Plum has already explained the public safety exception to Miranda, so I won't rehash it again, except to say that in 2010 the FBI and with the Obama Justice Department's blessing, took an expanded view of the exception in terrorism cases. See the attached.
With regard to Treason - um no. There is no evidence of that (and one was not a US Citizen, so it would not be possible for that person to have been charged with Treason). With the information we have, unless there were other attacks planned and not carried out, I cannot see how this charge could stick.
With regard to the charge of terrorism, it really depends on what the objectives were behind the bombings - which so far, we have no clue. While we may call someone a terrorist because his/actions terrorizes a community, that does not mean that he/she is actually a terrorist for criminal justice purposes. Generally, terrorizing people (which this did) without a political/social end or objective to the act of terror, would not be considered terrorism for purposes of criminal prosecution. Was the Sandy Hook shooter a terrorist? How about the Aurora shooter? The intention to inflict mass damage and destruction alone generally does not = terrorism for criminal prosecution. We may find a social/political component to the bombings, and if that is the case, then the charge of terrorism would be appropriate.
As the Oklahoma City Bombing Case clearly shows, crimes like these can (and in my opinion should) be tried in the daylight, for all the world to see. Osama Bin Laden was caught and killed based upon police work, and these men were caught because our law enforcement and our citizens worked together to find them and hold them accountable. We are a nation of laws, and our laws and our criminal justice system will send this man away for the rest of his life, if not take it from him.
Public Safety Exception
