With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". by telling the accused he or she is only a witness, when, in fact, the person is a suspect. Mathiason, 429 U.S. at 495-96, 97 S.Ct. 711; see also Beckwith v. United States, 425 U.S. 341, 347, 96 S.Ct. 1612, 48 L.Ed.2d 1 (1976); Cummings, 27 Md.App, at 379-80, 341 A.2d 294. Police may also exaggerate the evidence they have accumulated against the person being interviewed. See Mathiason, 429 U.S. at 495-96, 97 S.Ct. 711. A third factor, perhaps most important for this case, is that there is rarely custody when the person questioned leaves the interrogation unencumbered, only to be arrested at a later time. See Bartram v. State, 33 Md.App. 115, 148-49, 364 A.2d 1119 (1976); Cummings, 27 Md.App. at 378-79, 341 A.2d 294; see also United States v. Scully, 415 F.2d 680, 683-84 (2d Cir.1969) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Manglona, 414 F.2d 642, 644

A: holding that accused was not in custody when asked to give his side of the story and then left the station unencumbered
B: holding the defendant was not under arrest when police asked him to go to the station and then offered him a ride because he did not have transportation
C: holding that police failure to inform the accused of his attorneys attempts to contact him and misstatements to the attorney as to whether the accused was at the police station did not violate the accuseds due process rights
D: holding that accused was not in custody when asked to go to the police station and left the station freely
D.