Johnny Ray Swindle (20)
Newlyweds Johnny Ray Swindle (20) and Joyce Ann Swindle (19) of 5073 Voltaire Street were enjoying each others company in Ocean Beach, San Diego, out for a stroll by the beach on February 5th 1964, when they were murdered on a concrete patio overlooking the sea by a sniper situated approximately 50 feet away. Perched on the bluff above the patio, the sniper fired five shots at the couple from this distance, before walking down to where Johnny and Joyce lay and firing two more shots from near point blank range into their heads. Seven .22 long rifle casings were retrieved by investigators, five from the bluff 50 feet away and two from the patio. Joyce, hit in the back, left arm and head, sadly lost her life at the scene, whereas Johnny, struck in the back, left thigh, left ear and right temple survived for three more hours before finally succumbing to his injuries. Therefore, the killer fired five shots from the bluff edge and hit his targets with 100% accuracy.
To visualize this distance, imagine a ten-pin bowling alley from the foul line to the head pin is 60 feet. However, this was achieved between 8:15pm to 8:30pm in the evening with less than ideal lighting, to victimswho were unlikely to have remained perfectly stationary throughout the shooting (sunset on February 5th 1964 would have been 5:24pm). The noise of the ocean may have subdued the sound of the gunfire to some extent, so the couple may not have been immediately aware of what was happening to them. It has been reported that Johnny's wallet and Timex watch had been taken. Some Valentine candy was found on the ledge of the nearby retaining wall, purchased by Johnny from a nearby shop about 30 minutes before they arrived at the beachfront. Detectives struggled for a motive in this senseless crime because the level of callousness exhibited for small dollar reward did not appear proportional. They considered it likely that Johnny and Joyce Swindle were murdered for nothing more than a "thrill killing".
Joyce Ann Swindle (19)
Ross Geraci of Planet X Filmworks and his friend Bryan (a retired Navy marksman and weapons expert) released a YouTube video examining the location of the murders and giving us an overview of the case. Bryan believed that there was a good possibility the killer used a pistol as opposed to a rifle, which was the weapon commonly reported in the newspapers in the days following the crime.
On February 21st 1964 Sergeant Ed Stevens stated "We have learned that a man and a woman were walking on the beach about a block away from the shooting. A man was on the rocks a short distance from the seawall and another man was seen walking away from the bluffs just above the seawall. A man was seen running away from the beach about two blocks away. That might have been the murderer, or the man who earlier had been standing on the rocks below the young couple". The suggestion being that the killer would have descended from the patio after the attack, onto the rocks below, before proceeding up the stairwell toward Narragansett Avenue, and then running away from the area and being spotted two blocks away. If the man seen running two blocks away was the murderer, it is extremely unlikely he would have ran this distance carrying a rifle, making a pistol the likely weapon used by the killer (as suggested by Bryan). If the murderer had planned to kill somebody that evening with a rifle by the coastline, a vehicle parked relatively close by would have been the obvious choice (assuming he could drive and had access to a vehicle). .
There were other reports that a man was seen running on Del Monte Avenue at 8:16pm, about one minute after the earliest estimates of the murders (8:15pm) The shortest route from the top of the stairwell atNarragansett Avenue to Del Monte Avenue in a southerly direction is a journey of 558 feet. Typical walking speed is 4.6 feet per second, so if this was the killer running at approximately 10 feet per second, it would take him about 55.8 seconds to reach the western edge of Del Monte Avenue and correlate with the 8:16pm eyewitness sighting. :
But if these murders were committed for nothing more than a thrill, the individual was taking a big risk heading down from the bluff after firing five shots to administer thecoup de grâce, before returning back up the stairwell to escape. If robbery was the intention, the risk and reward element was massively disproportionate, because what amazing rewards could the killer hope to benefit from by killing a young couple. Some small change and a watch evidently.If the killer thought that now I've killed somebody I may as well benefit from the crime, he was either desperate or he took the wallet and watch as trophies to relive the crime in the future. There is no solid evidence that either of these items have been seen since.
Looking down over the patio
Due to the beachfront location and the .22 ammunition used, this crime has been compared to the Robert Domingos and Linda Edwards murders at Canada Del Molino on June 4th 1963, approximately 200 miles northwest of Ocean Beach. The big difference between the two crimes, is that the murderer of Robert and Linda fired the first 15 shots only 20 feet from the ocean edge, not perched on the hillside using any form of cover. There was no obvious use of concealment by the shooter in 1963.
However, just two days before the murders ofRobert Domingos and Linda Edwards, on June 2nd 1963, eleven teenagers who had been surfing at the beach, were fired upon by a sniper at a secluded location near Gaviota State Park, only three miles west of Canada Del Molino. On the same day, three other teenagers camping atTajiguas Creek four miles east ofCanada Del Molino, reported shots from the beach, In both instances they described the sound as originating from a .22 weapon. A sniper firing at teenagers close to the beach from a clandestine location has more in common with the Swindle murders, so the proximity of Gaviota State Park toCanada Del Molino, having occurred only two days previously, could by association, bring the Swindle murders back into the equation. If a transient using the shack atCanada Del Molino had murderedRobert Domingos and Linda Edwards, would he be desperate enough to murder Johnny and Joyce Swindle eight months later for the slim pickings of a few dollars and a Timex watch?
Weighing everything up, the obvious choice for the murders ofJohnny and Joyce Swindle seems to be nothing more than an individual who just acquired pleasure from the act of killing, who took items from his victims for no other reason than he could. Taking the path of least resistance from the little information we have, the murders of Johnny and Joyce Swindle were likely committed by a stranger using a pistol, who hastily departed the scene alongNarragansett Avenue and was spotted running two blocks away. If no vehicle was used in the getaway (and the killer wasn't a transient) is it safe to assume that the murderer lived in reasonable proximity to the crime scene? How far would a murderer be prepared to travel on foot with the "smoking gun" in his pocket? The "least effort principle" may indicate a killer living within a one mile radius of the crime scene (beyond the two block sighting). So if this was the murderer seen running away, where would your search for the killer begin?
THE SWINDLE MURDERS AT OCEAN BEACH (PT2)
