Judges compare Muhammad to Jack the Ripper, deny sniper’s appeal

Published November 6, 2007 5:00am ET



Convicted Beltway sniper John Allen Muhammad was fit to represent himself during his 2006 trial in Montgomery County and will not be granted a new one, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals ruled Monday.

Instead, the three-judge panel, in a sharply worded, unanimous 154-page opinion, compared Muhammad to Jack the Ripper, the unknown serial killer who terrorized the working-class Whitechapel neighborhood in London when he killed five prostitutes in 1888.

Muhammad and then teenage accomplice Lee Boyd Malvo held the Washington region in a 22-day reign of terror in October 2002, when the men began a rampage of sniper-style killings that ended with 10 dead and three wounded.

Six of those dead were in Montgomery County.

“In Montgomery County, every man, woman, and child was a likely target,” Justice Charles Moylan wrote in the opinion.

Muhammad’s appeal argued that he was denied a fair trial because Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge James Ryan allowed him to represent himself in the 2006 case when he should have been ruled incompetent to stand trial.

“Ironically, it is John Muhammad who is aggrieved at the way he was treated by Montgomery County, as he now complains,” Moylan wrote.

Muhammad was sentenced to six consecutive life terms in prison for the Montgomery County murders and has been sentenced to death in Virginia, where he is serving his time. Malvo is serving life in prison without parole in Virginia.

“We are very hopeful that this appellate decision will be the final chapter in what has been a five-year nightmare for this county,” Montgomery County State’s Attorney John McCarthy said Monday. “Hopefully this will bring closure to the victims of the six families.”

Paul LaRuffa, who was shot five times after locking up his restaurant in Clinton, in September 2002 before the rampage started, is believed to be among the sniper’s first victims.

LaRuffa, who testified against both men, called Monday’s decision a relief, even though the appeal was “moot” considering Muhammad’s and Malvo’s sentences in Virginia.

“Upholding his convictions is the right thing,” LaRuffa said. “There’s not a lot of question aboutit. The evidence is overwhelming.”

Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler, the former Montgomery state’s attorney who oversaw the prosecution of the case, said he expects it to continue to the state Court of Appeals.

“Anybody who sat through that trial knows that he had received a fair trial,” Gansler said Monday. “This is another chapter in the litigation … ultimately, he’ll either be executed in Virginia or spend the rest of his life in a cage in Maryland.”

[email protected]