Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Vasquez-Lopez and Barragan-Sanchez, we relied on the aliens’ previous voluntary departure agreements in rejecting their arguments for relief. Zazueta-Carrillo, 322 F.3d at 1173-74 (rejecting alien’s argument that the voluntary departure period did not begin until after our review, in light of the “specific policy” of voluntary departure to encourage prompt departure); Vasquez-Lopez, 343 F.3d at 974 (“While the statute provides some incentives to an alien to apply for voluntary departure and thus avoid removal proceedings and removal, nothing there suggests that an alien who commits to departure in order to avoid such proceedings is nevertheless entitled to continue accruing ‘presence’ so as to become eligible for other discretionary relief.”); Barragan-Sanchez, 471 F.2d at 760-61 ; cf. Doherty, 502 U.S. at 324,112 S.Ct. 719
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding confessions voluntary and noting that these men were not young soft ignorant or timid they were not inexperienced in the ways of crime or its detection nor were they dumb as to their rights
B. holding that aliens continuous presence in the country was interrupted by voluntary departure under threat of deportation proceedings
C. holding that because aliens two previous voluntary departures were the result of implied agreements and were not therefore strictly voluntary they constituted significant departures that precluded a finding of seven years continuous presence in the united states under a rule that excused absences that were brief casual and innocent
D. holding that a plaintiffs voluntary dismissal of his claims with prejudice constituted a final order that was appealable
E. holding that defendants were not in control and therefore were not supervisors and not subject to liability under  1983
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.