Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
as here, there is some evidence connecting defendant to those threats, testimony concerning the threats is admissible on the issue of consciousness of guilt.”); State v. Soke, 105 Ohio App.3d 226, 663 N.E.2d 986, 1001 (1995) (“[W]e note that evidence of threats or intimidation of witnesses reflects a consciousness of guilt and is admissible as admission by conduct.”); State v. Hicks, 333 N.C. 467, 428 S.E.2d 167, 177 (1993) (overruled on other grounds by State v. Buchanan, 353 N.C. 332, 543 S.E.2d 823 (2001)) (“An attempt by a defendant to intimidate a witness in an effort to prevent the witness from testifying or to induce the witness to testify falsely in his favor is relevant to show the defendant’s awareness of his guilt.”); Ransom v. State, 920 S.W.2d 288, 299 (Tex.Crim.App.1994) ; People v. Lucas, 151 Ill.2d 461, 177 Ill.Dec.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that rule 404b evidence is admissible in rebuttal
B. holding that evidence of threats or intimidation of a witness is admissible under rule 404b to show consciousness of guilt
C. holding that structural evidence showing the inception of the conspiracy prior to the charged activities was admissible under rule 404b
D. holding defendants false exculpatory statements admissible to show consciousness of guilt
E. holding criminal acts designed to reduce the likelihood of conviction including threats against witnesses are admissible under rule 404b as showing consciousness of guilt
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.