Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
their arguments to the jury.” State v. Miller, 271 N.C. 646, 659, 157 S.E.2d 335, 346 (1967). Further, the control of counsel’s arguments “must be left largely to the discretion of the trial judge,” State v. Johnson, 298 N.C. 355, 369, 259 S.E.2d 752, 761 (1979), because the trial judge ‘sees what is done, and hears what is said. He is cognizant of all the surrounding circumstances, and is a better judge of the lati tude that ought to be allowed to counsel in the argument of any particular case.’ State v. Thompson, 278 N.C. 277, supporting the jury’s verdict notwithstanding improper characterizations regarding the veracity of witnesses’ statements has been sufficient in some cases to prevent the imposition of a new trial. See e.g. State v. Sexton, 336 N.C. 321, 444 S.E.2d 879 (1994) ; Thompson, 278 N.C. at 277, 179 S.E.2d at 315
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it is improper for a prosecutor to assume the existence of prejudicial facts not in evidence
B. holding it was improper for prosecutor to inject personal opinion in statements to the jury in closing argument
C. holding that even if the statements were improperly admitted any error was harmless since there was overwhelming evidence connecting the defendant to the conspiracy
D. holding that statements to the jury made by the prosecutor asserting that a defense witness was lying was improper but considering all the facts and circumstances revealed in the record which showed overwhelming evidence against the defendant such statements did not constitute a prejudicial error
E. holding that prosecutors statements regarding his opinion as to the truthfulness of a defense witness considering the evidence against the defendant did not reach the level of the grossly improper statements which would require the trial court to correct them ex mero motu
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.