Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
that she made specific arguments outlining her objections to the jury instructions at the charge conference; however, arguments made at a charge conference do not preserve a subsequent challenge to a jury instruction on appeal. Rather, an objection “must be made at the close of the court’s initial instructions to the jury, and it must be stated with sufficient clarity or specificity to preserve the error.... ” McElmurry v. Uniroyal, Inc., 531 So.2d 859, 859 (Ala.1988). The objection made by McDonald at the close of the trial court’s instructions to the jury was not specific and accordingly fails to meet the requirements of Rule 51, Ala. R. Civ. P., for preserving any alleged error in jury instructions for appellate review. See also Burnett v. Martin, 405 So.2d 23, 27 (Ala.1981) . Because the alleged error was not preserved
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an exception to the charges having to do with contributory negligence  charges two three and four was insufficient to preserve issue for appeal
B. holding that two general objections were insufficient to properly preserve the issue
C. recognizing that conclusory statements do not preserve an issue for appeal
D. holding that the speedy trial clock for state charges did not begin to run when the defendant was taken into custody by federal authorities on federal charges but rather when he was indicted for the state charges
E. holding defendant failed to preserve burden of proof issue for appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.