Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
his motion for summary judgment, predicated upon his version of the events. Here the Court considers the issue on Nuon's motion, but on Kinney’s facts. 8 . An arrest without probable cause also establishes liability under the MCRA. The MCRA was intended to provide a state law remedy co-extensive with 42 U.S.C. § 1983, except that the MCRA also reaches private action, and requires a showing that a constitutional violation was effected “by threats, intimidation or coercion.” See Bally v. Northeastern Univ., 403 Mass. 713, 718, 532 N.E.2d 49 (1989); Batchelder v. Allied Stores Corp., 393 Mass. 819, 822-23, 473 N.E.2d 1128 (1985). An arrest without probable cause has been found to constitute coercion within the meaning of the MCRA. See Daley v. Harber, 234 F.Supp.2d 27, 31-32 (D.Mass.2002) ; Zurakowski v. D’Oyley, 46 F.Supp.2d 87, 88
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a police officers actions in effecting arrest without probable cause constituted coercion under the mcra
B. holding that the police officers had probable cause to make a warrantless entry
C. holding  1983 action lies for warrantless arrest without probable cause
D. holding that the defense of good faith and probable cause is available to officers in common law actions for false arrest and imprisonment as well as in actions brought pursuant to section 1983
E. holding that police officers have probable cause to arrest an individual with a sufficiently similar appearance to the description in a warrant
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.