Legal Dilemmas: Admissibility of Statements and False Confessions in the Eric Cartman Bomb Threat Case

300 words response 2 references/intext citations Due 1/17/2024

Eric Cartman was angry. He was angry at his friends, his parents, his teachers; he was angry at the world. But then he was always acting angry. Eric was interested in guns, bombs, war, and other types of violence. He often claimed anyone could build a bomb, it was easy with the internet. One day Dean Hanky of South Park University (SPU) received an anonymous call that there was a bomb on campus. Dean Hanky was concerned because the bomb could be in a dorm, a classroom building, or anywhere else. Could they find it or evacuate in time? He immediately called the local police. He told the police he did not have any information on the caller, but he suspected Eric Cartman. The police arrived and as part of their response they grabbed Cartman out of class, placed him in handcuffs, took him to the station, and questioned him. Pressed for time, they chose not to read him his rights. They kept telling him they knew it was him and demanded he tell them where the bomb was. For the first time in his life, Cartman felt intimidated. After some time had passed, he told the police he had made the call, but there was no bomb. He was just angry and wanted to disrupt things. In Cartman’s trial, could the prosecution use his statement to police? Could he successfully challenge its admission? What about false confession?