With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". condition which is consistent with [criminal activity] will not predicate reasonable suspicion, if that factual condition occurs even more frequently among the law abiding public.... ”). The Government also argues that El-masry’s deletion of five or six telephone numbers from his cellular phone while he waited for the plane to reach the gate “could have been interpreted as destroying evidence^]” Gov’t Br. at 16. This conclusion, however, is utter speculation; the Government’s Rule 56.1 Statement does not assert that Elmasry made any telephone calls during or after the flight, and the record gives no indication that Elmas-ry suspected he was about to be caught sufficient to imbue his acts with a suggestion of guilt. Cf. United States v. Gomez, 633 F.2d 999, 1002, 1008 (2d Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). Most troubling, the heavy reliance which the

A: holding that sounds indicating destruction of evidence after officers announced themselves and began to kick and bang on apartment door helped generate probable cause
B: holding that defendants constitutionally protected privacy interest began at the door to his room not at the door to the rooming house
C: holding that where other evidence established probable cause to believe that the defendant possessed controlled substances investigating officers had probable cause to search the defendants purse for similar evidence
D: holding that officers fear of imminent destruction of evidence may justify a warrantless entry
A.