Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
jurors should have been allowed to hear the 911 tape is no exceptio be worded Independently of our concern regarding the decision about the tape, we also hold that the conference triggered Frantz’s Faretta rights because it resolved the content of the judge’s response to the jurors’ request. The chance to shape the jury’s interpretation of an important tactical decision is at least as important as the chance to make the decision itself. And regardless of the judge’s leeway in granting the jurors’ request, the substance and wording of the judge’s response could have influenced the jurors’ interpretation of the tape’s absence. We have repeatedly recognized how seriously jurors consider judges’ responses to their questions. In federal court, we allow trial judges substantial th Cir.1986) . Because of the delicate nature of such
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that a defendants participation in formulating a response to a deadlocked jury  may be important to ensuring the fairness of the verdict particularly because there may be holdout jurors
B. holding that trial court was not required to instruct the jury to continue deliberations because despite jurors initial indication that the verdict was not hers she unequivocally affirmed the verdict in response to additional questions
C. recognizing that immunity may be waived
D. holding that there was an impermissible compromise where the damages award was inadequate liability was hotly contested at trial the jury was deadlocked the court charged the jury to continue deliberating to reach a decision and less than one hour later the jury returned a verdict
E. holding that the verdict must be sustained if there is any competent evidence to support the verdict
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.