Talk:D.C. sniper attacks

(talk moved from Talk:Washington sniper)

unnamed victims

" This list does not include two victims who were not publicly identified; .... and the other man, a 76-year-old from Tucson, Arizona, was shot non-fatally on a Clearwater, Florida, golf course on May 18, 2002.[10]"

Is there any reasons these names can not be put on this wiki? http://www.tampabay.com/features/humaninterest/clearwater-shooting-victim-awaits-execution-of-dc-sniper/1050591 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithbkessler (talk • contribs) 14:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Wrong location for the taking of the tree sample and search for bullets

The link to Takoma, Washington is incorrect. The actual location is Takoma Park on the border of Washington, D.C. and Maryland.

TimeHorse (talk) 18:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Is this right ? Tacoma, Washington is mentioned twice . Thats the place with the dodgy bridge ? Did these evildoers come from Washington state or did they just drive all the way there and back to get their guns ? Seems a bit unlikely.Eregli bob (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

backwards

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)

---

name problems

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

---

We also call them the "DC Snipers" (I'm a local) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.181.214 (talk) 11:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

---

With Muhammed's execution the shootings are back in the press. A scan of news articles shows that nearly all national news outlets (and on National News last night on CBS and NBC) refer to the case as "DC Sniper". Further, the name "Washington Sniper" is confusing as his first shooting death was in Washington State with the attempted murder of Muhammed's ex-wife, in which her niece was killed by mistake. I think we should change to "DC Sniper" OneHappyHusky (talk) 19:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

while its happening

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...

only one shooter

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)

--- Might want to include in the Effects on Society that since it was approaching Halloween a lot of parents were prepared to cut trick-or-treating. (205.250.167.76 20:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC))

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)

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)

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)

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)

How were the Snipers Really Caught?

It is common belief that the snipers were caught through citizen 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhacker (talk • contribs)

• The car used by the snipers was a 1990 Chevrolet 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)

One thing is for certain - the Beltway Snipers were caught no thanks to Charles Moose, the pathologically race-conscious and politically-correct liberal police chief of Montgomery County, Maryland, the area where the first attack occurred. Charles Moose led the sniper task force throughout the investigation. He refused to acknowledge the possibility that the sniper could be anyone other than a white man. Charles Moose refused to release a composite sketch of a non-white suspect based on actual witness accounts, because he didn't want to "paint some group." Charles Moose was more concerned about offending a minority group than catching the killers. That's incompetence writ large and should be called by its proper name, black official or not. It wasn't until the snipers gave themselves away by bragging about another murder they committed during a liquor store robbery in Montgomery, Alabama, that Federal agents began developing leads that ultimately resulted in their apprehension. Kepiblanc 05:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

See WP:SOAP. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 14:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

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)

Malvo explicitly said that Muhammad's motivation was because he believed "the white man is the devil", and his intent was to kill white people. source Bricology (talk) 11:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps one of the reasons that some people would still be wondering why the snipers did what they did is political correctness, in this case, the mainstream media's "revisionism and sanitization of Islam", i.e., the "politically correct whitewashing of the truth aimed at pleasing Muslim groups like CAIR": "When news of the snipers' identity first broke, CNN anchors were so determined to avoid making the obvious connection to radical Islam that they called the lead sniper, a Muslim convert, by his old name. Police were looking for John Allen Muhammad, but CNN insisted on referring to him as John Allen Williams." To further quote Rehabbing The D.C. Snipers by Investor's Business Daily (which presents a "pile of courtroom evidence"): "Nowhere in [CNN's] one-hour special — promoted as "The Minds of the D.C. Snipers" — is Islamist brainwashing even hinted as a motivating factor behind their serial assassinations. Yet the evidence is overwhelming that they were on a jihad." Asteriks 17:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

More victims

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/27/malvo.ap/index.html

just saw this today. might be important to include.--ZeWrestler ^Talk 03:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

White vans

I found it interesting at the time that a white van was suspected, as they are pretty much ubiquitous. 68.147.242.17 15:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't a white van. It was a "white box truck." --Someone who was there in Montgomery County

Indeed it was a "white box truck". However, white vans were also pulled over and searched. I remember, because I lived in Montgomery County at the time of the attacks, and a person I knew had their white van (a 1997 Ford Econoline) pulled over and searched. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 13:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

State of fear.

There were extra police everywhere. Police at the schools, on street corners...people were afraid to even go outside, especially the beltway. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.49.250.152 (talk) 02:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

That's so true. i remeber when the beltway sniper was on the lose. it was pretty scary(Esskater11 15:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC))

Indeed it was. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 14:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

References!!

Much of this article, especially the section having to do exhibits, needs citations. --Unsigned statement

I would say all of the article is in bad need of citations considering there are only six citations in the whole article. 67.142.130.26 19:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Link?

Ah, what do the Zebra murders have to do with the Beltway snipers beyond NOI member involvement? 129.119.240.84 (talk) 20:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Halo

On the video game controversy page, it says that the two killers were motivated and trained by playing Halo:CE, but in this article, theres no mention at all of Halo. Should that information be added?4nthr4x (talk) 18:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

If you have a reasonable source/reference, add it in where appropriate. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 13:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Murders in other states

I removed the line, "An earlier spree for which the pair was responsible had killed victims in California, Arizona, and Texas, for a total of 16 deaths identified as of March 2007." There is nothing in the article that further discusses killings in these states and no outside link to support the claim. Tgpaul58 (talk) 04:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing to support crimes in Georgia either, so I removed reference to that. Superm401 - Talk 08:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Tarot card messages

Edited the article to correct the quotation on the tarot card message, would is "Dear Mr. Policeman..." rather than "Dear Policeman...." I didn't add a citation but it should be in the cited sources if someone wants to add one, since the paragraph needs more anyway.

For those who don't think this detail doesn't mention an edit, here's an interesting story: at the time, police were still looking for a white man. However, when that message was released, my Caribbean friends say they knew it was an islander, because only an islander says "Mr. Policeman." Apparently the Montgomery County police department did not employ any islanders at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.241.143 (talk) 22:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect map locations

At least one dot location on the map is incorrect: number 13 occurred at Seven Corners, but is shown near Alexandria. Some of the others do not seem right, but it's hard to tell because the numbering in the diagram is not clearly linked to the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.43.134.199 (talk) 22:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Images

Some good images here that are PD - and should be added to article. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 19:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Good find, nice pics. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: I have added the pics to the article. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Why did they change his execution date?

In the article, Muhammad's original execution date was set for November 11. Why did they change it to the 10th? An explanation within the article would be helpful. ExistentialBliss (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Why does this article refer to him as JORDAN Allen Muhammad

Every other source says his name was John Allen Muhammad. 69.225.117.21 (talk) 02:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:Death Assessment Commentary

The article was assessed C-class for lack of in-line citations in some sections. Boneyard90 (talk) 12:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Malve and the Iraq War Debate

The single biggest accidental effect of the Malvo shootings gets ignored by everybody. The Senate debate on whether to go to war took place at the same time. War was declared on October 11, 2002. The Malvo shooting spree dominated the headlines and pushed the war debate completely off the front page of most newspapers for the entire debate. The last chance to oppose the war was lost in a sea of headlines screaming "SNIPER !!!". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.42.41.105 (talk) 21:01, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Arizona

Is there any info about the sniper attacks in Arizona, or elsewhere out west? If not, somebody should work on it. Thanks.--70.162.70.28 (talk) 21:34, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

According to this Washington Post article, Malvo admitted to a murder in Tucson in March 2002. I live in Phoenix but do not recall any coverage at the time nor after his confession.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701567.html

BTillman (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)B TillmanBTillman (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Race of Victims

I believe race should be mentioned in the article. 1.) the suspects where believed to be of a certain race due to profiling. 2.) the suspects started targeting blacks specifically to distort this profiling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.162.176.98 (talk) 13:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Studying this at school atm and was surprised Wikipedia is the ONLY source that ignores the fact it was racially motivated violence. They got away with it so long because of racial profiling of the shooters as white, all the victims were white, and they said themselves that they aimed to "kill six white people a day for 30 days" in their own testimony. It appears that a very carefully spun POV is being carried out here by it's removal. If the races were reversed it would be right in the lede section like Dylan Roof. The difference is Dylan Roof killed far less people and didn't get away with murder for so long. Dylan Roof is a household name. And the racial motive of Dylan Roof is in the FIRST LINE of his article meanwhile it's line 1058 on this. And is repeated only once. Dylan Roof it's repeated dozens of times and has an entire section devoted to it.

Agreed. I have just added the article to the Category:Racially motivated violence against European Americans, and am adding a mention in the lede about racial motivation. Bricology (talk) 11:46, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

I remember when Wikipedia was NPOV. I remember when that was important. :( 121.210.33.50 (talk) 06:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Time Discrepancy

There are conflicting times within this article for the murder of James Martin. The section titled "Attacks in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area" under the "Montgomery County, Maryland" subheading has time of death listed as 6:30pm. However the "Aftermath" / "Victims" section table lists Mr. Martin being killed at 6:04 pm. I can't find a citation for the table, which appears in related Wikipedia articles as well.

I believe the 6:30pm time is incorrect, possibly confused with the time of the earlier killing of Hong Im Ballenger on September 23, 2002. I have also found references that imply the shot killing Martin was fired less than an hour after the earlier "missed" shot at 5:20pm, on the same day, which would support 6:04pm as the correct time.

The book "23 Days of Terror: The Compelling True Story of the Hunt and Capture of the Beltway Sniper" By Angie Cannon has a chronology sequence that confirms 6:04pm as the time of Mr Martin's killing - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Qyz9pGKY6bEC&pg=PT10&dq=6:04

Should I search for more citations for the 6:04pm time before correcting the article(s) or ...? -- Gth-au (talk) 11:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Identification

This is a very confusing article. One thing that isn't made clear is, how did the police identify Muhammad and Malvo as the shooters, by name? I get it that once they did, they put the public on alert for a blue chevy, and caught them on a tip - but it's not clear how they learned their names in the first place. -- Y not? 15:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

See the article on John Allen Muhammad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.54.74 (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

The "Exculpatory Evidence Exonerating So-Called 'DC Snipers" text

50jmd (talk · contribs), also known as IP 66.192.172.132, keeps adding this "Exculpatory Evidence Exonerating So-Called 'DC Snipers" material to the article. He was reverted by Bantam1983, with Bantam1983 essentially citing WP:Fringe. And he was reverted by me, as seen here and here (follow up note here). Now why exactly does this unsourced, dubious text belong in this article? JoeSperrazza, you also watch this article. Any opinion on this matter? Flyer22 (talk) 02:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the question. I had not noticed the addition before, but I would not support it being added to the article for the following reasons:

1. It meets the definition of a WP:QUESTIONABLE (i.e., non-reliable) source. A copyright does not indicate that the copyrighted material has been fact checked or validated in any way.
2. Copyrighted materiel can be (and appears to be, by the citation) user-generated and self-published. Both fail the WP:RS test.
3. I can't find the copyright noted at http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First, so I question whether the citation is accurate. "COPYRIGHT Case No" is not a term of art that is familiar to me or useable at the USCO. Nor does a search for "James DeVone" find anything.
4. The documents also appear to be WP:WPNOTRS in that that they are WP:PRIMARY sources.
5. If, as suggested, these documents were written by the copyright holder, then they are almost certainly WP:OR. If 50jmd (talk · contribs) has any doubt, a quick trip to the WP:RSN would likely agree with my assessment.
6. Finally, the information seems to fit the definition of WP:FRINGE.

Best regards, JoeSperrazza (talk) 11:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I invited both @50jmd: and @66.192.172.132: to this discussion but also warned them against edit warring: [1], [2]. JoeSperrazza (talk) 11:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

This editor won't stop; I'll take care of this later. Flyer22 (talk) 13:36, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:50jmd and User:66.192.172.132 reported by User:JoeSperrazza (Result: ) JoeSperrazza (talk) 15:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@50jmd: edit warring continuing, see [3]. Prior edit was by IP @66.192.172.132: JoeSperrazza (talk) 18:51, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

The WP:RSN agrees that having something registered with the United States Copyright Office does not, in an of itself, make that a WP:RS. From Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_101#Is_a_Library_of_Congress_entry_enough_to_meet_our_RS_criteria.3F:

Under U.S. law all writers may register their copyrights with the United States Copyright Office, and a copy of the work is then deposited in the Library of Congress. That does not elevate it to rs. TFD (talk) 3:58 pm, 25 July 2011, Monday (3 years, 11 months, 1 day ago) (UTC−4)

JoeSperrazza (talk) 19:42, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for handling this while I was away, JoeSperrazza. I'm certain that 50jmd and the IP are the same person, though, which is why I stated "also known as" above. Flyer22 (talk) 02:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, @50jmd: and his IP @66.192.172.132: keep edit warring to restore this materiel, e.g.,

• 09:23, 2015 June 25 [4]
• 13:44, 2015 June 24‎ [5]
• 09:35, 2015 June 24‎ [6]
• 13:21, 2015 June 23‎ [7]

... etc. Full list is at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:50jmd_and_User:66.192.172.132_reported_by_User:JoeSperrazza_.28Result:_.29 JoeSperrazza (talk) 14:03, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Beltway sniper attacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140203054121/http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1763813 to http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1763813
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110310111752/http://www.neahin.org:80/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/stbullseye.htm to http://www.neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/stbullseye.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140203054118/http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=333&sid=265409 to http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=333&sid=265409
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.gazette.net/200242/princegeorgescty/state/126387-1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Terrorism

Terrorism and Islamism ought to be in lede and better covered in the article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

With sources like that, it is generally a good idea to find some additional sources that make a similar claim - if they make a similar claim. My very best wishes (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/call-to-priest-cracks-sniper-case/

Why the lack of Follow-up on this aspect of the snipers' capture that got national attention when the story broke? Even if the story didn't turn out to be true, it is still notable coverage of the incident, and should be properly dismissed as such. If it's true, it is the article's most glaring omission. MMetro (talk) 14:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

"motivated by an affinity for Islamist Jihad"

According to the "Motive" section, "[a] series of trial exhibits suggested Malvo and Muhammad were motivated by an affinity for Islamist Jihad." The source is a newspaper editorial, and newspaper editorials are not reliable sources for facts per WP:RSOPINION. I have tagged the source as unreliable. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:18, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Having waited six weeks and having received not a single response, I will remove the unreliable source and the material cited to it. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:36, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:NOTDIRECTORY

Malik Shabazz, regrading this and this, I question WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:NOTDIRECTORY applying in this case. For articles like these, it's common to include a section about the victims because the victims are commonly well-covered in WP:Reliable sources. Therefore, such sections can be encyclopedic. I'm not stating that the sections you removed were done well or that we should return them in their entirety (after all, we don't need more than one section about the victims), but I am stating that I don't think that sections about victims are automatically WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:NOTDIRECTORY violations. For further input, I'll ask about this case at the talk page for WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:NOTDIRECTORY; I'll point editors to this section so that the discussion is kept in one spot. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:43, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd welcome such a discussion, Flyer22 Reborn. Thank you. I don't doubt that an encyclopedic section about the snipers' victims could be written, but long lists of names, in my view, have no value. As an example, Casualties of the September 11 attacks is an encyclopedia article; Emergency workers killed in the September 11 attacks is a memorial that should (in my opinion) be deleted. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:33, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

RFC: Inclusion of Beltway sniper attacks in Chevrolet Caprice article

There is an RFC about a link to this article: Should the Chevrolet Caprice article mention in the body or via a see also link the Beltway Sniper's use of a Chevrolet Caprice? See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#Request for Comment: Inclusion of vehicle use in crimes as part of vehicle articles. Felsic2 (talk) 00:39, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

2016 move of this article

Loginnigol, looking here and here, I see that you moved the article from "Beltway sniper attacks" to "D. C. sniper attacks." And I see that with this move, Illegitimate Barrister recently fixed the spacing issue.

Loginnigol, because there are WP:Article title matters to consider, you should have started a WP:Requested moves discussion on this issue instead of moving this article per your opinion on what it should be titled. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Lead

This sentence in the lead is very unclear: "Their crime spree, begun in February 2002, featured murders and robberies in the states of Alabama, Arizona, and Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, and Washington, which resulted in seven deaths and seven injured people; in ten months, the snipers killed 17 people and injured 10 other people.". Did they kill seven and injure seven, or kill 17 and injure 10? Jon Harald Søby (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on D.C. sniper attacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20091110/NEWS01/911100329
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091101135127/http://www.altereddimensions.net/crime/WashingtonSniper.aspx to http://www.altereddimensions.net/crime/WashingtonSniper.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161218040554/https://www2.fbi.gov/page2/oct07/snipers102207.html to https://www.fbi.gov/page2/oct07/snipers102207.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Tacoma should be Takoma

Article links to Tacoma, Washington (state) when presumably they are referencing the Takoma Park neighborhood of Washington, DC. How would they find shells on the other side of the country? 2601:152:880:10A0:705F:5541:D7E7:767B (talk) 12:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Which link? The article says Muhammad practiced at a gun range in Tacoma, Washington (near Seattle). Fredlesaltique (talk) 03:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

How many victims?

The phrasing in one of the early paragraphs is confusing me and seems to present two different numbers for the amount of total victims.

"Their crime spree, which began in February 2002, included murders and robberies in the states of Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, and Washington, which resulted in 7 deaths and 7 wounded; in ten months, the snipers killed 17 people and wounded 10 others.[1]"

Was it 7 killed and 7 wounded or was it 17 killed and 10 wounded? WolfmanMcGee (talk) 10:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Victim names

Some of the names of the dead and wounded are missing. I think that should be updated. 2600:1007:B03E:52B:6984:5B61:24CD:BE35 (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Location #13 on map is incorrect

Whoever made the map - you should correct the dot for #13. You have it located just outside of alexandria - but it actually occurred at the Home Depot in Merrifield(just outside of falls church - which is the random defined city on the map in western fairfax county). Just stuck out as really far off… Sibley79 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Regarding possible copyvio

The copyvio-flagged text in the article was added in 2007 and earlier. Archive.org indicates that the Crime Museum article wasn't live until 2017. I suspect it made use of the Wikipedia text in writing its article. Schazjmd (talk) 19:53, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Question on ordering

Regarding this line: Chief Moose released part of the content of one of the shooter's letters, in which he declares, "Your children are not safe, anywhere, at any time."

It appears right in the middle of Johnson getting shot, how does this contextually make sense? Is it meant to have occurred the same day? Suggest moving it to the end of the paragraph 72.164.175.30 (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Agree, and moved. It wasn't in the para's source, so added a source-needed tag. Only reason I left it in the same para is it seems to have happened on the same day but without a source yet, couldn't be sure. Schazjmd (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Added ref, and "On the same day" to make clear it's in the correct place in the timeline. Schazjmd (talk) 21:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)