Question: A man was under suspicion for participating in the commission of a bank robbery. A grand jury was convened to consider whether there was sufficient evidence against the man to indict him for the crime. During the grand jury hearing, the state called a police detective to testify. The detective testified that following the bank robbery, he interviewed a bystander who stated that his friend witnessed the robbery and told the bystander that the man was the person who committed the crime. Neither the man nor his attorney was allowed to be present during the grand jury proceeding. As a result, the man did not have the opportunity to cross- examine the detective or to object to the admissibility of his testimony. A grand jury indictment against the man was issued, and the prosecution has formally charged the man with bank robbery. While the man awaits trial, his attorney has filed an appropriate motion to dismiss, challenging the admissibility of evidence during the grand jury proceeding. The motion should be
A: denied, because the issue before the grand jury is probable cause, not guilt. 
B: denied, because although the detective's testimony is hearsay, rules of evidence other than privilege are not applicable to grand jury proceedings. 
C: granted, because the grand jury hearing violated the man's Sixth Amendment privilege of confrontation, since there was no opportunity to cross-examine the detective. 
D: granted, because the grand jury indictment was based upon inadmissible evidence that resulted in an  Give two different versions of responses. Please separate the responses with 6 asterisk symbols: ******.
user