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:

On this day..

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: , , , , , , , , , ,

8,029 thoughts on “1989: Ted Bundy, psycho killer”

  1. Bob says:


    I don’t want to beat a dead horse…, but I have a couple of questions.

    Do you know if a passerby or a cop/state official took the photo to document the police activity?

    Also, do you know how the photo got into circulation?

    Thank You for your patience. Bob

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Hi Bob,

      After the girls disappeared from Lake Sam, the police asked the public to send them photographs they took that day (crowd shots) and perhaps they could spot Ott or Naslund walking with this “Ted”, and the folks responded. This is also how it got into circulation.

      And btw: you’re not beating a dead horse; I enjoy the questions. :)

  2. markb says:

    another question about bundy: was he left at the foundling home for 3 months or not? half say yes, half say no.

    1. Kevin Sullivan says:


      During my extensive research for The Bundy Murders, I never found any time frame that could be considered definitive; the answer to end all answers, as it were. It was also not too important to me, so I didn’t waste a lot of time on it. I was gathering literally thousands of facts that I could confirm from the official record and current testimony from the investigators I was working with. As such, “little things” like that I let go.

  3. mark brewer says:

    i sent an email to Rebbeca Morris a few days ago but haven’t heard back. maybe busy, or maybe she doesn’t respond to strangers. can’t blame her for that, really.

    some questions i’d like to ask her: did you see the report card that said ted needed to work on his temper? what grade was it?

    did you find out anything about ted’s youthful arrests for burglary that weren’t in the book?

    did the man who might have molested ted ever get in trouble with the law for molesting?

    Did “doug holt” back up everything that “sandi holt” told you?

    i’d like to know these things.

    {for some reason, this thing put my name up there. i thought i told it i was “markb”. whatever.}

  4. Bob says:


    How deep into your research were you when you learned that this photo may not be of Bundy and his car? Did you discover this interesting “tidbit” after your book had gone to press? I can’t imagine you would allow the photo to be included in your book, if you had serious doubts about its authenticity.

    1. Kevin Sullivan says:

      Hey Bob,

      Well, I had a tiny question mark in my mind at the time, even before I heard there were others who weren’t sure, but that didn’t matter to me because I also realized it MIGHT be him. I was also absolutely convinced that was his car (and I’m not completely sure it’s not as he may have used another VW), but I felt it should go into the book “as is”, if you will, because it’s just as likely it is him sitting in the can as not. Still (and just to cover my butt lol!), I say this in the caption: “Washington investigators believe this may be a picture (and if so, the only one) of Bundy sitting in his Volkswagen…”The key word is “may”.

      I still think it’s an interesting photograph, and as I said before, despite the new “evidence” I’m not convinced that Bundy wasn’t driving it because of the testimony of the woman who followed him to his car that she said was at this location.

      As to the said imaging they’ve used on it today to “prove” he wasn’t in the car, that’s fine. I believe Keppel said in his book that they tried to blow it up to see more clearly but were not successful. So if that’s the case, no big deal.

      I hope this helps…


  5. Bob says:

    Hello everyone!

    I’ve been lurking here for quite some time but I did not want to post anything until after I had finished reading all of the posts to ensure I would not be going over old ground. Well I have finally finished reading them all and would like your take on a thesis of mine.

    I would like to draw your attention to that “famous” photo which, most likely, shows Bundy sitting in his VW trapped in a parking space by police cars that are lined-up right behind him. This photo was taken at Lake Sammamish that fateful Sunday. (Kevin published this image in his first Bundy book).

    Let’s accept some items as facts: the photographer was standing south-southeast, looking north towards Ted’s car when he took the photo and the front hood of his car is facing west toward the Lake. The axis of his car (west to east) is confirmed by the long shadows that can be seen stretching across the parking lot from west to east. This is caused by the sun beginning to set, its rays blocked by the line of police cars which create the shadows. This means the photo was taken in the afternoon.

    What does this suggest? Well, we know that, about 4:20 P.M. Jacqueline Plischke was approached by Bundy as was another young girl just minutes before her. Both of these girls begged off. In my opinion Ted probably arrived at Lake Sammamish around 4:00 P.M. which would give him some “wiggle-room” to park, check out “the scene” and make his approach.

    Therefore, what the photographer unknowingly captured was Bundy immediately after he arrived at the park after “playing” with Ott. I don’t believe Naslund is in the car with him because I don’t see another head just the back of the passenger seat. But, I’ll concede it is possible that she could be there. (one can only imagine Bundy’s intense discomfort as he tries to keep conversation to a minimum as he waits for the cops to leave)

    What probably happened was he pulled into the parking spot, he was about to get out, when the cops pulled up behind him and blocked him. Ted probably waited because he did not want to become involved with the police. (hence, the period of 15 to 20 minutes before he made contact with the next possible victims) I also believe the car seat was in place in this case because he would not have been able to convince someone to go with him if there was no place for them to sit.

    Any comments?

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Hey Bob,

      Good theory, and perhaps you’re correct. However, there’s talk (and I was aware of this during my research) that that’s not Bundy sitting in the car, but it just looks like a person. Who knows? More recently, however, it’s been pointed out that the grill on the rear of the VW is different than the VW that Bundy owned AND THATS TRUE!!! So now we have a quandary, and here it is:

      As you know, a lady who went with Bundy to his car said Bundy’s car WAS parked in that spot and under that tree. So, did Ted use another car and do the Lake Sammamish run with someone else’s VW? It may be unlikely, but it’s possible? The only other alternative I can see is that Bundy was gone at that time and another VW pulled into the space. Also, is it possible he replaced the grilled engine cover? It’s possible, but also unlikely. But because of the witness’s statement as to where Ted’s car was, I’m not prepared to say it was absolutely not Bundy. Ah, another mystery lol!

      1. Tony says:

        I believe Keppel asks Ted about that photo in The Riverman. He says it isn’t him.

        1. Kevin Sullivan says:

          Keppel did ask Bundy, and Bundy disavowed it, but Keppel thought he was lying. And it does seem that Bundy was being evasive at that moment, based on how Bundy sometimes acted with other investigators who believed he was being evasive.

          1. Tony says:

            Meh. Why lie about that? Keppel was also dead certain Bundy killed Kathy Devine, and that was later disproven.

          2. Kevin Sullivan says:

            I’m not saying Bundy lied, but that Keppel thought he was lying. Why would Bundy lie about such a thing? Who can say? There were times when Bundy just didn’t want to admit things.

            As far as Kathy Devine, it doesn’t really matter that Keppel was wrong. The investigators were in a search for truth, and they were already aware that Bundy didn’t want to come clean on everything. Keppel could pull almost any name out of the mix and throw it at Bundy, as it was clear that Ted would admit to killing a certain number of victims in a particular state (as he did in WA), but then refused to give all the names. Keppel, working against the clock (as were all the investigators), was trying to get to the truth.

          3. NW gal says:

            Perhaps he borrowed Liz’ VW that day?

            I also believe there were times that he moved a rack from her car to his when they carried camping and other equipment. Maybe he did so on this day?

          4. Sandy says:

            That’s right – he did borrow Liz’ car (also a Volkswagen Bug) and he did switch the rack between the two cars.

          5. NW gal says:

            On pg 54 of her book, Liz mentions that Ted had the ski rack on his car the evening of the Lake Samm murders. Even though exausted (he blamed a cold he had been fighting), after devouring a huge meal, he decided to take the rack off his VW and return if to Liz’ where it belonged.

            Ted stayed home from work the next day, exausted and
            sick. Sweet Liz brought him chicken soup and orange juice.

            I seem to recall Keppel, at then end of Ted’s life, trying to find out what happened to the Ott bicycle. It was never found. I suspect it had temporarily been housed in Liz’ rack, on Ted’s car, as he drove a terrified young woman to an even more terrifying end of her life.

      2. NW gal says:

        Don’t laugh, but I an currently obtaining photos of find back grills on Bundy’s car, 1968 bugs (looks to me like Bundy’s style), and improvements to the grills in different model years.

        In Bundy’s1968, I believe the grill was only one long piece at the base of the back window. Later years has 2 sets of 4 smaller grill openings- I believe for additional ventilation.

        Favorite improvement so far: “elephant feet” lights in the rear.

        I think Liz had the same year VW but can definitely be wrong on that. Would love to really knock this question out!

        Does anyone have additional information? I’m pretty sure I’m going to drive my husband crazy over the next few days while I create a data -filled spreadsheet!

        1. Kevin Sullivan says:

          Hey NW gal,

          Well, I think we’re in some wild speculation now, lol!

          But all joking aside, there are questions that remain about the pic at lake Sammamish, and Bundy’s actual car. I’m not sure we’ll get to answer them, but it sure would be nice.

          I guess for now there’s going to be a big question mark over it all. :)

        2. Tony says:

          Wow — folks are REALLY invested in having that car in the photos turn out to be Ted’s, LoL.

          1. Kevin Sullivan says:

            LOL! I don’t care if it’s Bundy’s car or not. We know he was parked at that location, but now we must consider that he had left by that time, and another VW pulled in that slot. However, the possibilities of a second VW being used by Ted can’t be completely ruled out. I did find it strange concerning Bundy’s reaction to Keppel when he was shown the photo. He was being a bit evasive and that’s a sure sign of something. Perhaps he knew that wasn’t him, but he understood he’d parked there a short time earlier, and this might have rattled him.

  6. Shelley says:


    You are right. Elliott Leyton does use that quote in his book. It comes from “Bundy: The Deliberate Stranger” by Richard Larsen, Chapter 15.

