Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
improper voir dire questions, a party must make a timely, specific objection at the earliest possible opportunity. Turner v. State, 805 S.W.2d 423, 431 (Tex.Crim.App.1991). The State asked the jury panel members whether they would require more evidence than one witness if they found the witness to be credible and believed the State proved all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt through that witness. Appellant did not object until after the State had directed the question to two panel members, and one of those potential jurors had further dialogue with the State about the question. Accordingly, appellant did not object at the earliest possible opportunity and waived the issue for our review. See Thrift v. State, 134 S.W.3d 475, 477 (Tex.App.-Waco 2004, no pet. granted) . Appellant’s first issue is overruled.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding error was not preserved where matter was explored with jury panel before defendant objected
B. holding that where the trial court is on notice of error in seating the panel before the jury is sworn and the error is not corrected automatic reversal is required
C. holding that error was preserved when defendant objected to question regarding defendant was under arrest immediately following question about postarrest event sufficient to put trial court on notice of appellants state constitutional grounds for objection
D. holding issues not raised before the district court are not preserved for appeal
E. holding that defendant must have clearly objected at trial to the matter he is raising on appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.