Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
when Officer Brinson interviewed Thu-mann or Broderick. Nor does it provide any information about Thumann or Bro-derick, other than appellant’s alleged longtime friendship with Broderick’s family. Nor does it establish any reason for believing the information of either informant to be reliable and credible other than the confirmation of their information from the results of execution of the search warrant itself. And ex post facto confirmation of the reliability of information in a search warrant affidavit cannot be used to establish reliability for the purpose of establishing probable cause to obtain the warrant in the first place. There is, therefore, no basis for the magistrate to have relied upon the credibility and reliability of these informants. See Wilkerson, 726 S.W.2d at 545 ; McKissick, 209 S.W.3d at 212 (including
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that magistrate must have substantial basis for concluding that probable cause exists
B. holding that the plaintiff must show that there was a lack of probable cause for the criminal prosecution
C. holding that hearsay may be relied on to show probable cause when substantial basis exists for crediting it
D. holding that probable cause may be gleaned from the hearsay statements of informants
E. holding that probable cause may be determined on basis of collective knowledge of police
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.