Several persons together stole a painting from an art museum. One of them, who was the driver, was caught during the commission of another crime. He told police that "I didn't even get any money from the art museum. It all went to the first guy and the second guy." When the first and second guy go on trial for the theft of the art painting, is the driver's statement admissible in court?

If the driver's statement was voluntarily obtained by the police without duress, then the statement will be admissible.  But, if otherwise, it cannot be admitted.  Such self-incriminating statements are usually used as evidence for police to arrest a suspect, but to convict.  This is why at the point of arrest, the suspect is read his or her "rights to remain silent."

Explanation:

It is the responsibility of the trial judge to determine any issues as to the statement's voluntariness. This implies that the confession can be admitted into evidence if the judge determines that the confession was voluntarily made by the driver.  The judge will not admit the statement if it is determined that there were some use of threats of force, violence, or intimidation on the part of the police to obtain the self-incriminating confession.

answer:

explanation:

they will talk your license

answer:

the answer is the best one in the room will find it

explanation: