With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". id= 1202657565227?slreturn= 20140505130019. 4 . See Curtis & Co. Mfg. v. Douglas, 79 Tex. 167, 15 S.W. 154, 155 (1890) (noting that nonpreservation of evidence was "a circumstance to be considered by the jury”); Underwood v. Coolgrove, 59 Tex. 164, 170 (1883) (recognizing that the refusal to produce evidence in a party’s possession without explanation as to why it was not produced creates the belief that it would not aid the case of the nonproducing party); Cheatham, 8 Tex. at 162. 5 . See Trevino, 969 S.W.2d at 952 (refusing to recognize an independent tort of spoliation); Wal-Mart Stores, 106 S.W.3d at 722 (concluding that a party must possess a duty to preserve evidence in order for a spoliation instruction to be proper); see also Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835, 841 (Tex.2004) (<HOLDING>). 6 . The Texas spoliation presumption is a

A: holding that an adverse inference for spoliation of evidence requires proof that evidence was destroyed with a culpable state of mind and that it was relevant to the partys claim or defense
B: holding that partys deliberate  destruction of relevant evidence justified deathpenalty sanctions
C: holding that officers fear of imminent destruction of evidence may justify a warrantless entry
D: holding that partys bad faith and callous disregard of his responsibilities justified courts striking of pleadings and entry of default judgment against him
B.