on what constitutes the functional equivalent of express questioning, although it has suggested that interrogation may be limited to “compelling influences, psychological ploys, or direct questioning.” Arizona v. Mauro, 481 U.S. 520, 529, 107 S.Ct. 1931, 95 L.Ed.2d 458 (1987) . Innis thus provides a very general rule, and
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that defendants request to speak to his parents was not an invocation of the right to remain silent because defendant never gave the police any indication that he wanted to stop talking only indicating he wanted to take a break from the interrogation to speak with his parents
B. holding that allowing suspect to speak with his wife in the presence of a police officer was not interrogation as it did not fall into any of these categories
C. holding that questioning of a juvenile by a principal in presence of a police officer did not constitute an interrogation because principal was sole questioner and was not acting as an agent for police
D. holding that fifth amendment protection against selfincrimination requires police to notify suspect of right to counsel and to cut off interrogation once suspect invokes the right absent counsel further interrogation may not occur unless suspect initiates subsequent conversation if police initiate subsequent interrogation there can be no valid waiver of counsel even though police advise suspect of his or her constitutional rights and suspect acquiesces in the interrogation
E. holding that discharge of a police officer for the choice to enter into a relationship with the wife of his superior officer on the force was rational
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.