Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
court’s holding in Reese indicates that escape is a continuing offense. A review of cases in other jurisdictions shows support for this characterization of the escape crime. Escape is considered a continuing offense by those courts — including the United States Supreme Court — that require an escapee to immediately submit to the authorities after an escape before the escapee can rely on a necessity defense to an escape charge. See United States v. Bailey, 444 U.S. 394, 413, 100 S.Ct. 624, 636, 62 L.Ed.2d 575, 592 (1980) (“[W]e think it clear beyond peradventure that escape from federal custody ... is a continuing offense and that an escapee can be held liable for failure to return to custody as well as for his initial departure.”); Wells v. State, 687 P.2d 346, 350 (Alaska Ct.App.1984) ; Harbin v. State, 581 So.2d 1263, 1266
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that in light of our recognition that escape presents a continuing threat of violence until the escapee is safely returned to custody we hold that for purposes of  2k21b5 every escape is sufficiently continuing such that possession of a gun subsequent to the initial departure from custody can qualify as being in connection with the escape
B. holding that because a  1326 violation constitutes a continuing offense venue may lie in any district in which the continuing conduct occurred
C. holding that necessity defense to escape did not require defendant to turn herself in and that escape is not a continuing offense
D. holding that failure to appear is also a continuing offense
E. holding that because the necessity defense requires a defendant to turn himself in escape is a continuing offense
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.