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: , , , , , , , , , ,

8,379 thoughts on “1989: Ted Bundy, psycho killer”

  1. Alisa says:

    Hello, Kevin!
    I wanna ask you one question that has been bothering me for several days. What do you think about the rumors that Ted Bundy was a direct descendant of William the Silent (Prince of Orange) and a distant cousin of Prince Charles of England? I think it’s a pure nonsense. I’ve read about it on Facebook. The author of the post refers to Dr. Tanay’s psychiatric evaluation of Ted Bundy and website Ancestry.com. Lots of people believe that this is true. I checked several genealogy websites and found nothing about Ted’s remote ancestors. I’ve only found some information about his great-great-grandpas and great-great-grandmas (Johannes Thomas Knetch, Henrietta Schneider, James Longstreet and Anna E.). I believe you know exactly whether it’s true or not.
    Yours Sincerely,
    Alisa.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hi Alisa!

      No, I don’t believe that at all. I’ve seen these sorts of strange things pop up before, and they can’t stand up under scrutiny. I have Dr. Tanay’s full report and there’s nothing in there that even hints at such things. Unfortunately, some folks just love to create wild themes and speculations, and once you get into speculation, there’s no end to it.

      You can see this in constant full swing pertaining to Jack the Ripper. Book after book after book comes out proclaiming the “real” killer, and it’s not. The truth of the matter is we will never know who Jack the Ripper was.

      Could Ted Bundy be related to someone famous or infamous from the past? Sure – just like you or me, or anyone out there walking around today. But these things you’re referring to in your questions have no basis in fact in my opinion. None whatsoever.

      I hope this helps. :)

      1. Alisa says:

        Thank you so much for your reply and for helping to destroy this ridiculous myth!:) I absolutely agree with you. I wonder how can people believe in this stuff without any reliable proofs and sources…

        1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

          You’re very welcome, Alisa. :)

  2. KYGB says:

    Why are the new comments all stacking up behind Kevin’s post of Nov 4 & Dec 6th?

    Is there a way to break the logjam?

    1. Headsman says:

      That’s weird. I’ll take a look later today.

  3. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    I should have said “the solving of even one of the many mysteries…”

  4. Karen says:

    Sorry forgot apparently Liz has talked to sheriffs too so if you can tell us what you know there? She apparently is still around.,read her first book but haven’t found anything else about her written in last 30 years

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      I’m not aware of Liz speaking with anyone about the case in years. Many have tried to speak euth her and she refers them to her lawyer. I even know of one fellow who contacted her to republish her book (which would have put money in her pocket) but she refused.

      As to the case itself, I don’t know why she would contact any police agency for any reason, but I guess it’s possible. That said, I have my doubts she did though.

      I’m on my IPhone, so forgive any mistakes lol!

  5. Karen says:

    Hi Kevin. First time poster. Loved your book. I have a friend who knows somebody in sheriffs office in western washington some Author working with bob Keppel and Michoud or Aynewsworth found something on Bundy and apparently the sheriffs think they found something good enough to open a search. Wondering if that is you? Dying to hear what you have to say and thanks for having this message board! Karen B.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hi Karen!

      No, that isn’t me, but I may know who that is. As to what they have found out (if anything) I have no idea. It would be nice if they did unearth something that can be validated, as the solving of the many mini mysteries of the Bundy case is a good thing. So we’ll see. :)

  6. morph says:

    Sorry, that was a whopper.

    Second one is briefer .. when Melissa Smith’s body was found so quickly after she had died … I expected the post mortem to be crucial. This would give us concrete evidence of all that Ted does with victims (and, to be fair, what he does). But it is skimmed over. Nothing about the presence of evidence of any sexual activity or its extent. No mention of any other specific injuries (or their absence) and that she was wearing make up is pretty scant on details.

    Is her post mortem actually detailed anywhere .. that is, has anyone thoroughly examined it and therefore the conclusions that can be made from it?

  7. morph says:

    So much great info been shared on here. It actually answered a question I have long had .. namely, I couldn’t quite understand how the Carol DaRonch thing went down.

