Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
jury from the accused and isolating its sentencing decision from the fact that the death sentence, if imposed, will actually result in the execution of a fellow human being.” J. Sullivan, supra, 15 N.M. L. Rev. 63. Consequently, “[t]he right to speak without threat of disclosing otherwise undisclosed information such as a prior record may prove valuable or decisive, to a capital defendant seeking to avoid the death penalty.” Id., 42. Moreover, I see “no reason why a capital defendant should have a lesser right to explain his position and ask for mercy by being sworn and subject to cross examination than a non-capital defendant, who has an unfettered right to allocute.” (Emphasis added.) United States v. Chong, supra, 104 F. Sup. 2d 1236; see State v. Strickland, supra, 243 Conn. 354 . As this court has stated, statutes must be
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the general rules of preservation apply in probation revocation proceedings
B. recognizing right of allocution in probation revocation proceedings
C. holding that probation revocation proceedings are clearly not criminal proceedings
D. holding that standard for revocation of probation is preponderance of the evidence
E. holding that a right to confrontation exists in parole revocation proceedings
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.