Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
reasonably available means”). Generett has satisfied neither the Brady nor the Trombetta test. Brady v. Maryland, to begin with, does not apply. The LeSabre from which Officers Teeters and Smith recovered the firearm — as Generett himself appears to recognize, see Generett Br. at 13 (“[T]he disposal of the car, in essence, destroyed potentially useful evidence that may have been exculpatory in nature.”) — was at best only potentially useful evidence. See Illinois v. Fisher, 540 U.S. 544, 548, 124 S.Ct. 1200, 157 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2004) (deeming destroyed evidence to be only “potentially useful” when “[a]t most, [the defendant] could hope that, had the evidence been preserved, a fifth test conducted on the substance would have exonerated him”); Youngblood, 488 U.S. at 58, 109 S.Ct. 333 ; Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 488 — 89, 104 S.Ct.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the defendant bears the burden of proof and that such a disposition does not violate the due process clause
B. holding that police failure to inform the accused of his attorneys attempts to contact him and misstatements to the attorney as to whether the accused was at the police station did not violate the accuseds due process rights
C. holding that states inadvertent or negligent destruction of evidence did not violate defendants due process rights
D. holding that doctrine does not violate due process
E. holding that the failure of the police to refrigerate  clothing and to perform tests on   semen samples can at worst be described as negligent and did not violate the due process clause
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.