    Kevin, it is a fine book and really manages to bring to the story into a more modern reflective setting, new details and a fresh feel and pace.

    However, if I politely may, I have a couple of quibbles. These are not regarding you specifically because all “the books” have done this and, as the author, I would really like to run it by you and see what you think.

    Now, with the DaRonch incident it is an extremely important one as we uniquely have a living witness to an abduction and so, for the only time, we can see how Bundy actually ‘spirited away’ intelligent young women as ‘smoothly’ as he did.

    So, in your book (like the other authors I believe) you say that Bundy approached DaRonch in the mall and asked “Carol if she had a car parked in the Sears lot and she confirmed that she did”and continue the story also mentioning that Bundy “walked slightly ahead of her”.

    Now, thanks to this thread, we now know that this isnt actually what happened .. a vital detail has been missed. Without this detail, we are left thinking that Bundy probably approached a woman in the mall that he saw and wanted and kicked into his “Officer Roland” routine.

    However, we actually know that he didn’t first come across her in the mall but had followed her – the plan had started well before this and she was the only target in the mall.

    This wasn’t some Lake Sam chancing with women he comes across, it’s a targeted hunt. in progress and therefore his plan is more sophisticated than that.

    How do we know? Well, in the video DaRonch tells us right at the start what “Officer Roseland’s” first words were ..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU4e-BkdpVM

    So, he recited her licence plate (just as a ‘proper’ policeman would). This not only adds to his plausibility but tells us that he had seen her with her car and was interested enough to memorise the plate and follow her.

    It also explains how he could walk ahead of her. He needed to because it was an important part of the plan that they approach her car in a certain way, as I’ll discuss later.

    The implication of this is, I feel, huge. This scene played out a whole lot differently than if we believe he didnt know her number plate.

    Why? Well, it tells us he was really interested in her, he had chosen her .. so much so that he had memorised her number platye (or noted it down).

    And if this is so, how could he have chosen her – we know Ted was quite particular about how his victims must look. The car park at 4.30 – 5.00pm in November would have presumably been a bit dark. Presumably quite chilly so DaRonch would be wrapped up to some extent .. thickish coat, maybe a hat, etc. It is a huge car park and for him to be so sure he must have been close to her in the car park .. literally, within a few feet. But, crucially, not close enough that she would notice him or his car .. we know this because, well, she didnt at all and the Officer Roseland pretence would be busted if she had.

    This makes me suspect he had followed her there from somewhere where he had seen her in decent lighting .. where he could clearly see her. but, yeah ‘suspect’ I know. Just cruising a cold car park in low light looking for victims all under thick clothes when he wouldnt be able to see them very well unless he made a point of getting within feet of them … unseen … so, I suspect he followed her, but cant say any stronger.

    Thats by the bye .. but we can conclude that this is not Bundy taking a shot but he started his ruse outside the mall and had only one woman in mind inside it.

    Which brings me to my other query. If we accept that he has been working to a plan even before he first approached her and that he is organised .. then, why go out to her car not his?

    This is something he never did .. his outdoor abductions (all the way up to Kim Leach at the very end) were based on being fast and directly to his vehicle. As I’ll discuss, he didnt even prepare his car for an attack.

    Bundy would know too well that if he doesnt attack her at her car then it is really going to be a long time for his ruse to hold up as well as multiplying the witnesses a lot trapsing through the busy mall (she had even been chatting with friends in there).

    So, if he has seen her park in the car park then why would he drive away and park a longish distance away from her car before approaching her ??

    Doesnt make sense does it? So, I agree with you Kevin, that it was “likely he … planned to immediately attack her” at her car. So, what then was his plan and how did it all go wrong?

    I believe it is simply that when he asked her to look in her car she (naturally as a car driver) went to the drivers side. He needed her at the passenger side (both for him to drive the car away and to also maneouvre her out of sight and the steering wheel, etc would have made that a long drawn out affair). He may also have hidden his weapon under that side of the car.

    So, Ted has (as usual) executed his plan just as he wanted .. he is in a dark car park, standing over his victim as she bends inside a car .. and he does nothing. He either cant get his weapon or needs her to walk around.

