Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
causation standard under the enhanced penalty provision of 18 U.S.C. § 1347: Our decision is also guided by the principles of proximate cause. “The concept of proximate cause incorporates the notion that an accused may be charged with a criminal offense even though his acts were not the immediate cause of the victim’s death or injury.” Guillette, 547 F.2d at 749. “In many situations giving rise to criminal liability,” the harm “is not directly caused by the acts of the defendant but rather results from intervening forces or events.” Id. “Where such intervening events are foreseeable and naturally result from [the defendant]^ criminal conduct,” the defendant is “criminally responsible for the resulting harm.” Id.) see also Hoopengamer v. United States, 270 F.2d 465, 469 (6th Cir.1959) . Therefore, even if [the defendant] did not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding defendant culpable for the natural and probable consequence   of his conduct
B. holding that the bar against the admission of evidence of subsequent remedial measures comes into play only where negligence or other culpable conduct is alleged
C. holding that a trial court errs by failing to limit the definitions of the culpable mental states as they relate to the conduct elements involved in the particular offense
D. holding destruction of trial transcript pursuant to court rule ten years after defendants escape disadvantaged defendant due to his own culpable misconduct
E. holding negligent conduct was not culpable meaning not devious deliberate or in bad faith
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.