Is there evidence of improper coercive police activity leading to defendant confessing during his third statement?

showing of improper coercive police activity leading to defendant confessing during his third statement. "A finding of coercive police activity is a prerequisite to a finding that a confession was involuntary under the federal and state Constitutions." (People v. Maury, supra, 30 Cal.4th at pp. 404-405; People v. McWhorter, supra, 49 Cal.4th at p. 347.) "A confession may be found involuntary if extracted by threats or violence, obtained by direct or implied promises, or secured by the exertion of improper influence. [Citation.] Although coercive police activity is a necessary predicate to establish an involuntary confession, it 'does not itself compel a finding that a resulting confession is involuntary.' [Citation.] The statement and the inducement must be causally linked." (People v. Maury, supra, at pp. 404-405; People v. McWhorter, supra, at p. 347.)