With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that the trial court may grant a grandparent leave to intervene in a pending suit filed by a party authorized under section 102 of the Family Code to bring an original suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Section 102.004(b), as it existed at the time that Carol and Douglas filed their divorce, provided that: An original suit requesting possessory conservatorship may not be filed by a grandparent or other person. However, the court may grant a grandparent or other person deemed by the court to have had substantial past contact with the child leave to intervene in a pending suit filed by a person authorized to do so under this subchapter. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 102.004(b) (Vernon Supp.2006) (emphasis added); see In re MAM, 35 S.W.3d 788, 790 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2001, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); McCord, 111 S.W.2d at 812 (“It has been held

A: holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the state to introduce direct evidence of the controlling nature of defendants relationship with the victim
B: holding that the trial court did not exceed its discretion under rule 403 by allowing evidence that provided background for the crime charged
C: holding trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling based only on affidavits
D: holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the intervention of biological grandparent under section 102004b
D.