A judge shall admit statements or evidence of statements that do not conform to 46-4-408 if, at hearing, the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence that:
(1) the statements have been made voluntarily and are reliable; or
(2) one or more of the following circumstances existed at the time of the custodial interrogation:
(a) the questions put forth by law enforcement personnel and the person's responsive statements were part of the routine processing or booking of the person;
(b) before or during a custodial interrogation, the person unambiguously declared that the person would respond to the law enforcement officer's questions only if the person's statements were not electronically recorded;
(c) the failure to electronically record an interrogation in its entirety was the result of unforeseeable equipment failure and obtaining replacement equipment was not practicable;
(d) exigent circumstances prevented the making of an electronic recording of the custodial interrogation;
(e) the person's statements were surreptitiously recorded by or under the direction of law enforcement personnel;
(f) the person's statement was made during a custodial interrogation that was conducted in another state by peace officers of that state in compliance with the laws of that state; or
(g) the person's statement was made spontaneously and not in response to a question.