Definition: In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Input: Chicago, 242 F.3d 737 (7th Cir.2001) (finding "a reasonable officer would have thought [the defendant] was trying to flee, thereby justifying the use of a higher degree of force to protect the community and the officers than that needed for someone who committed only a minor traffic violation" where the defendant did not pull over after being followed by police cars playing their sirens); Brooks v. City of Aurora, Ill., 653 F.3d 478, 486-87 (7th Cir.2011) ("An officer, faced with a suspect fleeing toward his home and ignoring police commands, is not obliged to give that suspect an opportunity to retreat into his home and, perhaps, to fortify himself or to escape before the officer employs reasonable means of incapacitation); cf. United States v. Norris, 640 F.3d 295, 303 (7th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). Officer Drumm's actions were also reasonable
Holding statements: (A) holding that transportation of arrestee to police station is service of police under the ada (B) holding that an officers single use of a taser was reasonable where used to subdue an arrestee who had failed to accede to repeated police commands to stop his retreat into his home (C) holding that there was reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant based on his presence in an area known for heavy narcotics trafficking and his flight upon seeing police officers (D) holding that a police officers rape of an arrestee was outside the scope of his employment (E) holding that an unconstitutional seizure occurred when police officers discovered that a suspect illegally sold alcohol from his home and ordered him to open the door involuntarily to be arrested inside his home
Output:
(B)