Boston Bomber Not Mirandized By Andres Munoz

There was no legal obligation to do so that I know of. Indeed, I would argue that the DOJ would have a very compelling tactical reason NOT to announce this -- you would not want potential 'terrorist cell' members to know precisely how you are handling the interrogation of the Boston terror suspect.

As Gary Norton explained, the issue regarding Mirandizing suspects is, in most instances, an evidentiary one. which goes to the exclusion of statements made by a suspect. Whether a proper Miranda warning was given becomes an issue only if the government seeks to introduce such statements into evidence.

This precaution taken by the FBI in my opinion was the right decision. Different measures should be taken simply because of the fact that this could be a terrorist matter. Although they will receive a lot of debate on the topic, I believe not mirandizing him was the correct choice.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/21/1203692/-The-Politics-of-Announcing-The-Not-Mirandizing-of-the-Boston-Terror-Suspect