With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". court failed to question any of the prospective jurors regarding their understanding and acceptance of the first Zehr principle, defendant is presumed innocent of the charges against him. With regard to the second Zehr principle, the State’s burden of proof, the circuit court questioned the prospective jurors as to whether they would sign the appropriate verdict form if the State had or had not met its burden of proof. This was a “general question concerning the juror’s willingness to follow the law” (177 Ill. 2d R. 431, Committee Comments, at lxxix) which did not comply with the 2007 amended rule’s requirement that the court question the prospective jurors regarding their understanding and acceptance of the State’s burden. See also People v. Anderson, 389 Ill. App. 3d 1, 8 (2009) (<HOLDING>). The circuit court questioned the prospective

A: holding that such a general question regarding the prospective jurors willingness to follow the law did not comply with the 2007 amended version of rule 431b
B: holding that plan did not comply
C: holding that the february 28 2007 interim rule was invalid because it failed to comply with the administrative procedure act
D: recognizing general rule
A.