With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". belief must be objectively reasonable at time statement was made). Mogler initiated his conversation with Henning, and, at the time he made the statements, he was not in custody and was unaware that an investigation was already pending. Henning did not threaten Mogler’s employment security and asked only for clarification of Mogler’s voluntary statements. Mogler’s statement to his wife at their home is also admissible. Mogler, accompanied by Henning and another deputy, awakened his wife and told her that he had “messed around” with a minor. Although he was in custody, the statements were not elicited by the officers, and the district court did not err by allowing Henning to testify to the statement. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 1630, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) (<HOLDING>); State v. Camacho, 561 N.W.2d 160, 169

A: holding that selfinitiated statements volunteered after miranda warnings had been given are admissible
B: holding inconsistent out of court statements otherwise admissible not admissible against government in criminal prosecution
C: holding that statements given voluntarily and without compelling influences are admissible
D: holding that statements given after miranda warnings are admissible even when the arrest that preceded the statements was constitutionally deficient
C.