Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
evidence on you. Even if what you told us is true, a jury will still convict you of first degree murder. You’ve got 12 people sitting back there and they’ve read about all this stuff in the papers and, man, these people will just string you by the nape of your neck right now if they get their hands on you. Hell, we know you done it. You know you done it. We can prove it in court. Admit it. Say you’re sorry. Try and get off light. That’s your only recourse. Brewer, 386 So.2d at 234-35 (emphasis supplied). To advise a suspect of potential penalties and consequences does not amount to a threat. See Mendoza-Cecelia, 963 F.2d at 1475. In a similar manner, encouraging a suspect to cooperate with law enforcement is not coercive conduct. See Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So.2d 495, 512 (Fla.2005) . It is recognized that advising a suspect that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding defendant does not waive fourth amendment protection by signing parole agreement but the search condition does confirm right of parole officer to conduct reasonable searches within scope of parole mission
B. holding that parole officers advisement to defendant to cooperate did not vitiate the voluntariness of his statements
C. holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to give the defendants tendered instruction regarding the voluntariness of his confession
D. holding that the defendant had no legitimate basis to justify his refusal to cooperate with his appointed attorney and therefore did not demonstrate good cause for the court to appoint substitute counsel
E. holding that habeas petition challenging the state boards decision to defer his scheduled parole release date was rendered moot by prisoners release from custody on parole and subsequent incarceration for violating his parole
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.