Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of the trial court should not be disturbed unless the error is manifest. Hill v. State, 477 So.2d 553, 556 (Fla.1985). A potential juror should be excused on motion of a party if there is any reasonable doubt that the juror possesses “that state of mind which will enable him to render an impartial verdict based solely on the evidence submitted and the law announced at the trial.” Id. at 555 (quoting Singer v. State, 109 So.2d 7 (Fla.1959)). A trial court’s ruling on a cause challenge will be sustained on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. Kessler v. State, 752 So.2d 545 (Fla.1999). Based on Elledge’s equivocal responses, we disagree with the trial court’s conclusion that Elledge was sufficiently rehabilitated to serve on the jury. See, e.g., Bryant v. State, 656 So.2d 426 (Fla.1995) ; Hamilton v. State, 547 So.2d 630 (Fla.1989)
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a juror need not be excused for cause merely because he gives equivocal re sponses
B. holding that it was error to deny cause challenge because although juror stated he could follow courts instructions his other responses were sufficiently equivocal to cast doubt
C. holding that a jury is presumed to follow a judges instructions
D. holding that a jury is presumed to follow the trial courts instructions
E. recognizing that responses to artful questions and inaccurate responses do not require that a challenge for cause be granted
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.