Sagot :
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