In your assignment answer Question 1 and Question 2. Each question is based on a provided fact scenario. Be sure to review the evaluation rubric to ensure that your answer meets the expectations of the assignment. Briefly, this includes an evaluation of the following criteria based on each fact scenario:

o Issue: Identify the facts and legal issues relevant to the provided question

o Rules: Identify the applicable rules that apply to evaluating the legal issues (both statutory law and common law)

o Application: Discuss how the identified rules apply to the facts and legal issues

o Conclusion: Make a conclusion based on your analysis that answers the provided question.

1. Helen Lovejoy asked her friend Marge Simpson to pick her up in a parking lot down the street from the Springfield Mall where Helen had been shopping earlier in the day. Helen and Marge were planning to return to Helen's home where they were looking forward to watching a movie together on television. When Marge arrived in her car, she found Helen standing in the parking lot with a large plastic garbage bag which Helen then threw into the back seat of the car. Helen told Marge that the bag contained some clothes. Marge lost track of her speed while she was driving to Helen's house and before she realized her speed, she noticed the blue flashing lights of a police car behind her so she pulled over. Constable Wiggum approached the vehicle and advised Marge she had been driving 25 km/h over the speed limit. While he was writing up the ticket, he noticed the garbage bag in the back seat had partially spilled out, revealing a pile of clothes with the price tags still attached. He opened the back door of Marge's vehicle and after further investigation it was discovered that Helen had stolen all of the clothes in the garbage bag. Constable Wiggum charged Helen with theft under $5,000 and Helen has now come to you to represent her in defending the charge. Should the evidence of the clothing be excluded? Why or why not? In your answer provide authority to support your position.

2. Moe Szyslak is arrested on a charge of assault after he throws Homer Simpson out of his tavern one night after Homer argues with Barney Gumble over a lost bar bet. Constable Wiggum reads Moe his rights pursuant to sections 10(a) and (b) of the Charter. Moe calls you from the police station and after a speaking with you, advises the police that he does not wish to make a statement. Moe is then placed in a jail cell with another inmate. The inmate is actually an undercover police officer named Detective Lou. Detective Lou introduces himself as "Guy Incognito" and pretends to confide in Moe. Moe then provides several incriminating statements to "Guy Incognito". Would Detective Lou be considered a person in authority? Should Moe's statements be admissible at trial? Why or why not?