WorldNet Daily got it right on October 18, 2002 in an article titled, "Is shooter military trained?" The sub-head noted, "Beltway killer's tactics similar to those taught by U.S Army." The relevant sentences in the article were:
And, they say, among other tactics being used by the sniper, the two-man team concept falls in line with current military sniper training.Indeed you can look it up here. I found the U.S. Army's sniper manual online a few months ago (by accident!) and I saw that snipers worked in teams of two. I realized then the importance of knowing that John Allan Mohammed was an army sniper. It meant that a second person was needed for the crime.
According to the U.S. Army's Sniper Training Manual, snipers operate in two-man teams, with one acting as the shooter and another acting as a lookout.
Why do I bring this up now?
A recent report in the Washington Post tells that Lee Malvo boasted of being both the shooter and the spotter during the spree. But this raises a question. If both were needed to commit the crimes, why is it necessary to establish the identity of each as a shooter in order to seek the death penalty. The way they were working, no murder would have been committed without the presence of the second person. Wouldn't that render the identity of the shooter moot? The spotter was an integral part of the crimes.