Talk:Beltway sniper attacks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster Management.

(talk moved from Talk:Washington sniper)

I think that this has been done backwards: I believe that there should be a link that takes you to the entry for "The Beltway Sniper" (where this article originated,) instead of vice-versa. That entry was first put in when it was linked from the "serial killers" entry; the purpose being that this individual, who has been dubbed "The Beltway Sniper" (not just by the media, but by everyone in the DC metro area; I know, I live there) is now a serial killer. So one day down the line it will be "Jack the Ripper," "Son of Sam," "The Beltway Sniper." Can an admin make a decision on this and change it if needed? EB

This is why the article should be Beltway Sniper. Lir 01:17 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

not sure if Beltway Sniper is going to stick... the guy is outside of the beltway...and a quick breeze through the news.google, none of the headlines read Beltway Sniper, nor do they call him/her that often enough, at least on the west coast... to merit his current ignoble name.

Ok having read the other entry on the sniper, people living in the area do call him the Beltway Sniper

While we're at it, why not "Beltway Sniper of 2002" ? In 2210, this affair may well be forgotten. And hopefully it will be resolved by the end of this year. Just my 2 cents. FvdP

Beltway Sniper of 2002 seems redundant-this could go into 2003 too

If you look at a map it seems likely he is using the Beltway to get around. Lir 01:28 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Redundant ? And what if a beltway sniper strikes again in 2210 ? <wink> Well, anyway, forget about my suggestion. There will probably be no second "beltway killer" for a long time. FvdP

If so, future Wikipedians will be perfectly capable of renaming the page themselves. --Brion 01:35 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

That's what I thought. Don't understimate me ;-) --FvdP 01:37 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

truth of this statement?

Tarot cards with handwritten statements were found at the scene of several of the shootings.

I've only heard of one reported incidence...can someone verify the plural?

My take on the affair is that snipers like this are losers. They always get caught (that's what they want). Publicity should focus on how well authorities and the general citizenry combined to track these losers down. After that, give 'em a fair trial and then hang 'em. --Ed Poor

My take on this? I've been walking around for over a week, from bus stop to work and so on and so forth, carrying my bag in front of my chest as if it's going to protect me from a bullet to the heart. Every time I see a white van with a ladder rack I cringe. Yes, there should be a NPOV, but some of these comments are incredibly insensitive and you need to put yourselves in check before you open your mouth.eb

The article seems pretty non-opinionated to me. Lir 20:05 Oct 24, 2002 (UTC)

I was referring to the comments made on the TALK page. "This event will be forgotten..." etc...

There's only one sniper. There may be a person with him, but it's a safe bet that only one person was shooting. I don't really see the justification for the pluralization. Maybe later, when more facts come out. --The Cunctator

Just because only one person pulled the trigger doesn't mean that two people are not implicated in the crimes committed. What would you have it be called, "The Beltway Sniper and Accomplice?" "The Beltway Sniper and Friend Who Rolled Down the Window?" As of now it is assumed that two people are/were involved. It will be changed when change is applicable. EB

Perhaps we should call it "The Beltway Sniper and Friends?" If I were the Beltway sniper I woulda let the other dude try at least one shot. Lir 21:13 Oct 24, 2002 (UTC)

Maybe you should call it "The Beltway Sniper and God", because he claims to be God or working with God.

But isn't God a "He"!?! ;-)

If there is an accomplice so what? That still doesn't mean that there are two snipers. Only one sniper and an accomplice. The singular most accurately matches what the media and everyone else calls him/her, even if it *is* more than one. -- Ram-Man

I agree - it was a bit rash to move to the plural. The police haven't even confirmed that the men they have are in fact directly involved. We don't know yet that they both actually shot the gun. --mav

I don't know if this helps or not, but the US Army refers to the sniper and his spotter as a "sniper team"; the sniper is senior in the team, and the spotter will eventually learn and become a sniper. In a sense, both men are snipers, even though one is pulling the trigger, and the other is parking the car, looking for police and targets, making sandwiches, whatever. --Jkonrath 23:46, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Why should we use the same incorrect terms that everyone else uses? There were two of them. All the witnesses said so. They arrested two people. Should they police decide the other person wasn't a wannabe sniper-maybe we should go back-but why was he cruising around with the other dude unless he wanted in on the sniping action? Lir 21:25 Oct 24, 2002 (UTC)

You might want to tone done the sarcasm. All the witnesses did not say there were two of them. They've arrested thousands of people in connection with the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack. There were only 19 hijackers, not thousands. Let's assume for the sake of argument that these are the perpetrators. It's also a safe assumption that only Mohammad was the sniper, while the boy was used as a lookout. Does that make him a sniper? No. It certainly makes him accessory to murder, and possibly executable, but still, he's not the sniper.

I don't really care about the title, but your efforts would be better spent writing entries on the arrested individuals. --The Cunctator

We might as well wait until we know more to write more! They should soon know if they really are the snipers. Besides, it's fun to argue ;-) -- Ram-Man

I just on the news that John Allen Muhammad aka John Allen Williams was from New Orleans. Hmm...

In 1973 Mark Essex killed 9 (5 of them police officers) and injured 19 more.

And back in 1900 I believe Robert Charles still holds the record in this category with 27 kills, (5 of them police).

You may not have heard of them, but growing up black in the time and place he did, I'm sure John Allen did. --Infrogmation

I moved the article, to take the emphasis off the (suspected) killer(s). I'm not interested in "records" or in giving undue attention to the acts of disturbed people. Like, "don't feed the trolls". --Ed Poor

Please clarify the sentence "...17-year-old Jamaican stepson (wasn't really stepson)". I don't know what he is. --Menchi 02:15, Aug 17, 2003 (UTC)

That would be "17-year-old Jamaican son of the woman he lived with for a time but wasn't married to." I suspect we'll hear a great deal more about the relationship of the two snipers at their respective trials: it was speculated that they were sexually involved themselves, and at least one of them has denied this, but who knows? -- Someone else 02:24, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

This article probably should include a reference to their first attack, which was actually in Montgomery, Alabama. Kaszeta 19:34, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

---

1 Terminology Sniper vs. snipers
2 Franklin surname trivia
3 Jayson Blair
4 Benny Oberoi WAS NOT shot outside the Ponderosa Steakhouse
5 How were the Snipers Really Caught?
6 Motivation?
7 More victims
8 White vans

[edit] Terminology Sniper vs. snipers

At the time it all occurred, the general reference was "Beltway Sniper". We now know that 1. two persons were more or less equally involved in committing the crimes 2. that the range of their rampage extended for beyond the Capital Beltway to other states 3. and that is is very likely that each man acted a shooter during the rampage, although (despite earlier speculation above to the contrary) only the younger and less well-trained has admitted being the shooter so far.

Even though the younger man (Malvo)will apparently no longer face the death penalty in future prosecutions due to Roper v. Simmons, perhaps he will find some courage (and decency) to help explain more details which would help provide some closure to families. His attorneys may discuss with him that "hard time" for a life sentence without parole in Virginia and hard time in Alabama and Louisiana are not necessarily the same. The record and interviews with school classmates indicate that he is not stupid, although his actions were very evil. Serial killers have been known to confess to avoid a life sentence in one state over another. From what I have read, conditions down south are even worse than Virginia's equivalent of Siberia. He agreed to a plea bargain in Spotsylvania County, Virginia and some additional cooperation might mitigate some of his outcomes elsewhere. Even at Red Onion, there are privileges such as cable TV which may be purchased by some inmates. Even if he has no access to news or outside media, whatever the depth of their relationship was, it is hard to believe that Malvo would still feel any camaraderie with his older buddy.

Regarding the older killer, there would seem to be to be little reason for Virginia to allow extradition of Muhammed to facilitate prosecution in other states (and maybe the District of Columbia) unless for some reason his death row status changes. I wouldn't expect this man to do one single thing for the benefit of his ex-partner or anyone else. I occurs to me that a future Virginia trial might more clearly establish if he was an actual trigger man.

Of course, this article is also not just about who pulled a trigger and who was the lookout, but also about the terrorism they used as a form of extortion, resulting in thousands of victims beyond the deaths and woundings.

Bottom line: IMHO, the article label seems reasonably correct for what happened. I intend to do what I can to keep this and the related articles updated as time progresses. Vaoverland 00:39, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Franklin surname trivia

Why, exactly, is it relevant that Linda Franklin shares a surname with Joseph Paul Franklin? --Flidget Jerome 16:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Even worse, this questionable item of trivia is presented in a timeline. Unless someone can answer that question, let's leave the following deleted text out: It is worth noting that a man who shared a surname with the victim-serial killer Joseph Paul Franklin- had also commited sniper attacks in Falls Church against black people. Vaoverland 19:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jayson Blair

The infamously fraudulent NY Times journalist, Jayson Blair, was covering this case, and awarded himself a phony "scoop" at one point, too. I'd like to say something about that in this article, but I'll have to, gasp, do some work and nail down the relevant facts first. --Christofurio 01:01, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Benny Oberoi WAS NOT shot outside the Ponderosa Steakhouse

This is abjectly erroneous information. Oberoi was shot and wounded outside a Silver Spring, MD. liquor store weeks before the initial identified shootings began. Jeffrey Hopper was the man shot and wounded outside the Ponderosa Steakhouse in Ashland. I am so adamant about this change being made because I live in the area and it is quite relevant to me. That Home Depot is less than one mile from my house. I saw the police cars speeding past my neighborhood the night that woman was killed. Please fix this mistake!!

Thanks for helping get the facts straight for this article. His name was not been as widely publicized as some of the other victims. This is possibly because the Ponderosa victim was (and is) strongly desiring of privacy, illustrated perhaps by the extreme fact that his wife came back alone to MCV Hospitals in Richmond to thank all those who helped save his life. Although the media doesn't always seem to respect such (and to some extent perhaps shouldn't), I for one can't imagine anyone wanting this (or any of the others victims and families) to suffer more needlessly. Vaoverland 19:34, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] How were the Snipers Really Caught?

It is common belief that the snipers were caught through citizens tips. In reality, OnStar helped catch the snipers. The car they were using during the attacks had an OnStar system. OnStar was asked by authorities to turn over records of vehicles within a specified radius and time range from when the attacks occurred. The pattern revealed 3 emergency vehicles and the lone car. The OnStar system was still registered under the previous vehicle's owner. However, because OnStar is GPS based, it was able to pin point the sniper's location at the rest area. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dhacker (talk • contribs).

The car used by the snipers was a 1990 Caprice. OnStar was first made available in 1997 (initially in Cadillac models). -Aude (talk | contribs) 19:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

But how did the police decide to start tracking them? There is no information whatsoever in the article about that, and it's something I personally want to know. Kaiser matias 10:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Motivation?

The article left me with one nagging question: Why did they do it?

Me too. Adding their motivation would improve the article. WP 11:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I have been following this story since it happened. I have never read any clear motivation revealed. The closest I perceive is that John Allen Muhammad may have been laying the groundwork for killing one or more of his ex-wives who lived close to some of the killings and/or the long shot of exorting a huge amount of money from the government. He is obviously a very evil and angry man. If ever Virginia needed to expedite an execution, .... Vaoverland 13:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I was disappointed not to see anything a out the motivation. Didn't Muhammed leave letters for the media and at court have plenty to say for his motivations? A disappointment there is nothing about this here.

With the current (May 2006) trials underway and Malvo cooperating, perhaps we will all learn more. Speculation about money or revenge seems to be all that anyone can currently come up with in this crazy and tragic situation. Vaoverland 19:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)