    Larsen writes about an interview Ted did with Barbara Grossman, of Salt Lake City’s KUTV ….

    “More than ever,” he said, staring hard at Barbara and the camera, “I’m convinced of my innocence.”

    It is a very bizarre thing to say.

    1. Kevin Sullivan says:

      Yes, it was bizarre, but it was also classic Bundy. He just couldn’t help himself- he had to connect himself with the crimes! A normal innocent person would have said “I’m innocent” and been done with it. But not Ted.

    2. markb says:

      thank you so much, Shelley! thanks for the chapter info! i’m sitting here with a funky old copy of Larsen’s book and there it is, on page 202. i’ve read this book sometime over the past 30 yrs and that quote always stuck with me. and it must be Leyton who pointed out what a weird, ridiculous thing it was to say.

      i ordered a copy of Leyton’s book about 2-3 weeks ago and it still hasn’t shown up. i used to work security for the med examiner’s office. when i started working there they had lots of true crime books, but over the years, the best ones all walked off. now i have to try remember what i read and order them. there was a text book about sexual homicides that was so disturbing i couldn’t look at it for more than a minute at a time. i guess there was lots of valuable info there, but damn, it was just too hard to look at.

  7. markb says:

    Howdy folks. I just tonight have discovered this long long thread while doing some research on mr. bundy for a book on unsolved crimes i’m writing. i think i might have made a mistake in beginning my work with Ann Marie Burr. i think the bundy material is going to swamp the project! But that’sok, i think too much material is a good problem to have.
    what i want to ask, here in my 1st post concerns a passage in “the stranger beside me” that i can’t find. i have been thumbing through 2 different copies the past day or 2 and can’t scare it out of the pile.
    it is a quote from one of bundy’s letters to ann rule. bundy writes something like “Now, more than ever, i am convinced of my own innocence”. then rule says, to us “now, more than ever?” it’s a really nutty thing for ted to have said that shows something about how he thinks.

    can anybody here help me find this? like, what chapter is it in, or what page? OR did i just imagine it? not impossible…

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Hey MarkB,

      You can do a Google search of that quote and find the answer. The Stranger Beside Me is an eBook, and if you had the kindle edition of the book, you can search that exact quote and it will, if it’s a correct quote, will come up immediately. Check Google books, bring up Rule’s book, and put the quote in the search box. That should do it.

      Take care,


      1. markb says:

        thank you! i should know how to do such things, but i’m a computer illiterate. so i have now established that quote isn’t from a letter to ann rule. doing a google search showed me the quote does exist, but it was from an interview, sometime after his 1st arrest. i can’t find what book it’s in tho. but i will eventually.
        Mr. Sullivan, i bought TBM the 1st month it was out on my kindle. i think it’s an excellent book and is well-written.

        i live in frankfort, if you ever find yourself up here with spare time, i hope you’ll come by for coffee.

        1. NW gal says:

          Hey Marc- I have a PDF of this book and just tried a bunch of combinations in search for you. I couldn’t find any quote even close to these.

          Please don’t rely only on my word! If you would like the PDF, just let me know and I can send you a copy. I also have Liz’ book The Phantom Prince as a PDF.

          1. markb says:

            NW Gal: thank you so much! i have found that the quote is from a colorado TV interview from about ’77. bundy says “more than ever, i am convinced of my own innocence.” i read it years ago and thought it was in ann rule, but now i am more sure that it was in Elliot Leyton’s “hunting humans”. me trying to remember all the stuff i’ve read over the past 3 decades is like bundy trying to remember the details of his crimes: they tend to congeal into one big mass.

            i very much would like to get a copy of Phantom Prince from you, but right at this moment i am overwhelmed with material. can i get with you on that in a few days?

          2. markb says:

            Mr. Sullivan: i am wondering what you think of Rebeca Morris’ book “ted and ann”? many wild and extreme things are asserted in the parts of the book about bundy’s childhood: animal torture and assaults on other children and etc

            i’m wondering how much i can rely on it.

          3. Kevin M Sullivan says:

            Hi MarkB,

            I know and have worked with Rebecca, and I like her. I also really like her book. But you’re wise to question those early years parts (as do I) concerning what Bundy supposedly did with animals and other children. That said, I don’t fault Rebecca for passing along this info, as this is what she was told by others who knew Ted as a child. Like you, I’m skeptical about that small part of the book. But the rest of the work is great.

            I hope this helps. :)


    2. Paul says:

      That quote IS in the book, and it WAS from a letter he wrote to Anne Rule. I’ve read it three times, and remember that quite well. She quoted it from the letter he sent. Strange that it’s apparently from an interview… I have two copies of the book – one has the entire final 100 pages reprinting the first chapter mistakenly, and cutting off the last sentence. I had to buy a new one but request photographs of certain pages from the seller because I thought this misprint may have run across thousands of prints.

