From the front page of the new york times: "A federal law enforcement official said he would not be read his Miranda rights, because the authorities would be invoking the public safety exception in order to question him extensively about other potential explosive devices or accomplices and to try to gain intelligence."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/20/us/boston-marathon-bombing...

At which point, the Courts will say "you dun fucked up Police", and the self-incriminating evidence will be inadmissible to court, and not allowed to be told to the jury.

And the police will win the case _anyway_ because we got so much evidence on this guy they can win the case in their sleep. So it all won't matter in the long run.

Thats the good thing about the courts. The Police don't decide whether or not they're exercising the Public Safety Exception... the courts do.

What I'm more curious about is whether or not he still has those rights even if they weren't read to him. I would assume he does no?

Yes, he does. The Miranda rights are (and were) always present, they only serve the function of ensuring that the citizens under arrest actually realize they have those rights.

No. It may result in statements being inadmissible, but he will continue to be questioned even if he invokes his "rights" or asks for a lawyer.

The author is a her.