
Passage: The crime of unknown origin of a huge amount of property is objectively conducive to the protection of embezzlement and bribery. Once a huge amount of property is loaded into the basket of "unknown sources", it is not necessary to find out its sources one by one. How tolerant it is for those who were embezzlement and bribery.Moreover, the charge gives judicial personnel too much "discretion" and "room for blending". Therefore, the unknown source of a huge amount of property should be punished as the crime of embezzlement and bribery..
Question: Which of the following options does not support the above argument?
A. A.Corrupt officials know that once their embezzled and bribed property is found to be of "unknown origin", the punishment can be mitigated; China's existing means of investigation are backward, and those who confess may incur more severe punishment than those who do not confess.
B. B.Is there anyone who doesn't know where his family's property comes from? The crime of unknown origin of a huge amount of property is conducive to cracking down on corrupt officials "lightly and easily", but it is not conducive to social justice.
C. C.Presumption of innocence and "right to silence" are the basic concepts of the modern rule of law. If the defendant is not proved guilty, he should be found innocent.
D. D.The laws of Singapore, Brunei and India all stipulate that the unknown source of property of civil servants should be punished as embezzlement and bribery.
Answer: