With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Abreu’s App. at 1878.) The defendants do not challenge now, nor did they contest at trial, the accuracy of these statements as related to the bank statements. The declaration that the bank statements were kept in the ordinary course of the banks’ businesses did not add to the Government’s case against the defendants for submitting false loan applications. It was the information contained in the bank statements themselves, which is not contested on appeal, that the Government relied upon to make its case. The authenticity of the bank statements has never been challenged, and the admission of the statements contained in the Rule 902(11) Certifications as related to the bank statements simply had no effect on the verdict. Cf. United States v. Reifler, 446 F.3d 65, 87 (2d Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>); Government of Virgin Islands v. Joseph, 964

A: holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt
B: holding erroneous admission of evidence not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the only other evidence against defendant was the uncorroborated testimony of a cooperating witness of questionable credibility
C: holding error in admission of evidence is harmless when it was merely cumulative to other evidence in the record
D: holding the admission of plea allocutions of codefendants to be harmless against a crawford challenge where the government did not emphasize the allocutions which were used only as corroboration for other evidence showing the existence of an enterprise in a rico case
D.