Pemberton and three passengers, Able, Baker, and Charley, were injured when their car was struck by a truck owned by Mammoth Corporation and driven by Edwards. Helper, also a Mammoth employee, was riding in the truck. The issues in Pemberton v Mammoth include the negligence of Edwards in driving too fast and failing to wear glasses, and of Pemberton in failing to yield the right of way"Mammoth's counsel seeks to have Sheriff testify that while he was investigating the accident he 59 was told by Pemberton, "This was probably our fault." The judge should rule the proffered evidence
admissible as an admission of a party. admissible, because it is a statement made to a police officer in the course of an official investigation.  inadmissible, because it is a mixed conclusion of law and fact.  inadmissible, because it is hearsay, not within any exception
Question: Pemberton and three passengers, Able, Baker, and Charley, were injured when their car was struck by a truck owned by Mammoth Corporation and driven by Edwards. Helper, also a Mammoth employee, was riding in the truck. The issues in Pemberton v Mammoth include the negligence of Edwards in driving too fast and failing to wear glasses, and of Pemberton in failing to yield the right of way"Mammoth's counsel seeks to have Sheriff testify that while he was investigating the accident he 59 was told by Pemberton, "This was probably our fault." The judge should rule the proffered evidence
A. admissible as an admission of a party.
B. admissible, because it is a statement made to a police officer in the course of an official investigation. 
C. inadmissible, because it is a mixed conclusion of law and fact. 
D. inadmissible, because it is hearsay, not within any exception
Answer: