Four inch bone-handled fish knife with saw blade. One of the curious aspects of the John Franklin Hood and Sandra Garcia murders on a Santa Barbara beach on February 21st 1970 was the foldable bone-handled fish knife (with saw blade) found buried in the sand approximately one foot from the bodies. After reading through scores of newspaper articles it is still unclear whether investigators considered this the murder weapon. If they were going to hold back information to the public so that any future confession to the crime could be verified, it almost certainly would be the description of the knife and/or the location it was found, rather than whether it was the murder weapon.
However, investigators described the knife in great detail and exactly where it was found, but failed to reveal whether the knife blade was open and ready for use. It was also confounding why a killer would bury the murder weapon in the sand so close to the victims where it could easily be unearthed by responding officers. Any weapon being used on the victims would have been smeared in blood, which even if wiped down at the scene in darkness, would almost certainly have failed to remove all traces of the victims blood. The easiest option of throwing it into the sea would have been the sensible choice for somebody wanting to quickly separate themself from the murder weapon, but apparently this choice was not taken. Very little of this story makes sense, until we re-evaluate the crime scene from a more logical perspective.
However, investigators described the knife in great detail and exactly where it was found, but failed to reveal whether the knife blade was open and ready for use. It was also confounding why a killer would bury the murder weapon in the sand so close to the victims where it could easily be unearthed by responding officers. Any weapon being used on the victims would have been smeared in blood, which even if wiped down at the scene in darkness, would almost certainly have failed to remove all traces of the victims blood. The easiest option of throwing it into the sea would have been the sensible choice for somebody wanting to quickly separate themself from the murder weapon, but apparently this choice was not taken. Very little of this story makes sense, until we re-evaluate the crime scene from a more logical perspective.
John Franklin Hood & Sandra Garcia It is highly unlikely that John Franklin Hood and Sandra Garcia were murdered on an isolated stretch of beach at the exact location a knife had previously been buried in the sand. Therefore, it's logical to conclude it was part of the crime. But if investigators were still unsure whether it was the murder weapon months after the attack (which should have been obvious), then it probably wasn't the knife that killed either John or Sandra. That knife was probably taken from the crime scene by his accomplice.
The newspaper reports of a knife found buried in the sand sounds like a wilful act on behalf of its owner, but the word "buried" is likely misleading and could simply mean "covered in sand". Imagine for a moment we have a vigorous struggle between two assailants with knives and our two victims, but one of the attackers drops his knife into the sand during the initial struggle, which is disturbed enough by the action of shifting feet (or trodden on) to inadvertently cover it over. In this instance it is easy to see how a clean knife can be "buried" in the sand" absent of any blood, that investigators later had difficulty attaching to the murders. That's because it may not have been the knife that killed anybody - it was a second knife carried by a second assailant, who failed to use it in the attack. This may explain why the couple were beaten and stabbed. Once the second perpetrator lost his knife he likely resorted to using his fists. It is equally possible that the knife fell out of his pocket during an initial struggle (or fight) with the victims, before any knives were to be deployed After the murders of John and Sandra, any attempt to find his knife could have been brief and unsuccessful in near complete darkness. The frenzied and dynamic attack could easily have encompassed a considerable area of the beach (away from the blanket where the couple initially lay), so it's easy to see how a knife could be difficult to find after a limited search. Or he never even realised it had fell from his pocket because he was the one perpetrator of two who chose not to use it during the attack. The knife being lost by an attacker at the scene of the murders, as opposed to being deliberately buried, makes far more sense after re-examining what was reported in the newspapers.
The newspaper reports of a knife found buried in the sand sounds like a wilful act on behalf of its owner, but the word "buried" is likely misleading and could simply mean "covered in sand". Imagine for a moment we have a vigorous struggle between two assailants with knives and our two victims, but one of the attackers drops his knife into the sand during the initial struggle, which is disturbed enough by the action of shifting feet (or trodden on) to inadvertently cover it over. In this instance it is easy to see how a clean knife can be "buried" in the sand" absent of any blood, that investigators later had difficulty attaching to the murders. That's because it may not have been the knife that killed anybody - it was a second knife carried by a second assailant, who failed to use it in the attack. This may explain why the couple were beaten and stabbed. Once the second perpetrator lost his knife he likely resorted to using his fists. It is equally possible that the knife fell out of his pocket during an initial struggle (or fight) with the victims, before any knives were to be deployed After the murders of John and Sandra, any attempt to find his knife could have been brief and unsuccessful in near complete darkness. The frenzied and dynamic attack could easily have encompassed a considerable area of the beach (away from the blanket where the couple initially lay), so it's easy to see how a knife could be difficult to find after a limited search. Or he never even realised it had fell from his pocket because he was the one perpetrator of two who chose not to use it during the attack. The knife being lost by an attacker at the scene of the murders, as opposed to being deliberately buried, makes far more sense after re-examining what was reported in the newspapers.
This brings into focus the reports of two young men washing wounds at a service station in the area at approximately 1am on Sunday 22nd 1970, alleged to have been received during a fight at the beach. It is certainly not beyond the realms of possibility that these wounds could have been acquired through stabbing and punching somebody, but this would have likely placed John and Sandra at "Cemetery Beach" in the hour preceding midnight or just beyond, had these young men been related to the murders.
The other unusual feature of the double murder was the covering of the bodies with a blanket, that doesn't necessarily indicate that the victims were known to the killer/s. Sometimes a killer will cover the face of a victim in a process called "psychological undoing", that can occur during a frenzied attack. It is a defense mechanism in which a person attempts to atone or erase some negative action. Despite the brutality of the crime inflicted upon John Franklin Hood and Sandra Garcia, one of the perpetrators (or sole killer) may have had a difficult time looking at the faces of the victims, so the blanket of John and Sandra was used to cover their bodies while the killer/s contemplated their next move. Other than this, there was no other benefit that could possibly be achieved by the covering of two bodies lying on a beach in almost total darkness. Maybe the killers covered the bodies while searching in the sand for the lost knife.
This has been mentioned in the case of Robert Domingos and Linda Edwards who were murdered in 1963 thirty miles west of "Cemetery Beach", where some accounts claim that a towel was placed over Linda's face while she was positioned in the shack. The process of covering a victim's face is not common, but it's certainly well documented in many crimes.
THE CEMETERY BEACH MURDERS OF 1970 (PT1)
The other unusual feature of the double murder was the covering of the bodies with a blanket, that doesn't necessarily indicate that the victims were known to the killer/s. Sometimes a killer will cover the face of a victim in a process called "psychological undoing", that can occur during a frenzied attack. It is a defense mechanism in which a person attempts to atone or erase some negative action. Despite the brutality of the crime inflicted upon John Franklin Hood and Sandra Garcia, one of the perpetrators (or sole killer) may have had a difficult time looking at the faces of the victims, so the blanket of John and Sandra was used to cover their bodies while the killer/s contemplated their next move. Other than this, there was no other benefit that could possibly be achieved by the covering of two bodies lying on a beach in almost total darkness. Maybe the killers covered the bodies while searching in the sand for the lost knife.
This has been mentioned in the case of Robert Domingos and Linda Edwards who were murdered in 1963 thirty miles west of "Cemetery Beach", where some accounts claim that a towel was placed over Linda's face while she was positioned in the shack. The process of covering a victim's face is not common, but it's certainly well documented in many crimes.
THE CEMETERY BEACH MURDERS OF 1970 (PT1)
RSS Feed
