1903: Arthur Alfred Lynch condemned 1795: Unspecified Robespierrists

1989: Ted Bundy, psycho killer

January 24th, 2009 Headsman

Qu’est-ce que c’est?

It was 20 years today that Ted Bundy, the signature sexual psychopath in a golden age of serial killers,* rode the lightning in Florida’s Starke Prison.

Executed Today is pleased to mark the occasion with a conversation with Louisville crime writer Kevin M. Sullivan, author of a forthcoming2009 book on Ted Bundy … and a man who knows how the world looks from inside Bundy’s ski mask.


Ted Bundy is obviously one of the most iconic, written-about serial killers in history. Why a book about Ted Bundy? What’s the untold story that you set out to uncover?

The desire, or drive, if you will, to write an article about Ted Bundy and then create a 120,000 plus word book about the murders, was born out of my crossing paths with his infamous murder kit. Had Jerry Thompson [a key detective on the Bundy case -ed.] left Bundy’s stuff in Utah that May of 2005, well, it would have been an enjoyable meeting with the former detective, but I’m certain it would have all ended quietly there. Indeed, I doubt if I’d even considered writing an article for Snitch [a now-defunct crime magazine -ed.], much less a book about the killings. But it was having all that stuff in my hands, and in my home, and then being given one of the Glad bags from Ted’s VW that made it very real (or surreal) to me, and from this, a hunger to find out more about the crimes led me forward.


Ted Bundy’s gear, right where you want it — image courtesy of Kevin M. Sullivan. (Check the 1975 police photo for confirmation.)

Believe me, in a thousand years, I never would have expected such a thing to ever come my way. I can’t think of anything more odd or surreal.

ET: You mentioned that you think you’ve been able to answer some longstanding questions about Bundy’s career. Can you give us some hints? What don’t people know about Ted Bundy that they ought to know?

I must admit, when I first decided to write a book about the crimes, I wasn’t sure what I’d find, so the first thing I had to do was read every book ever written about Bundy, which took the better portion of three or four months.

From this I took a trip to Utah to again meet with Thompson and check out the sites pertaining to Bundy and the murders in that state. Next came the acquisition of case files from the various states and the tracking down of those detectives who participated in the hunt for the elusive killer.

Now, no one could have been more surprised than me to begin discovering what I was discovering about some of these murders. But as I kept hunting down the right people and the right documents, I was able to confirm these “finds” at every turn. And while I cannot reveal everything here, It’s all in the book in great detail. Indeed, you could say that my book is not a biography in the truest sense, but rather an in-depth look at Bundy and the murders from a vantage point that is quite unique. I wish I could delve further into these things now , but I must wait until it’s published.

The Bundy story has a magnetic villain and a host of victims … was there a hero? Was there a lesson?

The real heroes in this story are the detectives who worked day and night for years to bring Ted Bundy to justice. And if there’s a lesson to be learned from all of this, it is this: It doesn’t matter how handsome or articulate a person might be, or how nicely they smile at you, for behind it all, there could reside the most diabolical person you’ll ever meet! We need to remember this.

But how can you act on that lesson without living in a continual state of terror? Bundy strikes me as so far outside our normal experience, even the normal experience of criminality, that I’m inclined to wonder how much can be generalized from him.

Actually, (and I might say, thank God here!) people as “successful” as Ted Bundy don’t come our way very often. I mean, the guy was a rising star in the Republican Party in Washington, had influential friends, a law student, and certainly appeared to be going places in life. Some were even quite envious of his ascension in life. However, it was all a well-placed mask that he wore to cover his true feelings and intentions. On the outside he was perfect, but on the inside a monster. He just didn’t fit the mold we’re used to when we think of a terrible killer, does he?

Now, there are those among us — sociopaths — who can kill or do all manner of terrible things in life and maintain the nicest smile upon their faces, but again, just beneath the surface ticks the heart of a monster, or predator, or what ever you might want to call them. Having said that, I’m not a suspicious person by nature, and so I personally judge people by their outward appearance until shown otherwise. Still, it’s difficult (if not impossible) to see the “real” individual behind the person they present to us on a daily basis.

You worked with case detectives in researching your book. How did the Ted Bundy case affect the way law enforcement has subsequently investigated serial killers? If they had it to do over again, what’s the thing you think they’d have done differently?

