Whether the promise and delivery of sex by a police agent is sufficient inducement to trigger 5th and/or 14th Amendment protections

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW . Question 1: In the Appellate Division, Fourth Department’s order, both the decent and majority ; agreed that Ms. Sheritta Jefferson was an agent of the police. She was given an electronic recording device, told how to operate it, and instructed as to what questions to ask the Petitioner to aid in their investigation. This included the promise and ultimate delivery of sex as a tool of inducement. However, the 3 Judge majority disagreed with the two judge dissent that (a) there was at least a colorable basis for suppression of the statement because it could easily be inferred from the testimony of Sheritta Jefferson and the recording that the statement was made in exchange for the implicit promise of sexual relations, (b) there was a question of law as to whether the Petitioner’s statements to the police agent were voluntary, and (c) the Petitioner had the right to have a jury review the statement as to its voluntariness. ; . QIA: In the hand of an agent of the police, can the promise, and ultimately delivery : of sex be sufficient inducement to trigger 5" and/or 14" Amendment protections? : QIB: Because the police knew that the Petitioner was interested in a sexual relationship with Ms. Jefferson, was their direction to Ms. Jefferson to exploit this sexual interest sufficiently egregious to warrant categorization as “outrageous government conduct” to trigger preclusion of that recording under the 5" and/or the 14° Amendment? : QIC: Was the petitioner denied due process, a fair trial, and the right to present a defense when the trial court refused to submit the question of voluntariness to the jury regarding the Sheritta Jefferson recording? Question 2: Was the petitioner denied due process, a fair trial, and the right to present a defense when the trial court refused to submit the question of the voluntariness of statements he made to police investigators while he was incarcerated on a different matter, his freedom of movement severely curtailed, and the police asked inquisitional questions regarding his role in the shooting death of Jeremy Trim? Question 3: | Under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the reading of a contemporary African American Author’s book sufficiency race neutral to sustain the prosecutor’s . burden of providing a none-racial excuse for preclusion of an otherwise qualified African-American juror from serving ona jury panel? 2