You are an attorney who receives a call from a client who has been arrested. You tell him to say nothing to the police until you get there. You arrive to find him chatting with the detectives and occasionally mentioning issues related to the crime they are investigating. You ask whether he had been read his rights and whether he understood them. The detectives and your client answer yes to both questions. So, why, you ask, are they interrogating him. They reply that he did not tell them he was using his right to remain silent, so they began discussing the case with him. Can you challenge the admissibility of what your talkative, but not real bright, client just told the detectives?