Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
person), with RCW 9A.32.030(l)(a) (person commits first degree murder when, with a premeditated intent to cause the death of another person, he or she causes the death of such person or of a third person), and RCW 10.95.020 (listing aggravating circumstances). 5 Indeed, the trial court’s conclusion that reflection after the fact could show premeditation is probably wrong as a matter of law. To the extent that this is true, that decision is reviewed de novo. Walker, 136 Wn.2d at 771-72. Regardless of the standard applied, however, the trial court erred in concluding that the evidence did not support an inference that the shooting occurred without premeditation. 6 Br. of Resp’t at 14-15; Suppl. Br. of Pet’r at 9-10. 7 Compare State v. Tamalini, 134 Wn.2d 725, 728-36, 953 P.2d 450 (1998) , with Schaffer, 135 Wn.2d at 358-59 (remanding
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that aggravated battery is a lesser included offense of manslaughter
B. holding that due process does not require a lesser included offense instruction of manslaughter where not requested
C. holding that there are no lesser included offenses of second degree felony murder because of the multiple means of committing the offense
D. holding that the defendant who was charged with felony murder was not entitled to a lesser included instruction on manslaughter because manslaughter is neither a lesser included offense nor an inferior degree crime with respect to felony murder
E. holding that a lesser crime cannot be a lesser included offense of a greater crime if the lesser crime contains an essential element not included in the greater crime
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.