Is a police officer's exhortation to "tell the truth" sufficient to compel a suspect to give a subsequent confession?

Appellant knew he was going to jail whether he cooperated or not. There was no promise of leniency. "[A]dvice or exhortation by a police officer to an accused to 'tell the truth' or that 'it would be better to tell the truth' unaccompanied by a threat or promise, does not render a subsequent confession involuntary." (People v. Hill (1967) 66 Cal.2d 536, 549.)

In People v. Nitschmann (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 677 we held that a suspect may not "out Mirandize" the police by reciting his Miranda rights and later claim that the admonition was defective. (Id., at p. 683.) "[T]hose who know the Miranda rules, including 'con-wise' arrestees such as appellant, are entitled to the admonition. But a rule excluding otherwise voluntary statements after the arrestee admonishes himself on the record would do violence to common sense." (Id., at p. 683.)