They all agree that today, DNA would play a part of the investigation that wasn’t available then. However, in the early portion of the murders, Bundy made few if any mistakes, as he had done his homework so as to avoid detection. As such, even this wouldn’t be a panacea when it came to a very mobile killer like Bundy who understood the very real limitations sometimes surrounding homicide investigations.

I can’t help but ask about these detectives as human beings, too. Clearly they’re in a position to deal with the heart of darkness in the human soul day in and day out and still lead normal lives … is a Ted Bundy the kind of killer that haunts or scars investigators years later, or is this something most can set aside as all in a day’s work?

They are, first of all, very nice people. And you can’t be around them (either in person, or through numerous phone calls or emails) for very long before you understand how dedicated they are (or were) in their careers as police officers. They are honorable people, with a clear sense of duty, and without such people, we, as a society, would be in dire circumstances indeed.

Even before Bundy came along, these men were veteran investigators who had seen many bad things in life, so they carried a toughness which allowed them to deal with the situations they came up against in a professional manner. That said, I remember Jerry Thompson telling me how he looked at Ted one day and thought how much he reminded him of a monster, or a vampire of sorts. And my book contains a number of exchanges between the two men (including a chilling telephone call) which demonstrate why he felt this way

How about for you, as a writer — was there a frightening, creepy, traumatic moment in your research that really shook you? Was there an emotional toll for you?

Absolutely. But the degree of “shock”, if you will, depends (at least for me) on what I know as I first delve into each murder. In the Bundy cases I had a general knowledge of how Bundy killed, so there wasn’t a great deal that caught me by surprise, as it were. Even so, as a writer, you tend to get to know the victims very well through the case files, their family members or friends, and so on. Hence, I’ll continue to carry with me many of the details of their lives and deaths for the remainder of my life. And so, lasting changes are a part of what we do.

However, I did a story a few years back about a 16 year old girl who was horribly murdered here in Kentucky, and this case did cause me to wake up in the night in a cold sweat. Perhaps it was because I have a daughter that was, at the time, only a few years younger than this girl, and that some of what transpired did catch me off guard, so to speak, as I began uncovering just what had happened to this very nice kid.

Watch for Kevin M. Sullivan’s forthcoming The Bundy Murders: A Comprehensive History from McFarland in summer or fall of 2009.

* In fact, the term “serial killer” was coined in the 1970’s by FBI profiler Robert Ressler, as an improvement on the sometimes inaccurate category of “stranger killer”.


Additional Bundy resources from the enormous comment thread:

Also on this date

Entry Filed under: 20th Century,Capital Punishment,Common Criminals,Crime,Death Penalty,Electrocuted,Execution,Florida,History,Infamous,Murder,Popular Culture,Serial Killers,Sex,USA

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

7,463 thoughts on “1989: Ted Bundy, psycho killer”

  1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi ET guys and gals…

    I recently received this very nice review of my audio book, The Bundy Murders…

    “Since I usually reserve my ‘reading’ via audiobooks to my daily commute to work (listening is safer), I can honestly say that this book temporarily took the grind out of it. No it’s not ‘In Cold Blood’ but not since I experienced that level of writing have I been able to enjoy an author as much…if not the content which IS harder to comprehend when expressed so well. I recommend this to anyone who likes to be captivated enough to look forward to Monday morning. … Great writer, and a narrator who didn’t distract from or spoil it.”

    Check out the FREE audio sample at the link below:

    https://mobile.audible.com/pd/Nonfiction/The-Bundy-Murders-A-Comprehensive-History-Audiobook/B00OG5UV8Q?s=s

  2. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    And remember, if you own THE BUNDY MURDERS on Kindle you can get the audio book through Amazon for only $3.99. It’ s also available on iTunes and Audible.

    :)

    1. Arnar Þór says:

      It is truly a terrific listen.

  3. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Thanks Arnar!

  4. Peter Henderson Jr. says:

    Hi all,

    Its interesting to note that three of Utah’s unfound but confessed victims, (Nancy Wilcox, MP # 27747, Susan Curtis, MP # 27748, and Debra Kent, MP # 27776) have just been added to NamUs in February of 2015.

    I agree with Kevin up to recently Utah showed no interest in investigating the cases after Bundy confessed and they looked but did not find any remains.

    The exception being Debra Kent, who police believe found her knee cap. However investigators has never used DNA to confirm that fact as far as I know. On Debra’s page they now include a thumbnail photo of her coat or sweater.

    Susan and Debra’s pages currently say DNA sample: Sample submitted – Test not complete. Nancy’s page says DNA sample is currently not available, but its clear for the resent news report her mother is alive and could.

    I wonder if they are going to give it one last shot at finding their remains, or comparing their DNA with unidentified Jane Doe’s?

  5. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hey Peter,

    I’ll be surprised if Utah does even one thing officially pertaining to these cases. The interest just isn’t there as they know Bundy killed them. of course, if they find remains, at that point they would be very interested in closing out whatever case that is.

    Yes, Mrs. Kent is alive (and maybe Dean, her ex husband too), but I don’t believe they were ever really concerned about doing any tests on it as they believe the portion of the knee cap belongs to their daughter.

    Thanks for posting the info, Peter.

  6. Ken says:

    I have no problem with an individual being put to death who has done a crime such as these, but we forget that there is evil in the justice system, also, in the form of planted evidence, lying, etc. Since over 100 people have been released from death row through the innocence projects with DNA testing in states across the country, I have no idea how people can’t see that we are no better than the serial killer when we kidnap a human being and force him to await his death……and he has done nothing.

  7. Ken says:

    Bundy is absolutely guilty, I am talking about the death sentence in general, from a comment I read above, by the way. Just realized I should make that clear.

  8. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi Ken…

    Well, no system is perfect, but the criminal activity that you speak of “lying, planting of evidence”, has nothing to do with the need for the death penalty. The death penalty is a just tool to use against the killers of innocent people.

    Sometimes, anything other than death will be a travesty of justice, where justice is not served at all. Just ask the surviving families as they contemplate the killers of their loved ones who are still eating, watching TV, and being feed and cared for 24/7.

    It is not morally wrong to put certain people to death, and that includes Ted Bundy and all others like him. If they’re going to do these terrible things they need to pay the ultimate price fore the crime.

    Take care,

    Kevin

  9. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Or, “for the crime” (I’m playing editor now, lol!)

  10. Hal says:

    It’s easy for a non-American to say, but if you draw two lists of Death Penalty countries and non Death Penalty countries, those lists alone will tell you everything you need to know about whether it has any place in civilised society. America is keeping the worst company in the whole world on this issue. You literally couldn’t make America look any more morally backwards if you made the lists up yourself just for that purpose. And it’s all down to America being the only civilised power left whose population still believe in morally bankrupt, scientifically and historically laughable, plagiarised fairy tales.

    Bringing it back to Ted, I wonder if during his last interview, Ted ‘that’s the irony’ Bundy had worked out the real irony, that his fellow ‘Christian’ actually had the value system of a medieval tyrant and wanted to see him die that very night. I can’t think of any member of society other than Christian, who could visit a ‘friend’ in prison and wish for his immediate death.

    If US Netflix carries similar content to the UK site, check out a movie called For The Bible Tells Me So, which features NO non-Christian content whatsoever (and therefore makes no claims against the religion) but also makes it abundantly clear that James Dobson is responsible for as many needless deaths as Ted was. And not only that, but he couldn’t care less.

  11. So, Kevin, you must believe there should be two classes of surviving families, those who are worthy of justice and those who are not, based upon the arbitrary criteria, “sometimes.”

    If you’re talking about killing “certain” people, you should be willing to specify exactly by what criteria you are identifying them. “Ted Bundy and all others like him” is not sufficient. And you should also be willing to explain why only some families are worthy of justice.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Richard:

      If you’re referring to the families of the killers, well, it’s regrettable they are in the position they’re in. But let’s hope they can and will understand when the state executes their loved one. It’s not the same for the families of the murdered.

      If you’re not referring to the above, you must be wondering why I said “certain” folks need to be put to death. I would think you could figure this out on you own, based on our laws and previous statements I’ve made3 on this site. That said, I will explain what L meant:

      Those who commit premeditated, cold-blooded murder (think Bundy here and most serial killers) should be put to death. Bottom line. This is my view.

