Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
and not contradicted by external evidence, there can almost never be a finding of clear error.” United States v. Igbonwa, 120 F.3d 437, 441 (3d Cir.1997). As a result, the District Court did not clearly err when it found that the window was tint-free. Nor did the District Court err in concluding that the officers had a reasonable suspicion to stop Davis. The officers observed odd behavior through the front window—an exchange, shocked expressions, and tossing motions. Davis and Blackshear rapidly left the car and began walking away, the latter failing to close the car door. And the activity took place in a high-crime area. The officers thus had a reasonable suspicion that a crime might be afoot. See Terry, 392 U.S. at 30, 88 S.Ct. 1868; Wardlow, 528 U.S. at 124, 120 S.Ct. 673 ; see also United States v. Bonner, 363 F.3d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing presence in a high crime area unprovoked flight and nervous evasive behavior as factors supporting a reasonable suspicion
B. holding that nervous evasive behavior is a pertinent factor in determining reasonable suspicion
C. holding nervous behavior and inconsistent story justified reasonable suspicion and subsequent search
D. holding that nervous evasive behavior such as flight is a relevant factor in an examination of reasonable suspicion
E. holding that in a high crime area unprovoked headlong flight from police can form the basis for reasonable suspicion under terry
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.