    By going to the drivers side and then refusing to open the passenger door, DaRonch saved her life twice. And condemned his as what played out leads directly to the death chamber in Florida now.

    So, if we look at what transpired when they got to her car we get a clue as to what he was thinking. He has her enter her car .. and when she exits he asks her to enter it again but from the passenger side where he would be standing. Now, this was clearly a little bizarre (as DaRonch said .. this is when she first got suspicious) .. so it was no casual request .. it seemed forced and made her wonder why so much she refused and asked for ID.

    One further element which (I think) confirms this was how it played out … when they got to his car (eventually) she noticed he “was a real gentleman and opened all the doors” .. Im sure he did Carol! So, again, he is standing over his victim and she is entering his car .. and he does nothing again. Why? Either his weapon was not in a prepared spot underneath the his vehicle as usual or it was a busier area with people about … either way, he hadn’t prepared his car to be the attack venue and so couldnt. Therefore, if he hadnt planned to attack there then he must have planned to attack at her car.

    Unfortunately for him, Bundy has ended up being in the worst position he could be in. He is flustered, he doesnt know what to do … he cant let her go (she is a witness now and could well contact the police about him … and, of course, he never lets anyone go) .. that he tried to handcuff her in quite a busy road .. well, I think it is safe to safe, this was not his plan at the outset. Plain stupidity. That would be a very hard thing to do anyway .. but to not at least go to some remote spot.

    So, there you go … my little Anne Rule impression!!

    If anyone has read this far, please pick holes as much as you can.

    A couple of final conclusion which can be made.

    1. Just like in Florida, when his first plan went pear shaped he immediately acted on another plan he had already researched and mapped out. He already had the theatre programme for Viewmont High and went straight there.

    2. This, I think, further backs up my own thought that Carol DaRonch wasn’t chanced upon .. she had been targetted somewhere else before the mall. Ted had plans that night!

    3. Just like at Tallahassee three years later, he makes big mistakes when his plans fall apart.

    So, if we look at what transpired when they got to her car we get a clue as to what he was thinking. He has her to enter her car .. and when she exits he asks her to enter it again from the passenger side. Now, this was clearly a little bizarre (as DaRonch said .. this is when she first got uspicious) .. so it was a freeflowing request .. it seemed forced and made her wonder why so much she refused and asked for ID.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hey morph!

      Well, I don’t have my book right in front of me, but the way i write the DaRonch incident it is clear he was following her, and that he had already gotten her license number. So it was at least a hastily devised plan. He did the cop thing just because it would fit into such a scenario.

      Yes, I do believe he planned to attack her in her car, but things didn’t go that way for him. He couldn’t set up her car up for attack like he did his own (the crowbar under his rear right wheel in a darkened parking lot), as he had done during the Hawkins’ abduction. That was impossible here.

      And despite everything he did, Bundy failed to capture his prey, and now Debra Kent was going to die.

      As to Melissa Smith, I didn’t add anything from the autopsy report (I think I had it? lol!), because I had the very informative police report of the crime scene investigation. It was the information her that I found would be the most interesting. Besides, Bundy’s MO as to sexual acts during the murders was well established. And you may remember that Bundy had hit her so hard in the skull that the detective at first believed she’d been shot in the head.

      I hope this answers some questions, morph. :)

    2. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Morph: One last thing: First, I don’t think he followed DaRonch to the mall and hatched his plan. I think he spotted her in the parking lot and the plan unfolded from there. Of course, he had already checked the side door of the cleaners to make sure it was locked, etc, and he was doing this prior to even having a target that evening.

      Great questions, btw!

      Kevin

  8. morph says:

    Well, this is the famous thread!!

    Ive been reading it for about a week now and only up to 2012! Its really a fantastic thing.