      Those who commit premeditated murder but have had previous existing circumstances which may have led to it, that is a different issue and at the trial such a sentence can be considered. Maybe, maybe not. Again, my feeling about what the law should be.

      A guy finds his wife in bed with another man, he whips out a gun and kills him. Should he face the death penalty? No, absolutely not. That would clearly be a case of someone losing it and such a terrible action should not be a death penalty case.

  12. “Sometimes, anything other than death will be a travesty of justice, where justice is not served at all. Just ask the surviving families as they contemplate the killers of their loved ones who are still eating, watching TV, and being feed and cared for 24/7.”
    – Kevin M. Sullivan 28 March, 2015 at 4:08 pm

    This argument has strong emotional appeal but, as a rational argument in support of the death penalty, it has no basis.

    First, it does not represent all of the families. Most recently, the Richards family, who lost their 8-year old son on the Boston Marathon Bombing, have asked that the death penalty be taken off the table since it will only extend and exacerbate their pain.

    Second, in order to achieve this goal in all first-degree murder cases, there must be a prohibition on plea-baraining and a mandate for summary execution upon conviction. Otherwise some families will be forced to suffer a “travesty of justice.”

    This argument does a disservice to the families by using our sympathy for them to promote a political agenda with which they may not necessarily agree.

  13. Tony says:

    Agreed, more or less.

    The death penalty as it stands is subjectively and inconsistently applied. A black kid who shot one person gets the needle while a white nurse who gassed 15 babies gets institutionalized, etc. I can understand dismissing the “What if an innocent man gets executed?” argument on the basis of “hey, no system is perfect,” because there you’re talking about something that MIGHT happen. This DOES happen, period.

    In order for the death penalty to possibly be applied fairly, it has to be applied according to some kind of objective standard… that is, we as a society have to identify the type of situation where it is warranted and apply that standard fairly, consistently, and dispassionately. You can’t kill one perp because the judge doesn’t like black people, but spare another because the judge (or the jury) can’t countenance killing a woman.

  14. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    You’re walking in circles Richard.

    If a family doesn’t want the death penalty applied to the killer of their loved one, fine. But that still doesn’t mean that the prosecutor has to go along with their wishes. It may depend on other factors as well (information given by the killer which results in the return of the remains of the loved one, for example). So everything can be on the table.

    That said, most families of the murdered do believe in the DP being used in these cases, and their wish should trump all others, in my view.

    If anti DP folks will be honest (and it’s difficult during a debate to get them to be honest), they have a moral objection ton the DP and it begins and ends here. They may use other arguments, but it all goes back to that.

    The DP is an excellent and a justified tool of our justice system, and I hope that we don’t become so weak like other western nations and ban it. It is not immoral ton put these heinous folks to death. The world became that much better, and justice was served, when they pulled the switch on Ted Bundy.

  15. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    I don’t know how I managed to write “ton” for “to” twice above but I did, lol!

    Change to “to” :)

  16. Disproving your statement is not walking in circles. You said one simply needs to ask surviving families. Well, someone did and the answer was not what you said it would be. it’s far more complicated than that.

    Now you seem to believe that only those families who agree with your philosophy deserve justice.

  17. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    If particular families of murdered loved ones believe it to be just to allow them to live, that’s okay with me? I have no problem with that. If they want to exchange the killer’s life for the location of their loved one, that’s great too. But by and large, most folks with murdered loved ones want the killer to die, and that, in my opinion is one (and there are others!) good reason to have the DP.

    The death penalty is, in my opinion a just tool of the justice department. It rids the earth of the most heinous and diabolical among us who have committed the most egregious of crimes.

  18. L.A. says:

    Lots of unseen footage of Bundy’s trial has been uploaded to youtube, about an hour’s worth. Check out this channel:

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcea0cfahdmh8wpudYqss0Q

  19. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Thanks for sharing, L.A.!

  20. Junebug says:

    Hal,

    “You literally couldn’t make America look any more morally backwards if you made the lists up yourself just for that purpose. And it’s all down to America being the only civilised power left whose population still believe in morally bankrupt, scientifically and historically laughable, plagiarised fairy tales

    Really now? If you noticed, one the countries that supports and imposes the death penalty is China and their govt not only doesn’t hold any beliefs in “morally bankrupt scientifically and historically laughable plagiarised fairy tales” but actively cracks down on any such believers being part of the govt. Obviously, religious beliefs are not the reason for the death penalty.

    Also, are you aware that Christians are very divided about the death penalty? Many Christians see the taking of a human life, even as punishment, as being morally wrong and against the teaching of Jesus. Do you actually think the matter is as simple as someone believing in the bible and automatically supporting capital punishment? Many people in the US federal and state bodies aren’t even religious. Also, not all US states even support the death penalty, and for those that do, not everyone in that state body is religious and they don’t hold a prayer circle to decide when to execute someone.

    As far as Ted goes, what happened with the Tanners willing to see him die seems quite fitting and even ‘karmic’ considering that Ted tried to use and con them into extending his life by feigning religious conversion. Ted was a con artist who was looking for an available avenue to extend his life, his final ‘bones for time’ plan speaks volumes. You don’t actually think that he saw the Tanners as his “fellow Christians” or that he was serious about his religious conversion do you?

    ” I can’t think of any member of society other than Christian, who could visit a ‘friend’ in prison and wish for his immediate death.”

    I find that impossible to believe because history is filled with members of society who not only were non-Christians but some even atheists who wished for death and even killed people who they considered to be their friends for many many reasons.

  21. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hey Junebug,

    Hal was having a mini tirade because he doesn’t like Christians. That’s why he was saying some absurd things – like the Tanners were wishing Ted to die. No, they understood the concept of capital punishment and so that was that. He was just undergoing a tirade.

    As a Christian minister with over 30 years’ experience, I have no problem with the DP and in fact, I support it. What I find amazing with some folks is that no matter how awful and diabolical some people get as they go out to annihilate the innocent, they strangely want to protect their lives. Then they pat themselves on the back actually believing they’re doing the “moral” thing by keeping these monsters alive. When in fact, the moral thing is to put them to death.

  22. Meaghan says:

    Kevin, what’s your take on executing the developmentally disabled? Like that World War II soldier I wrote about a week or two ago, the one with an IQ of 50 who wrote to Eisenhower asking not to be “hong” for “mudder.”

    I’m against the DP as your know, but if I wasn’t I would still be against it for disabled people. That guy shouldn’t have been in the Army in the first place and I think the Army is partially responsible for what happened.

  23. Junebug says:

    Exactly, Kevin! And even according to research, sociopaths like Bundy can’t be rehabilitated or cured, so they always remain a danger to society. Even when he was locked up you would think that society would be safe but Bundy managed to escape twice and commit multiple murders before being recaptured. Sociopaths also con prison officials and parole boards into thinking they’ve been rehabilitated and once they’re released back into society they revert to form, Charles Manson is a famous example of this.

    Society has a right to protect itself against violent sociopaths who cannot be rehabilitated or cured.

  24. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi Meaghan…

    No, I don’t believe execution is the answer for the developmentally disabled. That said, I am also in great disagreement that “mentally ill” killers be placed in the hands of the medical folks, who may “cure” them one day and release them. That is absurd. So if the type of person you reference commits murder worthy of the DP, then I would opt for life without the possibility of parole.

  25. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hey Junebug…

    That’s right. There is absolutely nothing immoral taking the life of heinous killers. The world is far better off without them.

  26. Kevin, you claim:

    that it is a travesty of justice for “the surviving families to have to contemplate the killers of their loved ones who are still eating, watching TV, and being feed and cared for 24/7″

    that the death penalty “rids the earth of the most heinous and diabolical among us who have committed the most egregious of crimes.”

    If only the most heinous are killed, why are the majority of families whose loved ones were killed by one who was slightly less than “most heinous” left suffering the travesty of justice that the death penalty is supposed to eliminate?

  27. “If anti DP folks will be honest (and it’s difficult during a debate to get them to be honest), they have a moral objection ton the DP and it begins and ends here. They may use other arguments, but it all goes back to that.” (Kevin)

    My objection to the DP is practical, not moral. You say that the DP is “just tool of the justice department.” Well, a nuclear weapon can be cossidered just a tool of the defense department. Both are dangerous to employ. In the case of the DP it provides an incentive to kill. For one example, consider our subject, Ted Bundy:

    When Bundy asked attorney John Henry Browne in what state people would most likely be executed, Browne’s answer was that, “It’d probably be Florida now.”

    Journalist Richard Larsen questioned whether Ted Bundy went to Florida “to play his thrilling drama on the most ominous of stages.”

    Bundy’s interviews with Dr. Ronald M. Holmes, Professor Emeritus of Justice Administration at the University of Louisville, verified Larsen’s suspicion when Bundy “said that the reason he went to Florida was that he knew Florida had the death penalty, and if he was caught for his crimes he would be executed. He added ‘the greater the risk, the greater the thrill.’”

    Michael Mello, internationally recognized authority on the death penalty and capital punishment issues, believed that, beyond the risk attraction, “if caught, he [Bundy] wanted the celebrity of a high-profile trial and execution.”

  28. “Ted was a con artist” (Hal)

    That he was. But remember that the easiest thing for a con artist to get us to believe is what we want to believe. What we wanted to believe was that he would try to extend his life by this sort of scheme. That was postulated by at least two detectives and a prosecutor in 1979. So he he made it look like that.

    What he was really dong was bringing us down to his level. He demonstrated that we were more interested in killing than in alleviating the suffering of many families with unresolved murders and missing loved ones.

  29. Junebug, you say “Bundy managed to escape twice and commit multiple murders before being recaptured”

    He didn’t “manage” that. He had the cooperation of Colorado officials who had the great wisdom to move a convicted kidnapper, suspected serial killer, and known escape risk from a maximum security prison to a sometimes unguarded county jail. Of course he escaped. How could he not?

    The first escape plan anyone will try is to get transferred to a county jail from which escape is a piece of cake. Danny Rolling tried it when he was sent to FSP. Bundy’s transfer to Colorado was a “get out of jail free” card for him.

  30. Meaghan says:

    Kevin — I’m not sure why you put “mentally ill” in quotes like that, but I’ll assume it’s not because you think mental illness isn’t real. I will also assume (correct me if I’m mistaken) that you don’t have a severe mental illness or know anyone who does.

    I DO have a severe mental illness, one that is currently well under control with medication and therapy. But when it’s not under control I turn into a different person altogether. There have been times when, walking down the street, I was afraid to use the sidewalks because I was sure people driving by in their cars (whom I did not know from Adam) were talking about me and saying nasty things. Last year I stabbed myself, penetrating almost down to the bone — I can’t say why I did, only that it seemed like a good idea at the time. My illness doesn’t make me incapable of careful planning though; I can’t tell you how many times when, during an episode, I’ve thought out in the calmest and most rational manner how to do the most IRrational things.

    My point is that I can well believe that there are some people who are so sick they are not responsible for their actions. And, from my own personal experience, I know it’s possible to return them to their former selves with the right cocktail of medication and supports and careful observation.

    Just my two cents.

  31. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Richard,

    We will have to agree to disagree. I can’t keep walking in these circles with you.

  32. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Meaghan,

    No, I’m not mentally ill, but my brother was, so I understand true mental illness. That said, very often medical folks will declare evil people as merely mentally ill, after they commit the most diabolical of crimes, they will medicate and work with them, and ultimately release them once they determine they’re “getting better” and, in their view, no longer a threat to society. Not a good thing, Meaghan, not a good thing at all.

    Believe me, I’ve written about folks like this, and it’s terrible to see a heinous killer taken out of the court system, enter the mental health system, only to be released back into society where they may (and often do) kill again.

  33. Tony says:

    “That said, most families of the murdered do believe in the DP being used in these cases.”

    If there’s a more concise definition of “lack of objectivity,” I’ve never heard it.

  34. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    That’s correct, Tony. There should be NO objectivity when it comes to the DP. If one has a standard concerning the sacredness of innocent life (the victims), and the standard includes a very harsh penalty for those who take said innocent life, than that is all the objectivity one needs in these situations. If you don’t want to be put to death by the state, don’t murder people.

    Now, those against the DP are a fawning bunch for sure. They foolishly believe that all life is sacred, when it’s not. They foolishly believe that heinous killers should be feed three times a day; be allowed to watch TV, and if they get a hang nail, the doctors will run to them and fix them. I, on the other hand, believe justice is best served by taking from them what they deprived of their victims: Life. So for those on my side of the fence, it very much appears that the anti DP people don’t have enough sense to come out of the rain.

    Truth: It’s such a sweet thing.

  35. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Or, “should be fed…”

  36. The problem is that there are people who DO want to be put to death by the state: French, Rolling, Gilmore, Dodd, and our own Mr. Bundy, to name a few. And the price of admission to this game is murder.

    You DP people so focused on your simple-minded concept of “justice” that you are oblivious to the devastation you are causing to the innocents you claim to defend: Margaret Bowman, Lisa Levy, and Kimberly Leach to name a few.

  37. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Richard,

    I’m sorry to have to inform you, but the folks you mention murdered people because they wanted to commit murder. Your statement that they murdered so they could be put to death is so absurd it’s not even worthy of a response. Please tell me you don’t really believe this?

  38. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Who ELSE wants to hear the strange tale of Ted Bundy? Follow the link to Audible, click on the sample audio, and prepare yourself to hear chilling things you’ve never heard before…
    (And if you’re not already an Audible member, check out how you can get my book for FREE!)

    https://mobile.audible.com/pd/Nonfiction/The-Bundy-Murders-A-Comprehensive-History-Audiobook/B00OG5UV8Q?s=s

  39. All you’re saying is that people murder because they have a motive. That motive can be financial gain, revenge, notoriety, high-stakes gaming, terrorism, and so forth – including suicide.

    “Within prison and without, there are certain disturbed individuals — mostly men and mostly whites — for whom the prospect of execution was highly appealing.”
    – Katherine van Wormer

  40. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    But, Richard, you’re missing the main element to all of this: These men had a desire to murder. That’s what they were about. You don’t commit the kind of murder Bundy committed when you’re just looking to be executed (and I don’t believe Bundy was looking to be executed).

    Bundy loved killing and mutilating women. He loved necrophilia and all things diabolical. So if you think these killers did all of this so they could ride the lightning, you’re wrong. Their diabolical ways had to do with their love of murder and evil.

    They loved and embraced evil.

  41. You paint these killers as if they were one-dimensional comic book villains. Like everyone else they are complex human beings. They don’t live and breathe murder 24 x 7 and they don’t kill just for the love of killing.

    The death penalty can create killers like French, Hampton, and Hickman who kill solely to force the state to kill them because they cannot commit suicide themselves. It can attract killers like Bundy who want to take the ultimate challenge by putting their own life on the line. It can also attract others like Rolling who want to go out in spectacular fashion rather than just dying in a ditch somewhere.

    States that have the death penalty expose their citizens to the risk that they will be targeted by these kinds of people.

  42. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    You’re completely and absolutely wrong. The proof? When the United States had a brief period where the death penalty was outlawed, the serial killing continued. The diabolical acts continued. The murderers didn’t miss a beat. They continued to do those things that they loved – they continued to murder!

    Your absurd theory won’t and can’t stand up to facts or reason.

  43. Where did I say the death penalty causes all murders? You’re not addressing the issue which is that the death penalty provides an incentive for some people.

  44. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    The last thing I’ll say about this: It’s a non issue. And with that, I’m finished.

  45. It’s a non-issue that a few innocents are sacrificed to keep the death machines running?

  46. KYGB says:

    Richard, stop trolling. Trolling is hiding under your weird little bridge and shooting pot shots at Kevin. Kevin Sullivan is the moderator and the guy who makes this comment list go. You agreed to stop trolling and annoying Kevin, but evidently, your word is no good.

    Follow up on your commitment to knock off that behavior and allow the list to flourish again.

    Please.

    (Don’t make another pathetic “Kevin started it” comment in reply. You know damned well what I’m talking about)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Calendar

Archives

Categories

Execution Playing Cards

Exclusively available on this site: our one-of-a-kind custom playing card deck.

Every card features a historical execution from England, France, Germany, or Russia!


Recently Commented

  • marcie: My question is….How come no movie??
  • Rats: His creed of conduct for those that followed him...
  • lawguy: I suspect that Mr.[?] Kenway, is neither a real...
  • Meaghan: Did you miss the “not” there Kacey?...
  • Kacey: “Along with Smeaton, three gentlemen-doomed...