Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
traffic stop should have concluded. Accordingly, Clayborn asserts that Detective Hall could not ask for his license and registration because it was not reasonably related to the circumstances that justified the traffic stop. We disagree. On appeal from a district court’s denial of a motion to suppress evidence, this court reviews, the factual findings for clear error and the question of whether a Fourth Amendment violation occurred de novo. United States v. Allegree, 175 F.3d 648, 650 (8th Cir.1999). Clayborn does not challenge the factual finding that Detective Hall’s traffic stop was justified and lawful, because it was based on an objectively reasonable, although mistaken, belief that a traffic violation had occurred. See United States v. Peltier, 217 F.3d 608, 610 (8th Cir.2000) . Therefore, the issue is whether the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an officers mistaken belief that the defendant was speeding was not an objectively reasonable purpose for a traffic stop
B. holding that a suspects ability to proffer an innocent explanation for the facts does not negate probable cause
C. holding that the dismissal of an indictment did not negate the presumption of probable cause
D. holding the fact that officers belief proved to be mistaken does not negate a finding of probable cause
E. holding that where the defendant obtained a nondefaulted debt under the mistaken belief that the debt was in default and where the defendants subsequent collection activities were based on that mistaken belief the defendant was a debt collector for purposes of the fdcpa
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.