Prosecution of Dr. Iaconis for arson. To prove the fire was set intentionally, the prosecution calls Jay Leiner, a police arson investigator ho has served in that capacity for ten years after spending several years as a beat officer.

Jay Leiner never attended college and had no special schooling in arson investigation, but learned investigative techniques from a senior investigator with whom he worked for two years. From techniques learned through this experience, Leiner spoke with eyewitnesses who saw the fire at various stages and concluded from information as well as his own investigation of the fire scene that the fire was set intentionally.

Which of the following objections to Leiner's testimony is the court likely to sustain, if either?

A. Leiner is not a qualified expert.

B. Leiner's testimony about the cause of the fire should be excluded as inadmissible hearsay.

C. The court is likely to sustain both of these objections.

D. The court is likely to rule that it does not matter anyway because Dr. Iaconis is a known arsonist.

E. None of the above.