benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1389 / A defendant was convicted of assault of a federal officer and imprisoned in a…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

A defendant was convicted of assault of a federal officer and imprisoned in a federal penitentiary. While in prison, federal authorities began investigating the murder of the defendant's 11-year- old stepdaughter who was murdered two years earlier. Believing that the defendant was responsible for this killing, federal agents decided to plant an informant at the prison to befriend the defendant and possibly obtain evidence about the crime. In accord with this plan, the federal agents hired a paid informant and placed him in the prison as a fellow inmate, masquerading as an organized crime figure. The informant soon befriended the defendant and learned that he was being threatened by other inmates because of a rumor that he had killed a child. The informant then raised the subject in several conversations, but the defendant repeatedly denied any such involvement. After the defendant started receiving tough treatment from other inmates because of the rumor, the informant offered to protect the defendant but told him, "You have to tell me the truth about what really happened you know, if you want me to help you. " Believing that the informant would protect him from the other inmates, the defendant then admitted to the informant that he had driven his stepdaughter to the desert where he killed her. Based upon this confession, the defendant was then indicted for the first-degree murder of his stepdaughter. Prior to trial, the defendant moves to suppress the statement given to the informant. Should the defendant's motion be granted?

category

law

options

  1. Yes, because the informant was acting as an agent of the government in a deceptive manner.
  2. No, because under the totality of circumstances, the informant's conduct was not inherently coercive.
  3. Yes, because the informant was a false friend, and the defendant was tricked into making the confession.
  4. No, because the confession was made to a fellow inmate, not to a law enforcement official.
  5. Yes, because the defendant was not read his Miranda rights before confessing to the informant.
  6. Yes, because the confession was coerced by the threat of physical violence, absent protection from the informant that motivated the defendant to confess.
  7. No, because the defendant was not under direct questioning by law enforcement at the time of the confession.
  8. No, because the confession was voluntary.
  9. No, because the defendant was already convicted of a crime and thus lost his right to avoid self-incrimination.
  10. No, because the defendant's safety in prison was not the responsibility of the informant.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1389
task_id
eeb13545-6a9a-5e85-b53c-a2f282cf6ff8
task_key
default--test--1389
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import