  8. NW gal says:

    Kevin- I have read the Phantam Price. After years of bidding hundreds of dollars, a Reddit poster uploaded it as a pdf, not page by page or photos. I grabbed it before he got arrested!

    1. Steve says:

      He got arrested? Liz sure doesn’t play any games.

      1. Tony says:

        I thought perhaps she was being cheeky with the “arrested” remark.

  9. Steve says:

    I want to add about the whole Rob guy. I have read everything on the Visual timeline page. Quite a bit of it is pointless. He posts random pictures of unknown people from Bundy case files. He also has no idea why they are in there, but still seems compelled to post them.

    I wonder if his book is a lot like that too?

    Also, showing school pics of Jerry Thompson is kinda pointless.

    That and doing the same thing with the guy that bought Ted’s car.

    He said that the guy who bought the car did a recent interview. I googled it. It sure isn’t there anywhere.

    I’d rather read the book from the Duffus guy that thinks Ted’s gay.

    1. NW gal says:

      Yep. He is wrong about Carole Boone and the family. I don’t care. I hope everyone is wrong. A bunch of people think Rosa is an ANRP in Seattle. It’s hilarious. That person was in college when Bundy’s daughter was born.

      I say- let them. These are human beings. They deserve their life!

      1. Steve says:

        The guy is big on making assumptions. Even in the family photo with Ted, he is clearly trying to insinuate things.Saying he’s looking down on her.

        He was a horrible person. But there is no need to add to it.

        I’ve looked at that Rosa Johnson and that is clearly to old to be her. LOL She might not even have a social media page.

        I think Rob pretty much thinks anyone in Ted’s family, or was once in his family is a horrible person. Or atleast someone keeping secrets.

        1. NW gal says:


          I feel horrible for Ted’s immediate family. Poor Johnny Bundy, sweet man who marries Louise and adopts her son. Works as a cook to support his family, straight arrow….and his last name is associated forever with seriel killer. I believe Louise did her best with what she knew at the time. Ted was adamant in interviews that he came from a good solid home. Not perfect but nothing to churn out an adult like him. The Bundy’s lived about 20 minutes from my house. Everyone knew where they were. They attended the same church, kept the same phone number and raised 4 additional healthy children. Imagine having this simple, consistent life interrupted with the horrific stories from law enforcement and knowing they must be lies. Cashing in your measure savings for funds – both bail and attorneys. Begging on the stand for the court to spare your son’s life and then failing. Sure, you can fault a young, unmarried pregnant girl who had no where to turn and snuck off to give birth and rush bringing that baby back to your family home and lying. It was a common occurrence. The other young women in the same situation did not become sadistic killers. I can’t blame her.

          His siblings were pretty healthy kids who grew up in the same house, reportedly loving their brother. They didn’t become seriel killers.

          Liz was young, naive and drank too much. By all accounts she was a great mom, friend and person. She believed someone who is terrific at telling lies. In the end, even she had to turn him in.

          Carole was another innocent naive woman who made proving his innocence her life’s work. She left most of hee children, except one, with family for years while she worked to free her husband. It was foolish and she tended to marry often and readily. Yet, after divorcing one husband with whom she has children, her ex-husband’s family continued to see her as member of the family. They loved her that much. She had many friends and was beloved by many.

          I just can’t see evidence of those around Bundy as being crazy, criminal or responsible. I see them as naive, trusting, supportive and loyal then finally shattered go learn the truth. I can’t imagine confronting the reality they faced in those last days when he began confessing.

          This is why I let them be, why I don’t share their names, whereabouts or details. It’s their story to tell. Or not.

        2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

          Yes, some want to point the finger at the Bundy family, as if they had anything to do with it, and that’s absolutely absurd. They were a normal family. And outside of Ted, everyone else turned out well; that is, no other anti-social behavior out of any of them.

          People need to keep their fingers pointed at Bundy alone.

  10. Hal says:

    Kevin, you have been exposed as a poor writer and that you are currently part of a vanity publishing house. I see you’re avoiding the evidence for both.

    Although at least telling you proof that you’re a conspiracy theorist is easy to get, has allowed you to jump ship on that one. And are no longer claiming you aren’t with a vanity publisher. Partial progress.

    Anyway, you’ve asked for a couple of answers: you described your book as ‘excellent’ right in the preface (it’s short, easy to find, and I’ve already said exactly where it was so unsure why you would ask!). It isn’t excellent. It’s a mess, and something that no reputable publisher would have touched. Examples of truly atrocious writing have been given and aside from pretending they were typos, and then pretending the difference hasn’t been made explicit, you’ve taken, what, seven opportunities now not to address any of them? Anyway, I not only gave you clear cut examples of something you’d surely only find in a self published or vanity published book, I’ve also shown that this was, in fact, the case. No surprises.

    There are a few bestselling authors out there who are reportedly as bad. But the difference is, their publishing house deals with it before release. This is a required step, Kevin, from a reputable publisher. You do know that, right?

    You actually had a demented attack on, I think, my second post for not understanding your position with this publisher. You also used he word ‘ignorant’ despite claiming to be clueless on the odd publishing practices from your original publisher (a brief look at their website would have cleared that up). And despite being part of a ‘consortium’ with your current lot (a word you seem to be claiming you misused), you then also claimed ignorance (funny that) that they were advertising as a vanity publisher and claiming that your partnership was behind the whole thing. But none you know, apparently? Isn’t it odd that someone can spend two minutes on the website of your publisher and know more than you, especially when you are actively involved in one of them!

    You also tried to pretend that a publisher paying a ghost writer (proper publisher), and a publisher asking a member of the public to pay for a ghost writer, is the same thing. When they are polar opposites. Respectable vs Vanity. And that was when you were also pretending the second part of WildBlue’s advert wasn’t there – that you are an outandout vanity publisher.

    Anyway, it’s also unbecoming to ask me a question about something that I know nothing about (your Q2). How could I possibly answer that? By all means, let’s see if I can help you out. Post a pic of the entire page or pages the quote appears in, along with the detail of the source, identify who quoted you, and anything else I may need for context and we’ll see if we can figure it out. I’m sure we can.

    Anyway, forget the above points for now. Just show me the details you refer to about your quote as I obviously can’t comment without it,mand you can answer these two.

    You say those that matter like your books. But what do YOU think about the errors listed? Does it read like publishable prose to you? Yes or No? Are the quoted passages representative of your skills? In your opinion?

    And should a publisher have asked you to fix these before publication as a minimum professional expectation?

    (Also, it’s neither here nor there in the grand scheme, but let me do you a favour and say that writers don’t say ‘lol’ all the time – or ever – for pretty obvious reasons, especially just as a default post closer. You can have that one on the house.)

    1. Fiz says:

      Hal, you are both bad mannered and boring. Go away and spam some other site!

    2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      I am not a part of a vanity publisher and never will be. That’s all in you tiny mental world. So be it. Also, I have no need or desire to provide you with anything that would encourage your mental illness. The “lol” is meant to mock you, and I’m sorry you can’t see this.

      I guess in a greater sense you need to be pitied, but I’m not in the mood to offer you such niceties. You’re still embarrassing yourself and it’s sad to see. You must have a very bad life. It must be bad to be you.

      And please, share with us your publishing exploits, lol! (Yes, another lol!!!)

      Here’s a link to McGraw-Hill’s Abnormal Psychology. Check it out for yourself. Last time I checked, they weren’t a vanity publisher.

      Bye loser!


  11. Kevin M Sullivan says:

    I’m currently reading The Devil’s Defender, by John Henry Brown, and I really like it. It’s not all about his interactions with Ted, but there’s plenty there, and overall, it’s an excellent read.

    There are the occasional mistakes, like, he referres to an officer “Rosebud”, when in fact it was officer “Roseland” that Bundy was using. But these are minor issues, and I’ll probably email him, introduce myself, and send him a note about them.

    Again, it’s a great read.

    1. Paul says:

      Agreed – how a lawyer who was so connected to that case could confuse Roseland with Rosebud is beyond me. Didn’t the editor read it??

      1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

        Hey Paul,

        Well, I think the publusher must have assumed that these other details were correct as well. Obviously, Browne didn’t realize it, but if he or they would have done even a brief fact checking, they would have caught them very quickly.

        On Amazon, I have given his book four stars, but without these rather egregious errors I would have made it five.

        1. Kevin Sullivan says:

          Perhaps we should make that “publisher” lol!

          1. Paul says:

            Yeah, I get it – I always feel the need to correct my typo’s too, courtesy of my damn iPhone. It just makes me wonder what else these people get wrong in these books… It makes me think they aren’t as familiar with the cases as they’re supposed to be, making errors like that. I know it’s just a name, but ‘Roseland’ has become a huge part of True Crime history, and the story that goes with it. Rosebud is laughable!

          2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

            Lol! Browne knows his own story very well. But all the other facts of the Bundy case, not so much. There are only 6 reviews up in Amazon at this time, and I’m the only one who has mentioned this. I hope the publisher takes note of it and makes the needed corrections. Had they not been in there (and so glaring to the easily known facts of the Bundy case) I would have given it 5 stars.

  12. Michele says:

    Okay, my email has been filled with this back and forth. A very quick search made this argument easily decided. Kevin has written multiple books with Gregg Olsen, a well respected author in his own right. It is very common in this new frontier of authordom to use different avenues of publishing. It is also not uncommon to find errors in the most esteemed of texts. I have no idea what the motivation for this vitriol is, that lies in the mind of the constant writer of useless criticism. Move on to some other topic, won’t you? Replying to you further is giving you attention for which you are clearly unworthy. Shall we get back to constructive discussions of Ted Bundy?

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Good to hear from you, Michele. :)

  13. NW gal says:

    Hey again friends,

    If you do have picture requests, could you send them to me by July 28th?


    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Good to hear from you again, NW gal!

      1. NW gal says:

        Hi Kevin!

        Great job on the new book- nice, verifiable tidbits! I appreciated that you told us it was a companion version to the larger original book. It was just right!

        I would love your opinion about Bundy evidence in King County. As you know, I am in Gig Harbor. It’s pretty easy to get myself to Seattle. I’ve read most Bundy books. Other favorites are those written by you, Keppel, Aynesworth, Carlisle, and Michaud. As I’ve read the interviews, listened to the tapes, and studied the books I’ve seen that there is information regarding his confessions kept from the public out of respect for the victims. I admire that decision.

        If I were to go to King County and ask to see the files and evidence, will I find information I will later regret seeing? I realize this is a subjective question! As you know, I’ve not been interested in the details of his horrific crimes- not to minimize them by any means. My area of study has been the women in his life -Louise, Liz, Carole.

        Is it your opinion that access to the files would help me learn more about his relationship with them, and his own (whatever you want to call it)- mental health, personality disorder, “the entity”, and/or compartmentalization of his personality?

        Or am I just going to see horrific crime scenes and descriptions of behaviors I can never then forget?

        1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

          Hi NW gal!

          Thanks for the kind words, btw…

          Well, at the end of Bundy’s life, and all the investigators were talking to Bundy, Keppel was encouraging Ted to give details about the Hawkins abduction, promising him that the details would never go public. Now, I don’t know if he was lying to him, or perhaps he meant it at the time. Regardless, all of that info did come out, and I believe all the information came out soon after his execution. Some tidbits came out later, of course, but out it is. In fact, I don’t believe anything has been redacted from the record concerning his actual confessions, and that’s good, as I don’t like redacted lol!

          One thing you’ll need if you don’t have it, is a copy of The Phantom Prince. If you can borrow a copy somewhere, or find a library that has it, that’s a good place to see another side of Bundy from Liz’s perspective.

          If I were you I would go to the King County Archives and peruse it. It is a fabulous archive, and one all Bundy authors should either visit or go on line and view the categorized boxes of evidence containing the case files and photographs pertaining to the case.

          I also want to encourage you to forge ahead and write your book! I think what you want to do WILL be a great addition to the Bundy canon as it were. I will also purchase it on the day it’s released! Lol!

          It would be great if Liz Kendall would grant you an interview. Perhaps it’s a long shot, as she’s been fending off requests for years, and referring them to her attorney! But no matter, it’s worth s try.

          Please keep us informed on the progress of your research, and if you ever need to communicate with me privately, message Jason (he’s the headsman at this site) and he’ll forward your email along to me. Also, if you’re on Facebook, look me up and send me s friend request and I’ll accept.

          Take care,


          1. Tony says:


            Exactly what sort of credentials are traditionally asked for when it comes to gaining access to this sort of info? I have a BA in Communication, am about to start working on my master’s in English, and have done some (very little) freelance journalism work over the past few years, though nothing heavy like crime, public affairs, or anything of that sort. I’ve been thinking about trying to tackle a Bundy (or some sort of true crime) book for ages, but I’m afraid investigators, archivists, and so on won’t be interested in talking to me!

            Any pointers would be much appreciated.

          2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

            Hi Tony,

            You don’t need credentials to write a book or perform research, neither do you need any special qualifications to conduct interviews of former or current investigators. The most you’ll be asked (maybe), may pertain to the project itself, and in some cases, are you an established author. Of course, this is due to noseyness on the part of the person and has nothing to do with granting your request.

            Of course, when dealing with the detectives, always be open and honest (and for God’s sake, never promise anything to them if you can’t or won’t do it!), and gain commen ground with them, as they don’t have to talk to you about the case.

            However, the archives must treat all individuals exactly the same, and grant requests for information if the standard requirements are met by the researcher. So you’ll have no worries here.

            So, good luck on your journey, Tony, and let us know how things turn out.

  14. Hal says:

    NWGal, if you’ll notice anything I’ve been saying, it is that it is unbecoming to big yourself up with credentials. Leave compliments for others to give you, and don’t shower them on yourself. Most people wouldn’t dream of doing it.

    Does this mean you would have written a book and described yourself as excellent also on page one, as no proper publishing house would ever allow? Or would you have been able to write it properly?

    If you’re as clever as you are flouting, wouldn’t it be a start to truly think for yourself, and not believe everything one single poster says, without any reason? Instead, here you are discussing my qualifications, presumably having investigated the qualifications of the other author. Who is just the latest in a line of people Kevin has accused me of being when he refuses to deal with criticism. And it’s always marked by insults, claims of different identities and mental illness. The question is why would *you* believe such a thing? Especially as I’ve already explained it’s how he always reacts when he throws his toys out of the pram. And if you were at one point planning on being a published author, surely you winced at the bad writing (leading to false declarations about the subject of your book, no less) Kevin was happy to release via a publisher who will publish anything you pay them to, a la a vanity press, per their website.

  15. NW gal says:

    So, friends, getting back to our regularly scheduled program-

    It’s a beautiful summer in Seattle. I have some vacation time near the end of July. Would anyone like photos of places or sites?

    Just a caveat- I don’t bother Bundy’s brother and sister who live nearby. I also don’t bother Liz and her (now grown with a child of her own) daughter.

    1. Tony says:

      The alley Georgann Hawkins disappeared from. The site where he took her, if you can find it based on Bundy’s description in Riverman. (I know there was a guy on the old Bundy message boards who claimed to have tracked it down and had some pics). And if you ever make it out that way, I’d like to see some pics of the relevant areas at Evergreen State College.

      1. NW gal says:

        Hi Tony

        I will work on these for you. I may not get down to Evergreen by the end of July but will be there in August for an event. I’m assuming you would like the library, sidewalks, light for sidewalks, potential parking spots? I can’t remember if there was a theory that Ted met her in a little cafe/pub/food area rather than the library? Maybe someone can chime in. If either is possible (aside from a meeting on the walkway), I can attempt to get photos of all of the spots

        1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

          Hi NW gal,

          It is unknown where Bundy encountered her, but it would be one of only two places: the outer area of the library, or the trail leading from her apartment to the library. And because no one saw them, we may never know the actual encounter location.

          I had a guy contact me through WildBlue Press that has both my books on audio and has never seen the pics from the books. Now, when I added the photos at the Trail of Ted Bundy page, I only added those pics that were not in the book. Now I’m thinking I should put some of them in the site for all to see, and that I shouldn’t assume everyone has seen the pics from the book. That said, I’ll be adding more.

          1. NW gal says:

            Wild Blue Press?!??

            Oh no, I can’t talk them unless I am self-publishing a book !! And I am banned by them as I don’t own part of it.

            I was an English major and will work hard to ruin my grammar.

          2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

            That’s the bunch lol!

        2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

          Some good areas to photograph would be the first year student housing, which today is still in the same location as when Donna was there. And then the trails lead westerly from there to the library. I assume she took the shortest route, given it was rainy and she wanted to get to the library perhaps as quickly as possible.

          Anyway, you should have a very interesting time while there!

        3. Tony says:

          NW Gal,

          Just anything relevant to Manson or her disappearance… I admit it’s been awhile since I’ve read up on the details of the early disappearances. (I’ve read/listened to Ted’s confessions and “speculations,” a few times over the years — my copy of Conversations was well-worn, back when I still had it — but I haven’t given The Stranger Beside Me or Larsen’s book, for instance, another read-through in many, many moons.

        4. Meaghan says:

          I applied to Evergreen when I was looking at colleges. I was accepted, but elected to go elsewhere.

          The first place I’d ever heard about Evergreen from was Ann Rule’s book about Ted Bundy.

  16. Hal says:

    KYGB, seriously, you’re just going to ape your master with the ‘Hal/Rob’ crap? That’s the entire content of your post. How old are you for god’s sake? Why waste your breath telling me to promote something I have nothing to do with, haven’t bought and haven’t read? And why have you also failed to deal with anything said, except this lapdog act?

    I see Kevin has convinced his apologists that a critic of his book has to be the competition. That’s disturbing. Gal and Kygb: are you blindly going to believe every conspiracy theory? Why would you two believe such a thing? Kevin makes these statements all the time.

    In any case, if he really believes this is a conspiracy, he should contact the site owner who will be able to tell him I have posted from the UK. From his Facebook page, I assume Rob is based/from either Australia or America. Either way, he will clearly not be me. I’m sure Kevin would rather remain ignorant however, rather than have these childish conspiracy bubbles burst.

    Kevin did this before. When I pointed out a glaring error in his book, not only was I met with compliments he received from detectives (on a day they probably found themselves short of lollipops), in a way that shows he has no shame, the poster who agreed with me was automatically accused of being someone else. This is called a modus operandi.

    Also, I see neither of you (nor Kevin) have defended the parts of the book shown to be error strewn and written to the standard of a 13 year old. Nor have you been concerned about Kevin pretending he is only guilty of typos when that clearly isn’t the case, nor was suggested. (Yes, the books are strewn with typos in a number you would never find in a book from a reputable publisher – in print or on Kindle – but that is irrevelant compared to the other transgressions, nor worth mentioning in the circumstances).

    So aside from nutty conspiracy theories, claiming unpublishable writing is a few typos, and his usual insults, he’s now added vanity publishing to his list.

    And it is kinda funny that Kevin claims I must be someone else and he has proof he is keeping hidden apparently (it all sounds very Donald ‘I’ve heard some things’ Trump to me). And yet so far, you two have failed to say anything that he hasn’t? Both times you have come back repeating the one point he’s just made. Am I to assume that at least one of you must be Kevin, since that’s apparently how he thinks the world operates? Am I to assume Gal, when you claimed the other book was inaccurate but refused to prove it, you were attacking the book without grounds? Trolling it, in your words?

    Kevin’s latest bit of deflection: ghostwriting is not vanity publishing. No. But vanity publishing is vanity publishing, right? This is why I broke the quote in two showing you were doing both and making your predictable excuse apparent before the fact. I set ‘em up, you knock ‘em in.

    Kevin can say ‘it’s not my thing’ all he wants, but the fact remains that his current ‘press’ will publish anything for cash as their website clearly states, on any subject whatsoever. They will even lie about the actual authorship. And then put it out in the same fashion and imprint as their current catalogue of books. Shameless.

    Surely it goes without saying that a reputable author wouldn’t deal with such a publisher who will allow the public to pay to join the roster, with any subject they like.

    This is vanity publishing. Which Kevin denied over and over they were doing. Well, they are. (Will his next defence be that they are a ‘failed’ vanity publisher?)

    Kevin, having already deflected that it’s just ghost writing, and not acknowledging the vanity publishing side, despite my attempts to make such a deflection too obvious in advance, then makes a few incorrect or misleading assertions.

    Firstly, none of the authors he knows do it. Well, he claims he’s in a partnership with these authors, and the website claims it is infact these authors who are doing it. So if we believe Kevin, at best he is just in the dark about lowly practices at his printing press. And has somehow managed to miss it spelled out on the website.

    Also, to claim proper publishers also use ghost writers is not the issue. Another deflection. They use ghost writers on books they are desperate to publish and pay the credited author a sizeable advance on. Only they are likely in the public eye and have no writing experience (or just not the time). Hence the ghost writing.

    This is not ghost writing on a random book from a paying member of the public. I.E. it is not the vanity publishing you are involved with, but something entirely different. (Not to mention in most cases these days, the ghost writer will be properly credited as co-author or at least acknowledged inside)

    If anything, Kevin has, by his example, shown how WildBluePress are not ghost writing in the traditional sense, but purely as an arm of vanity publishing. Cheers.

    And Kevin, please, I’ve asked you to be less shameless in bigging yourself up and deal with the inadequacy of the book, as shown in detail. You can’t keep saying you’re fantastic, or calling your own book ‘excellent’ on page bloody one, then showing you can’t even write ‘Ted was born to Louise Bundy’ a page later without making a car crash of it. Writing in awful English, and making two claims, one of which you can’t state as a fact, and the second of which you just know to be somewhere between outright crap and incredibly innacurate. And you repeat words in this short sentence that a professional copy-editor would change in a heartbeat.

    You know, if you had one.

    1. NW gal says:

      The other book is inaccurate regarding Carole Ann Boone. Significantly. I refused to provide an obit because I am protecting privacy to include her husband’s, 5 children, grandchildren and friends.

      I did my own research for a book I planned to write after my doctoral work was finished. The book focused on the women who loved him: his mother, Liz and Carole.

      As I researched, I came to the conclusion that they deserved their privacy.

      I don’t care if you believe me. I don’t care what you think. As for advanced degrees, I have 2 masters and a doctorate. Big deal. You are living proof advanced degrees don’t make one a perfect researcher, writer, or person with manners.

      Nobody cares to debate you. We aren’t going to answer you. We are going to ignore you.

      We’re just not that into you.

    2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      It doesn’t matter if you’re a HalRob or not. It doesn’t matter if you know him. It makes no difference if you don’t know him. You guys are just the same two peas in a very small pod. It is good that you have pratteled away like this as it give readers much information from the both of us, and you’ve clearly revealed yourself here.

      However, I would like you to enlighten us in a couple of things: where exactly do I say in ANY of my books that I am excellent or my books are excellent? Please show us? Of course, plenty of great things are said about my work, but never does it come from me.

      As to my books: those who really make a difference -the publishers and the readers-do not share your very odd and caustic views. They are normal individuals, with no axe to grind about anything, and I’m sure it bothers you that they do not believe your very odd rants.

      You never did answer me (you probably won’t) why the esteemed McGraw-Hill would quote verbatim from The Bundy Murders, when it’s so strewn with errors. Surely they should have re-written it? Again, you have no idea what you look like to other people.

      Go away, little man. Your inaccurate poison is not welcome here. But do answer me the questions I’ve put to you here; that is, if you can? Lol!

      Your embarrassment continues.,

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>




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