Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
this would constitute a miscarriage of justice. The offense of loitering and prowling contains two elements: first the accused must be loitering and prowling in a manner not usual for law-abiding citizens; and second, the loitering and prowling must be under circumstances that threaten the public safety. State v. Ecker, 311 So.2d 104 (Fla.), cert. denied, Bell v. Florida, 423 U.S. 1019, 96 S.Ct. 455, 46 L.Ed.2d 391 (1975). With regard to the second element, “the p an open convenience store constitutes loitering and prowling in a manner unusual for law-abiding citizens, there was no evidence introduced at trial indicating that appellant’s actions were creating an imminent threat to the safety of persons or property in the area. See T.W. v. State, 675 So.2d 1018 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); R.D.W. (holding that juvenile’s and two other
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity after observing a group of men huddled around a closed store at 2 am
B. holding that change in schedule  from working 600 am to 230 pm with sundays and mondays off to working 730 am to 400 pm with sundays and tuesdays off  did not constitute adverse employment action
C. holding that the police officer had reasonable suspicion when he saw a vehicle moving with its lights off in the parking lot of a closed business in a rural area at 300 am
D. holding that juveniles presence one foot from closed pawn shop at 400 am while carrying chain saw case did not create imminent threat to the safety of persons or property in the area
E. holding that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the car in which the defendant was a passenger when the officer saw the vehicle come out from behind a closed building at 330 am and the building had been recently burglarized
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.