OA is mentioned
When the defendant in a trial chooses not to testify , the jury is not supposed to view this as evidence of the defendant's guilt or innocence . Rather, the jury should base its decision on the evidence that is presented throughout the trial . Nevertheless, jurors will often take the failure of the defendant to testify as evidence of that defendant's guilt .
Which of the following conclusions can most properly be drawn from the information above ?
(A) Most defendants who refuse to testify in their trials are in fact guilty
(B)The rules should be modified to testify regardless of their guilt or innocence
(C) The fact that a defendant refuses to testify is sometimes unfairly considered by a jury
(D) A defendant would sometimes be better served by testifying at trial than by choosing not to testify
(E) Even when a defendant does testify some jurors choose not to believe the defendant's testimony


OA [spoiler]C[/spoiler]
I mentioned the OA


This Cr is from veritas prep sc guide. I found C and D to be the possible solutions.
Considering that an innocent defendant could be pronounced guilt in case he chooses not to testify , wouldnt opting to testify be a better option for him/her .

Could An instructor please help me eliminate D ?