Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
“the voluntariness of a confession turns on whether the defendant’s will was overborne to the extent that [his] statements were not the result of a free and voluntary act.” John, 812 N.E.2d at 1224 (citations omitted); see also Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 285-87, 111 S.Ct. 1246. The SJC concluded that John’s confession was voluntary, discussing both John’s impression of the relevant meeting with Novak and his possible motivation for confessing to the FBI agent. John, 812 N.E.2d at 1224. After review of the record, we conclude that the SJC did not unreasonably apply, or act contrary to, Supreme Court law when concluding that John’s confession was voluntary. Although the SJC did not cite Supreme Court precedent, its voluntariness analysis was consistent with it. See Dagley, 540 F.3d at 16  (citations omitted). And the SJC’s
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that to pass muster under the contrary to prong a state court need not cite relevant supreme court precedent or even be aware of relevant cases so long as neither the reasoning nor the result of the statecourt decision contradicts them
B. holding that this court does not have jurisdiction over plaintiffs claims because the court may review neither criminal matters nor the decisions of district courts
C. holding aedpas contrary to clause does not require citation of our cases indeed it does not even require awareness of our eases so long as neither the reasoning nor the result of the statecourt decision contradicts them
D. recognizing that a failure to cite supreme court decisions does not itself suggest a state court decision is contrary to such precedents   so long as neither the reasoning nor the result of the statecourt decision contradicts them 
E. holding that evidence contrary to an administrators decision does not make the decision arbitrary and capricious so long as a reasonable basis appears for the decision
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.