With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". ‘to certify to the correctness of a copy of a record kept in his office,’ but had ‘no authority to furnish, as evidence for the trial of a lawsuit, his interpretation of what the record contains or shows, or to certify to its substance or effect.’ ” Melendez-Diaz, supra at 2539, quoting State v. Wilson, 141 La. 404, 409 (1917). The Court in Melendez-Diaz further explained that “[b]usiness and public records are generally admissible absent confrontation not because they qualify under an exception to the hearsay rules, but because — having been created for the administration of an entity’s affairs and not for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trial — they are not testimonial.” Melendez-Diaz, supra at 2539-2540. See Commonwealth v. Weeks, 77 Mass. App. Ct. 1, 5-7 (2010) (<HOLDING>). Thus, when determining the admissibility of a

A: holding that admission of business records does not violate the confrontation clause under roberts
B: holding that doctrine does not violate right of confrontation
C: holding that admission in evidence of certified copies of docket sheets of defendants prior convictions did not violate defendants sixth amendment right to confrontation because such records are not testimonial
D: holding that admission of statement with references to we or they which did not directly implicate defendant did not violate defendants confrontation rights
C.