  9. KYGB says:

    Who was Diana Weiner and why was she involved in the Ted Bundy case? Well, she was an attorney from Sarasota, Florida. She graduated from law school in 1984 and practiced law there with her husband. Nevin Weiner was a public defender in the Sarasota area before he moved into private practice. Nevin Weiner maintains a law firm in Sarasota and his wife is a partner in that firm to this day. The Weiner’s were social friends of Dr Art Norman in Sarasota
    In 1986, Art Norman invited Diana Weiner to assist him when he interviewed Ted Bundy on death row. Norman felt the presence of a good looking female would help “soften Ted up”. Diana was equal to the task and accompanied Norman in his session with the convicted killer. Her uniform of the day was described later as “very little, with nothing on underneath”. The attorney that handled the bulk of the work for Bundy’s appeal, Polly Nelson, put Diana Weiner on the visitor list and a 2 ½ year relationship started.
    Diana Weiner became Ted’s personal attorney, handling Ted’s prison disciplinary issues and other personal business not related to Ted’s appeal. Diana Weiner is the daughter of Messianic Rabbi. Her paternal grandfather was the victim of a political execution over his refusal to convert to Catholicism. To say that she is an opponent of capital punishment is probably understating her personal beliefs.
    Diana Weiner made many trips from Sarasota to Raiford to visit Ted on the row. She had 70 visits with Bundy at FSP, many of them wearing her uniform of the day. Bob Keppel described her role as “Bundy’s lawyer, girlfriend/whatever”. Long dark hair, stunning figure, and well featured good looks went well with Diane’s new black Mercedes as she pulled into the prison parking lot for visitors. One can only imagine the jail house gossip on the row when Bundy spent time with his personal attorney.
    What kind of hanky panky went on between these two on the row? Who knows, although there were reports of Diana “flashing” Ted and another complaint about inappropriate back rubbing. There were many visits alone and a lot of stuff could have gone on with those two in the back. Eventually, prison administration put a stop to the solo visits, etc.
    Bundy’s appeal was handled by the law firm assigned that task. Polly Nelson and the brilliant Jim Coleman did all that work. Weiner and Ted worked on their own scheme to save Ted’s life. The “bones for time” scheme was hatched by TRB, but Weiner and Ted did all the work on that ill-fated scheme. “Bones for life” was fated to fail from its inception, but Ted had his zealot, Weiner assisting him every step of the way in implementing this silly ploy.
    Diana also drafted Ted’s last will, in which he willed all his possessions to Weiner. It wasn’t much, personal papers, $700 bucks and a few old ski mags. This was a final slap in the face to Carole Boone. The relationship with Diana and Ted’s admissions of guilt are the reasons that Carole refused to talk to Ted at the end. Even so, the Fla Attorney General sued for the “Ted” material a few months later. Nevin Weiner defended Diana against the State’s case. As a result of the lawsuit, Bundy’s papers were given to Fla and eventually Bob Keppel and King county.

    1. Fiona says:

      Thanks for this! I can’t help thinking I’ve read it somewhere (or similar) before. I note if you type the name into google up pops a twitter page with lawyer called Diana Weiner, looks to be in her 60s, with long dark hair – I assume this has to be the same person. I do find it fascinating that his posessions ended up with Keppell, here in the UK I can’t imagine that happening you would expect it to end up back with the authorities and by that I mean generic not a specific individual. Maybe just different times? I have to question the sanity of the women (such as Weiner) who get involved with men like this knowing full well what they have done. It begs belief.

      1. Tony says:

        Polly Nelson talks quite a bit about Ted and Diana in her book. There was definitely something other than professional going on between the two of them. That old Bundy charm at work, I guess. :-/

  10. Fiz says:

    That’s right, Kevin! Tantalise us and leave us hanging! ;)

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      You’re so funny, Fiz! lol! :)

  11. Fiona says:

    Thanks for the reply. I guess human nature being what it is folk will always be curious about that aspect of his life. What was interesting to me was Carole’s son Jamie Boone stayed in contact with Ted right through till his execution and was one of the last persons to see him alive (I believe). I read a book called Among The Lowest of the Dead (BTW you can get it on preview on google books – search ‘Bundy’ you can read the whole chapter on him for free) and this was written by the man who spent the last night with Bundy holding his hands through the cell doors and praying with him. Anyway I am sure in there it mentions Jamie Boone. So that was in 89 and I guess he must still have been in touch with his mother too, another fascinating dynamic there. I am also interested in the relationship betwee Ted and Diana Weiner – I’ve read they were an item of sorts – is this true and if so how did it happen? I am surprised given how notorious he was by the time she got involved that anything could possibly have gone on. Odd too that she knew what he was but still entertained him.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Yeah, I’ve been told odd things from at least two of the investigators about Ted and his attorney. I can’t repeat what they said to me, but they were there and they did have some interesting observations to pass along. I would love to be able to say more but I can’t.

      I have other odd stories surrounding the participants in this case, but I can’t talk about those either, lol! :)

  12. bart says:

    I once read on the Internet in a post of one of forums (not very trustworthy source) that daughter of Bundy lived for a while in Pacific NorthWest with her Mom then after starting her own family – she moved to Canada. She is said to have at least 2 kids now (then I read it like a couple years ago). Plus she is aware of who her father was. Of course this is might be bogus.

  13. Steve says:

    This might be kinda of random. I know some do wonder what became of Ted’s ashes. I haven’t seen any real answer as to weather they were spread in the cascades or not. I know there were many who didn’t want that to happen.

    I found that Michael Radelet said that he had Ted’s ashes in his closet for 2 months.

    I thought Ted willed everything to Diane Weiner. And Keppel got most of it?

    I wonder what he did with the ashes?

  14. Fiona says:

    What a great thread! I couldn’t go back to the start as it would take some reading but I’ve gone back a little and thoroughly enjoyed this. I have just read your book Kevin and want to say congratulations. It was great. I am curious about Bundy’s progeny, is Carol Anne Boone still alive and did she manage to have a normal life post Bundy? Did her and the girl have to change their identity or were they left to get on with their lives? It’s terrible for them too, especially the child but also an interesting splinter to the whole story. Not many serial killers father children after their death sentences! I wonder if the girl knew/knows who her father is and indeed if she ever came to peace with that. Strange to think Bundy could have grand kids running around.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hi Fiona!

      Welcome to the blog…

      I think Carol Boone is still alive and I think she’s in the Pacific Northwest. Her daughter’s a grown woman now, but I have no real info on either of them. I heard when I was researching my book that she changed her name, but I can’t confirm that.

      If the daughter knows who her father was (I’m sure she does), it must be very odd indeed. I had some communications with Stephen Michaud (one of the author’s of The Only Living Witness) a few years back, and he said something like “Can you imagine what it must be like for his daughter?”

      See ya! :)

      1. NWgal says:

        Hi- Ted’s daughter is alive and well in the PNW. She has done well for herself. Her last name was changed. Has an education and a great career. Interestingly, she lives and works not far from Liz’ daughter, who uses her married last name.

        1. Paul says:

          No – Carol Boone died 10 years ago in Texas. Read the new Rob Dielenberg book, Ted Bundy A Visual Timeline, it’s incredible.

  15. jane says:

    Jana – I did a quick catch-up read and was surprised that you think too much is made of the necrophilia angle?? Maybe I’m mistaken. Methinks it was all about the dead body for him. Didn’t Liz the girlfriend say he asked her to play dead once during sex? Also anyone not into necrophilia would be appalled and repulsed by the beheadings – no? He did that over and over and took the heads home – personally, I can’t even get a mental picture of what happened next and I don’t want to. Aynesworth in M&A’s TOLW asked him how he could get pleasure from a dead girl and he was said to get irritated with the question and spat back – we’re not talking about normal sex, ok. So I don’t get why you think the necrophilia angle is overblown. How much worse does a person have to get than what is known.

    Why wasn’t he hooked up to a lie detector during his confessions? I’d have given the creep another month of life if he agreed to that condition. The minute he showed deception, all bets are off and you’re back on the countdown with Ole Sparky.

    1. Jana says:

      Jane- I’m not sure where you got that from- but Bundy was all about the necrophilia! He wanted the cops to keep quiet about it to the public because although society would think him a monster for killing girls- he didn’t want him to think him “that” kind of monster. Lol.

      1. Jana says:

        *them to think

      2. May says:

        He Jane,

        Well, we agree that Bundy was all about image, lol. That is one of the reasons why he was secretive about his murders. But to come to the conclusion that Bundy was a necrophile,he must have to have confessed somehow, since most of the bodies were never found, were too decomposed to come to this conclusion, or only skeletal remains were found.

        And, from what I could gather from his talks with Michaud, the hitchhiker murder confession to Polly Nelson, the condition of Laura’s Aime body, Bundy was also a sadist. He did enjoy the fear in his vicitms, the psychological torture (and maybe physical as well). Kevin Sulivan is right about that. It as all about power/control. A true maligant narcissist. The worst of the worst.

        1. May says:

          * malignant narcissist

        2. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

          Hi May,

          I think the hitchhiker story he gave to Polly Nelson was bogus. That’s not Polly’s fault, but I believe it’s completely bogus. This is why I used Bundy’s end-of-life confession to the Idaho Investigators. He was really coming clean then and in my opinion, these confessions are the most trusted we have.

          Per Bundy’s sexual activity with his victims: He often had sex with them before he killed them; he enjoyed having sex with them as they were dying; and yes, he loved necrophilia. Bundy told the Idaho investigators that he had sex with 12 year old Lynette Culver AFTER he killed her. I cover the Culver story in great detail in my book.

          1. May says:

            Hi Kevin,

            About the hitchhiker, the confession to the Idaho investigators doesn’t deny Polly Nelson’s confession. Nelson’s confession was only more detailed. It doesn’t make sense for me the most horrid and detailed confession (Nelson’s) to be a lie. And Bundy did want to be seem as a likable man to Polly Nelson.

            I don’t dispute Bundy being a necrophiliac with some of his victims. What I dispute is his necrophilia as a means to an end. Bundy didn’t kill women to have sex with them, he killed women because he liked. The whole “he was attracted to dead women and that’s why he killed” makes he seems more like a crazy perv than the evil, evil man he was.

          2. May says:

            Hi Kevin,

            I’m not 100% sure he was honest in his last confession. He omitted a lot of info on most of them, didn’t even told the names in some, while in a few he gave descriptions. And I’m sure there were more murders than those he confessed.

            I forgot the info about the geography of the kidnapping. Thank you. He also told Nelson he returned to the body afterwards, something he didn’t told the investigators. Well, it doesn’t make sense to me why he would make the story worse for Nelson. And the way he told her it seemed he was enjoying telling her about it, like he was experiencing it again. I guess we will have to agree to disagree in that one.

            Hmm, he may have told two different stories because he was talking about two different hitchhikers. I’m positive the Idaho hitchhiker wasn’t his first hitchhiker, he may have told an earlier murder to Nelson? Who knows?

            Thank You!

    2. May says:

      Hi Jana,

      I think the necrophilia angle in Ted Bundy is exaggerated, yes. Yes, he did necrophilic acts with some of the bodies, I don’t dispute that. However, some people think he murdered girls only to have sex with their bodies, as if murder was a mean to an end. And I think to look at things from that angle is not correct. If that was it, it would be easier if he looked for work in a morgue. He murdered women because he liked it. Necrophilia was just a part o the ritual.

      No, he NEVER asked Liz to play dead during sex. And I read her book. This comes from “Ted Bundy” movie. But, as far as I know, he never asked such thing from his girlfriends. By the way, the movies (with the exeception of ” The Deliberate Stranger”)

      The necrophilia thing comes much from Bob Keppel, which I understand. Necrophilia is a common behaviour of serial killers from Bundy’s group (Power/Control), so it is not surprising that type of behaviour. As far as I know, he never even confessed necrophilia to him during their 1983 conversations, though that is in the movie about the book. However, he did say he had sex with some of the bodies to Hagmaier and to the investigators in the Death Row interviews.

      Much of what Ted Bundy did with his victims, alive or dead, comes from speculation. Bundy was very secretive, even if his last confessions he didn’t give much. When he confessed Gerogann Hawkins murder to Keppel he only gave the before and after, he didn’t say anything regarding the murder itself.

      About the heads. He took about 12 to his home. He didn’t do that to all his victims. I’m not sure he used them as sexual instrument. Did he say to anyone what he did to them.? I don’t doubt he may have done that. And, is is appalling. But he did confess this?

      What annoys me anout this necrophilia thing. It seems in every interview, board, etc. It seems necrophilia is the worst thing, the most disgusting and abhorrent thing you can do to a victim. That got me in a Bob Keppel interview when he said in a documentary: “For most serial killers is rape and murder, to Ted Bundy it was murder and rape.”
      Why murder and rape is any worse than rape and murder? It seems people can understand a person raping another, hurting another, torturing another, KILLING another. But necrophilia is the most disgusting thing ever? Don’t get me wrong, I do think necrophilia is disgusting, but I don’t think is worse than rape and murder.

      The “normal sex, abnormal sex” rant comes from the question regarding inserting objects in women’s vagina. But, you’re right, he did get annoyed about the necrophilia question. But Bundy seemed to get annoyed by every “personal” question Aynesworth did. Necrophilia for Bundy’ types o serila killer is a power/control thing.

      About the lie detector, it is not the most trustful machine. I think by the time Bundo was executed it wasn’t much used anymored.

      1. May says:

        I’m sorry about the typos in my reply. I was in a hurry when I wrote that and I did not review it accordingly.

      2. May says:

        * Necrophilia for Bundy’s types of serial killer is a power/control thing.

        * About the lie detector, it is not the most trustful machine. I think by the time Bundy was executed it wasn’t much used anymore.

      3. Jana says:

        There’s actually me–Jana– and also a Jane in this thread. We aren’t the same. :)

        I’ve read most things about Bundy. Rule was the one that said Liz said he asked her to play dead during sex.

        My former professor (and one of the foremost authorities about homicide, especially sexual serial homicide) Dr. Louis Schlesinger, talked a bit about Bundy during the Profiling/Homicide class I had with him. He also mentioned the necrophilia and how Bundy did not want to be seen as “that sort of monster.”
        Insertion of items into the vagina during sexual serial homicide is extremely common. It’s a method to degrade the victim and often a symbolic rape when the killer can’t perform sexually.

        1. May says:

          Hi Jana,

          Thanks for clearing up who is who. I was sure you two were the same, sorry :)

          “The Stranger Beside Me” was the first Bundy book I’ve read. I read it some years ago and I don’t remember anything mentioned about Bundy asking Liz to play dead during sex. I read an old edition, maybe in some more recent? I even looked for it when you wrote about it, and I didn’t find it. I know that he strangled two women (not Liz) during sex. One of them even mentioned that he performed in a way it was too close too rape, even though it was consensual.

          Bundy surely didn’t want to be seen as some sort of monster, he was too much of a narcissist. Those lies he told Michaud that he didn’t really want to kill the girl, that he didn’t want to make her suffer, is all that. But, as far as I know, he mentioned necrophilia as something he did with some of the bodies, and that’s it. The rest remains speculation. Almost everything Bundy did during those hours with a living/dead girl remains speculation. I’m sure there is a lot we don’t know, and I doubt he was “quick” with the victim. He was way too violent in his sexuality for that.

      4. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

        Hi again May!

        As i recall, the story Bundy told nelson was completely different than what he told Russ Reneau and Randy Everitt. In the Nelson story I believe Bundy tells of driving through the hills of Idaho. But it’s abundantly clear from his end of life confession that it’s a far different story than what he told Nelson. Bundy told the Idaho investigators that he picked her up at the top of the on-ramp of the freeway in a suburban area “on the outskirts of Boise”. According to Bundy there was no trolling in the hills. And after he killed her he said he slid the body in the river.

        I agree Bundy didn’t kill women so that he could commit necrophilia. He killed them because he loved killing them. And his sexual desires were such that with a victim they could manifest in all three areas: prior to death, as they were dying, and after death.

        See ya!

