Alex and Sam were arrested for holding up a gas station. They were taken to police headquarters and placed in a room for interrogation. As a police officer addressing both started to give them the Miranda warnings prior to the questioning, Alex said, "Look, Sam planned the damned thing and I was dumb enough to go along with it. We robbed the place what else is there to say?" Sam said nothing. Sam was escorted into another room and a full written confession was then obtained from Alex. If Sam is brought to trial on an indictment charging him with robbery, the fact that Sam failed to object to Alex's statement and remained silent after Alex had implicated him in the crime should be ruled
admissible, because his silence was an implied admission by Sam that he had participated in the crime.  admissible, because a statement of a participant in a crime is admissible against another participant.  inadmissible, because, under the circumstances, there was no duty or responsibility on Sam's part to respond.  inadmissible, because whatever Alex may have said has no probative value in a trial against Sam
Question: Alex and Sam were arrested for holding up a gas station. They were taken to police headquarters and placed in a room for interrogation. As a police officer addressing both started to give them the Miranda warnings prior to the questioning, Alex said, "Look, Sam planned the damned thing and I was dumb enough to go along with it. We robbed the place what else is there to say?" Sam said nothing. Sam was escorted into another room and a full written confession was then obtained from Alex. If Sam is brought to trial on an indictment charging him with robbery, the fact that Sam failed to object to Alex's statement and remained silent after Alex had implicated him in the crime should be ruled
A. admissible, because his silence was an implied admission by Sam that he had participated in the crime. 
B. admissible, because a statement of a participant in a crime is admissible against another participant. 
C. inadmissible, because, under the circumstances, there was no duty or responsibility on Sam's part to respond. 
D. inadmissible, because whatever Alex may have said has no probative value in a trial against Sam
Answer: