Victor E Copto
George Mason University
CRIM 495
Dr. Marie Mele Thomas
September 6, 2023
This case study will discuss the DC sniper attacks committed by John Muhammad and
Lee Malvo. This type of violence can be considered as homicide, but it will be looked at as
terrorism. The case study will dive deep into the context of the violent act and identifying the act.
It will also look at other forms of violence it might be correlated to and figure out which social
science theories might best explain the motivation.
When looking at the context of the violent act which in this case are the DC sniper
attacks. It is apparent that the victims, offenders, the location of the crime, the nature of the act,
and the rationale of the act be looked at to get a better understanding. First, are the victims of the
DC sniper attacks. During the attacks, Muhammad and Malvo targeted 13 random victims with
no correlation to them in which 10 were killed and 3 were seriously injured (Beltway Snipers,
n.d.). The victims included: James Martin, James Buchanan Jr., Prem Walekar, Sarah Ramos,
Lori Ann Lewis-Rivera, Pascal Charlot, Carolie Sewell, Iran Brown, Dean Myers, Kenneth
Bridges, Linda Franklin, Jeffery Hopper, and Conrad Johnson (Albarus & Mack, 2012, p. 2-3).
Second, the offenders were John Muhammad and Lee Malvo. John Muhammad was a war
veteran that planned the attacks, and Lee Malvo was the shooter and teenager that Muhammed
took under his wing for the attacks (Albarus & Mack, 2012, p. 3). Third, all the sniper attacks
where centralized in the DMV area near stores, gas stations, parking lots, and a school
(Philofsky, 2014). Fourth is the nature of violent acts. The nature of the acts was to select
random individuals during broad daylight and to terrorize the community by bringing the normal
daily life to a standstill (Philofsky, 2014). Lastly is the rationale of the acts which some believed
was to get revenge on Muhammed’s ex-wife (Philofsky, 2014), but it was also to bring chaos and
panic by teaching more young children how to shoot and terrorize the country (“The DC Sniper
Beltway Attacks,” n.d.).
Next is identifying and categorizing the violence of the act displayed by John
Muhammad and Lee Malvo during the DC sniper attacks. The attacks would be considered both
instrumental and expressive. While first looking at expressive which is expressing violence out
of an emotional state. Expressive was shown through John Muhammad because he was
discharged by the US military (Spicer, 2014, p. 7) and was upset with the court system after
taking away his children which caused him to move into the Washington area (Albarus & Mack,
2012, p. 3). These factors lead Muhammad to have a bad taste towards the American system.
Instrumental was also used by John Muhammad to fulfill a three-phase plan that he had come up
with. The first phase being the original sniper attacks but killing more individuals than what they
accomplished. The second phase was to move to Baltimore and continue their killing spree, and
the last phase was to contact the police and extort money from the government (“The DC Sniper
Beltway Attacks,” n.d.). Their plan for that money was to finance a bigger step that would take
young boys and move them to Canada while teaching how to shoot. Muhammad would have his
own personal army to be able to terrorize large cities around the country (Spicer, 2014, p. 8).
After identifying the act as both expressive and instrumental, next would be categorizing
the type of violence. The DC sniper attacks would be categorized more as interpersonal violence
due to the multiple offenders and victims present. As mentioned previously, the two offenders of
this violent act were John Muhammad and Lee Malvo. Also mentioned before was the countless
of victims that Muhammad and Malvo victimized which was a total of thirteen.
After identifying and categorizing the violent act, the next step would be to show the
connection to other forms of violence. The DC sniper attacks can be connected to the form of
violence that John Muhammad and Lee Malvo experienced. When looking at John Muhammad,
he was surrounded by violence most of his early adulthood because he was an ex-soldier that
served in the National Guard and US Army. He was discharged due to many incidents including
stealing weapons and a particular grenade rolling incident (Spicer, 2014, p. 7). Looking at this,
John Muhammad did have some form of violence in his life due to his profession.
While John Muhammad was not the only person that experienced some form of violence
in his life. So did his accomplice, Lee Malvo. In Malvo’s early life, he had a great relationship
with his father but not so much with his mother. Malvo’s father stated that Malvo’s mother
would inflict an excessive amount of punishment by beating Malvo as he was a grown child with
anything she could get her hands on (Albarus & Mack, 2012, p. 37). This early abuse was a form
of violence that Lee Malvo had experienced which allowed him to be easily persuaded by John
Muhammad in the end.
Finally, is to look at and identify a social science theory that explains the factors for the
violent act. The best theory to best explain these factors is the social learning theory which
implies that individuals learn violence though experiences, association, and things we see. Also,
another variant of social learning theory can be applied which is differential association theory.
Differential association theory implies that individuals that associate with others that engage in
violence and support it will most likely engage in violence themselves. The social learning
theory can be best applied to John Muhammad because he was trained by the US military to be
an excellent marksman which had a distinct level towards violence (Spicer, 2014, p. 7). The
differential association theory can be applied as well because Muhammad was associated to a
group, the US military, that supported the act of violence due to the nature of their profession.
It is the same case with Lee Malvo where both theories, social learning theory and
differential theory, can be applied to the factors of violent acts. A mixture of both theories
applies to Lee Malvo because through differential association theory Malvo, as a boy, was
heavily associated with Muhammad. Malvo’s heavily association to Muhammad was because of
his admiration towards Muhammad and hours he would spend with him due to Muhammad’s
story telling of him exploiting the military (Spicer, 2014, p. 7). The reason for these long periods
of time that Malvo would spend with Muhammad was because of Malvo’s lack of father figure
in his life. Even though, Malvo had a great relationship with his father. Malvo’s father did leave
him and his mother for some time to earn money in another country which led to Malvo’s mother
taking him away from his father entirely (Albarus & Mack, 2012, p. 37). Also, Malvo would
spend time with Muhammad to avoid the abuse that he suffered under his mother’s hand. During
this point, Muhammad had engaged in some form of violence through the military which Malvo
had admired and become associated to. With Muhammad’s support towards violence, it made it
easier for Malvo to engage in these acts of violence because he viewed Muhammad as his father
figure. During an interview, Malvo asks for his father and corrects the interviewer that his father
is Muhammad (Albarus & Mack, 2012, p. 37). Also, the social learning theory applies because
Malvo was taught by Muhammad how to shoot. After Malvo learned to shoot, this would set the
course of the DC sniper attacks planned by Muhammad.
The reason these two theories, social learning theory and differential association theory,
explain the violence in this case is because Muhammad’s and Malvo’s violent tendencies were
learned and had some form of association. Muhammad has his association toward the US
military which is known for their violent profession and where he learned some form of violence,
as it is shown by people calling him an expert marksman in the military. Malvo was associated
with Muhammad at an early age due to the lack of father figure in his life, and the abuse he
would suffer from his mom. His association with Muhammad was where he also learned some
form of violence by being taught how to shoot which contributed to most of the shooting.
These theories can also be explained in the type of violence this act committed which was
a mixture of homicide and terrorism. When it comes to homicide and terrorism to be able to
commit that type of violence. The individual must have had some experience or association with
someone else that engaged in that type of violence. When it comes to homicide, a person must
have experienced some form of violence and associate with a person or group that supports or
engages in that type of violence. It can be the same for terrorism, a person must have
experienced a form of violence by an individual or community and be associated with others to
commit that type of violence. For example, the social learning theory applied through terrorism
can be caused through the association a person has with that terrorist groups which leads the
individual to commit that violent act. The same can be said for homicide if an individual joins a
gang, that individual due to association and learning from the gang can commit that violent act.
The case study went over the context of the violent act by looking at the victims,
offenders, location, nature, and rationale of the violent act. It identified the violent act as both
expressive and instrumental with it also being interpersonal violence. The case study connected
other forms of violence by looking into other violence Muhammad and Malvo experienced in
their lives. Also, identifying that social learning theory and differential association theory which
best explained the factors of the violent act. These theories were also applied to the violent act by
explaining that both Muhammad and Malvo learned their violence and were associated to others
with some form of violence. In Muhammad’s case it was the military, but Malvo was associated
to Muhammad and learned by him. Lastly, the theories explained the type of violence that was
committed by the act. It looked at both homicide and terrorism as being types of violence that
can be caused due to association or learned behavior.
References
Albarus, C., & Mack, J. H. (2012). The Making of Lee Boyd Malvo: The D. C. sniper. Columbia
University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/gmu/detail.action?docID=1001078
Beltway Snipers. (n.d.). Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved September 6, 2023, from
https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/beltway-snipers
Philofsky, R. (2014). Beltway sniper attacks | Description, History, & Facts | Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Beltway-sniper-attacks
Spicer, M. (2014). Teenage violence and Lee Boyd Malvo, the DC sniper. Deputy and Court Officer,
6(1), 6–8.
The DC Sniper Beltway Attacks. (n.d.). Crime Museum. Retrieved September 6, 2023, from
https://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/mass-murder/the-washington-dc-sniper/