If someone tries to plead the fifth on a specific question in a police interview, is that statement admissible?

At a trial defense counsel should move in limine to bar the use of any such statements like "I'd like to plead the Fifth on that particular question" as hearsay for which there is no hearsay exception. It will be up to the judge to rule on the evidence and the motion in limine.

It would be better if they just said nothing at all. Agreeing to answer some questions, but not others may not only lead to the admission of the "I plead the Fifth" answers, it might lead to a waiver of the right to counsel during interrogation entirely (which it sounds like they opted out of anyway). While a limine motion, as suggested by the other attorney, is necessary and may work, those answers may come in as a statement against interest. In the end, few people are damaged by the words they didn't say.

I generally agree with Mr. Newton. The better set of facts is where nothing is said at all. However, if one WANTS to say some things, it would be beneficial to have an attorney around so that the attorney can guide the interview. There are not many situations where divulging facts can be helpful, but if my client were to insist on saying SOMETHING, I would ask the police officer to tell me what he/she wants to ask. Then, I would relay it to the client. I would let the client respond in a general narrative over answering a particular question by the officer at a time. Then, that would be the end of the discussion. However, I would almost always advise against saying anything to the police. There is almost no reason to give them more evidence to consider.