Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
incriminating. Id. at 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037. In that case, the production itself communicated a “statement[ ] of fact”; it proved that the documents existed, were authentic, and were in the custody of the producer. Id. at 36,120 S.Ct. 2037 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). There, the Supreme Court held that the physical production was a violation of the Fifth Amendment because the preparation of the produced documents was the only means through which the government obtained the evidence which led to the indictment. Id. at 42-43,120 S.Ct. 2037. This case, however, is more akin to the physical trait cases. Tattoos which are openly visible on the body are physical traits, as are voice, appearance, and handwriting. See United States v. Bay, 762 F.2d 1314, 1815-16 (9th Cir.1984) . Cf. United States v. Williams, 461 F.3d 441,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a defendant need not take the stand to be able to show the jury the tattoos on his hands which were an openly visible physical characteristic
B. holding that an officer stopped the defendant when he ordered the defendant to take his hand out of his pocket
C. holding that the jury need not be specifically instructed to find whether there is a connection between the defendant the weapon and the crime
D. holding that the failure to inform the defendant of his right to a sixperson jury and the failure to consult the defendant as to his wishes was an error for which a new trial was the only remedy
E. holding that confession was coerced because it was prompted by a credible threat of physical violence where official told defendant that defendant was in danger of physical harm at hands of other inmates and offered to protect defendant in exchange for a confession
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.