@JLeslie
According to what I heard on one of the news programs where they did have a lawyer participating, your line of reasoning is most likely accurate.
At this point they have SO MUCH physical evidence on this kid that if the confession gets tossed, it’s not that critical to the case.
It was deemed far more important to investigate the possibility of a local terrorist cell and more bombings in the immediate future.
Unfortunately, I don’t remember which program or which lawyer since I frequently multitask with the TV in the background and I rotate among several different stations.
It could have been MSNBC (Dan Abrams) or FOX (Napolitano) or whomever Piers Morgan could rustle up (and he manages to get some surprisingly good guests).
As in the original Miranda case, the prosecution side was penalized by the confession being thrown out but it didn’t mean the guy got off Scott free.
If a case is largely circumstantial, then a confession is critical and the cops make damn sure he is properly Mirandized.
But in this case, he is on video with the backpack bomb standing right behind the little boy who was subsequently killed by it, they’ve recovered an identical bomb from their apt. and the carjacking victims testimony so no matter how slick a defense lawyer he gets, he can’t perform miracles.
This is anything but a mere circumstantial case.