van, an informant who had often proven unreliable, told Alan, a detective, that Debbie had offered Ivan $2,000 to find a hit man to kill her husband, Carl.

On the basis of that information, Alan obtained a warrant for Debbie's arrest. In the affidavit in support of the warrant, Alan described Ivan as "a reliable informant" even though Alan knew that Ivan was unreliable.

Alan gave the arrest warrant to Bob, an undercover police officer, and told Bob to contact Debbie and pretend to be a hit man.

Bob called Debbie, told her he was a friend of Ivan and could do the killing, and arranged to meet her at a neighborhood bar. When the two met, the following conversation ensued:

Bob: I understand you are looking for someone to kill your husband.

Debbie: I was, but I now think it's too risky. I've changed my mind.

Bob: That's silly. It's not risky at all. I'll do it for $5,000 and you can set up an airtight alibi.

Debbie: That's not a bad price. Let me think about it.

Bob: It's now or never.

Debbie: I'll tell you what. I'll give you a $200 down payment, but I want to think some more about it. I'm still not sure about it.

When Debbie handed Bob the $200 and got up to leave, Bob identified himself as a police officer and arrested her. He handcuffed and searched her, finding a clear vial containing a white, powdery substance in her front pocket.

Bob stated: "Well, well. What have we got here?"

Debbie replied, "It's cocaine. I guess I'm in real trouble now."

Debbie has been charged with solicitation of murder and possession of cocaine.

Should Debbie's post-arrest statements be admissible as evidence of her guilt?