> I think this dead man's switch is deterrent against being taken into custody.
Quite the contrary, taking him into custody is always in the best interest of the US. Snowden could be targeted with the intention of purposefully triggering the release of the documents, so the US would need to protect him.
However if he remains alive then the threat continues as well, at least until he expresses desire to not release the documents. So since he's alive then the US will want to keep control of him until the threat is neutralized.
Either way the US needs to take control of the situation, unless they can ensure the "dead man's switch" doesn't get triggered after Snowden dies.
You are assuming a dead mans switch that is not set up (whether technical or depending on people) to get triggered if he is taken into US custody.
Given his previous statement that he "can't be" tortured to give up the information he has, I am assuming he does not himself have direct control of the dead mans switch, but have left information to other parties on when to release, so it might be entirely out of both his hands and the US governments hands whether or not their actions will trigger "the switch".
Quite the contrary, taking him into custody is always in the best interest of the US. Snowden could be targeted with the intention of purposefully triggering the release of the documents, so the US would need to protect him.
However if he remains alive then the threat continues as well, at least until he expresses desire to not release the documents. So since he's alive then the US will want to keep control of him until the threat is neutralized.
Either way the US needs to take control of the situation, unless they can ensure the "dead man's switch" doesn't get triggered after Snowden dies.