Let me ask you a question, with some background first.
They are using the public safety exemption to not read Tsarnaev his rights. They are required by law to do so, if they want to use his statements against him in a court of law. It doesn’t matter if he knows them or not. The Supreme Court handed down a decision that says it has to be done.
Having said that, what if law enforcement, the government, etc., decided that a right-wing conservative group (you pick the group) was a danger to public safety? What if they came to arrest the members of that group and because of the public safety exemption, law-abiding American citizens were denied their rights?
That’s the kind of precedent I believe not reading Tsarnaev his rights would set and I do not care to start traveling down that particular road.
I’m not going to bite on what if questions.
The Miranda notification is not required by the Constitution.
Again, this is not a precedent. It’s been used before. Even if it is ruled later that the government cannot use the exception this time, the only penalty will be that they cannot use any testimony obtained before a Miranda notification in the trial against the guy.
Again, they are not required by law to give the person a Miranda notification. Police give the notification to protect all testimony evidence in their case.
You don’t seem to understand that they already have enough evidence against this guy. They will be interrogating him to get information about the others who are involved, and any plans by the group for future terrorism attacks.