Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Id. at 455, 105 S.Ct. at 2104, 85 L.Ed.2d at 466. The Benchimol Court declined to impose an implied obligation to enthusiastically advocate for the recommended sentence under the federal plea bargain rule. Id. at 455, 105 S.Ct. at 2105, 85 L.Ed.2d at 466 ("But our view of Rule 11 ([c]) is that it speaks in terms of what the parties in fact agree to, and does not suggest that such implied-in-law terms as were read into this agreement by the Court of Appeals have any place under the Rule."). By contrast, long after Benchimol was decided in 1985, we reiterated the prosecutor’s obligation under Iowa law is to not only recite the recommended sentence but also indicate that it is " 'worthy of the court’s acceptance.’ ” Bearse, 748 N.W.2d at 216 (quoting Horness, 600 N.W.2d at 299-300 ). The Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the nature of the therapistpatient relationship gives rise to a duty  to refrain from  causing emotional or mental harm to the patient
B. recognizing prosecutors implicit obligation to refrain from suggesting more severe sentencing alternatives
C. recognizing a previous reprimand was an aggravating circumstance warranting more severe discipline
D. holding that state prosecutors agreements with defendant not binding on federal prosecutors
E. holding that insurance obligation was primary to indemnity obligation
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.