Answered

At Westonci.ca, we connect you with experts who provide detailed answers to your most pressing questions. Start exploring now! Join our Q&A platform to connect with experts dedicated to providing precise answers to your questions in different areas. Our platform offers a seamless experience for finding reliable answers from a network of knowledgeable professionals.

THE SCENARIO

Alice visited her local police station in response to Detective Barker’s request that Alice meet with him at her convenience to discuss a series of burglaries that had occurred in a neighborhood near Alice’s home. Though he suspected that Alice had committed the burglaries, Detective Barker explained that she was free to leave the station at any time; that she could take breaks from speaking with Barker whenever she wished; and that, regardless of what she said to Barker, Alice would not be arrested that day.

At the outset of her conversation with Barker, Alice repeatedly denied any involvement in the burglaries. In response, Barker truthfully told Alice that several pieces of physical evidence implicating her in the crimes had been collected from the burglarized residences, and questioned Alice about her whereabouts on the nights the burglaries occurred. Alice then asked Barker whether he could “get her a good deal” from the district attorney if she confessed her involvement in the crimes. Barker responded by stating that the district attorney was responsible for making decisions regarding potential charges or plea bargains, but that Barker believed that “honesty is always the best policy.” Alice then proceeded to make incriminating statements regarding her participation in the burglaries.

Alice has filed a motion to suppress the statements she made at the station.



QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED

1. Was Alice being interrogated at the station?

2. Was Alice in custody?

3. Was the officer required to give Alice the Miranda warnings?

4. Was Alice compelled to confess or were her statements voluntary?

Explain why or why not to each question in a minimum of 100 words

Sagot :

Baraq

YES! Alice was being interrogated at the station. This is evident in paragraph 2, lines 3 to 8. ... Alice then asked Barker whether he could “get her a good deal” from the district attorney if she confessed her involvement in the crimes. YES! Alice was in custody. This is also evident in paragraph 1. ...Though he suspected that Alice had committed the burglaries, Detective Barker explained that she was free to leave the station at any time...

What are the answers to other questions?

3. No, there was no mirinda warning! The officer was not required to give Alice the Miranda warnings. No evidence of such is found through out the text.

4a. No, Alice was not compelled to confess. Even when the officer knew she was involved in the burglaries, he gave her the the chance to speak at her will. This is evident as well in paragraph 1. ...Though he suspected that Alice had committed the burglaries, Detective Barker explained that she was free to leave the station at any time...

4b. Hence, her statements were made voluntarily. This is also found in paragraph 2. ...Barker responded by stating that the district attorney was responsible for making decisions regarding potential charges or plea bargains, but that Barker believed that “honesty is always the best policy.” Alice then proceeded to make incriminating statements regarding her participation in the burglaries.

Therefore, the correct answers are given above

learn more about mirinda warning: https://brainly.com/question/2242029

#SPJ1

Thank you for trusting us with your questions. We're here to help you find accurate answers quickly and efficiently. Thank you for your visit. We're committed to providing you with the best information available. Return anytime for more. Thank you for using Westonci.ca. Come back for more in-depth answers to all your queries.