      5. Paul says:

        In jail, Bundy told fellow serial killer Gerard Schaefer, how he enjoyed his victims ‘glazed-over eyes’, how, after strangling them to the point of passing out, then releasing the pressure, they were still conscious, but the life had gone from their eyes. They were still living, but catatonic, “like all the soul had gone out of them”. He liked to think he had an animated corpse to play with. Read Ted Bundy: A Visual Timeline for the lowdown on that.

        1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

          I understand. I’ve heard those types of things too, and they always seem to be mixed with a bit of truth. But I take what other killers say Bundy told them with the proverbial grain of salt. That’s not to say that it shouldn’t be mentioned. But I am saying it’s how it’s presented ( truth or with s speculative eye) to the reader. For example, Bundy did tell Mike Fisher he choked Julie Cunningham into unconsciousness, then he allowed her to come to, scream and run away, and then he chased her down and strangled her to death. However, that does not mean that what Stano said was true. It may be, but it may not be true. Still, presenting it as a possibility is fine. However, this doesn’t “float” for the Stapely book for the aforementioned reasons.

          And yes, I’ll read the timeline.

          Btw: I do like the fact that through the help of some folks, they’ve determined that two “standard” photos of Bundy related pics are incorrect. That’s great! But as to the these other things, and how they’re presented, I’ll “judge” that as I go along with it. I am looking forward to reading it.

  16. KYGB says:

    Kevin, Great news. Can’t wait to see the work. Give us that pre-order info when ya get it.

    Bart, be patient boy. There’s a few things to do. No great wine comes before it’s time.

  17. bart says:

    Hi Kevin
    Do you have somoe more specific date for the release of your new Bundy book. “Early 2016″ means what? February? Or later? Any chance to get in Amazon Kindle or other e-reader version? Can I pre-order it somehow straight from my beloved author? :)

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hey Bart,

      I’m thinking the book should be published in the early part of 2016. Maybe in the first few months. But the timeline will be decided by the publisher.

      The book will be published in trade paper, eBook and audio. But no, I won’t have any copies to sell. Books can be purchased through Amazon, Audible, etc. :)

      1. bart says:

        OK, I am impatient to buy your book… lol

  18. Steve says:

    It’s cool to hear that the new book will have interviews with people that knew him.

    How well is very well? LOL

    I won’t lie, when I say I’ve searched the web to find current info on people who “knew him”.

    I’ve actually found the facebook pages of three of Ted’s siblings. Linda, Glenn, and Rich.

    Yea, I can be a little obsessive. LOL

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hey Steve,

      I can’t say “who” prior to publication, but they are not from the Bundy family. I did not want to bother them, and they probably wouldn’t speak with me anyway.

      That said, it is new and unpublished info, and it’s being being published for the very first time. It answers some questions that do a wonderful job of completing the back story to Bundy’s reign of terror.

      Publication should be fairly early 2016.

      1. Steve says:

        I never thought it would be family. They should be left alone. Tho, I have no idea how that Morris woman got Linda to talk. Maybe some cash came her way? I’d demand it.

        Sounds good!!!

    2. Jana says:

      They aren’t hard to find…Glenn and Linda are FB friends but not with the Rich I found. If so, interesting family dynamic!

      1. Steve says:

        Tho only Linda has info on her page to see.

        Tho, there are pics of Rich performing online. Even some youtube stuff.

        He needs to do something with that Einstein hair cut tho. LOL

        While, I would never ask. I would of course love to know how they deal with being a Bundy. Espically since they all live in Tacoma.

  19. May says:

    Thank you for the reply, Kevin.

    Most of my doubts about Bundy MO come from head injuries, etc. As I written, my sister was struck really hard on her head and she was only 6.. But now that you mentioned your friend, I remember something similar happened in a town nearby. I guess it depends on many factors, such as he angle of the injury.

    Yes, I agree with you about Caryn Campbell death. I was just not aware of her neck injuries and that she was struck on her head more than one time. Bundy said she died after the first blow.

    Yes, there are many risky factors of keeping girls conscious in his house. But, I don’t know, it is not like Bundy didn’t enjoy taking risks, he was a psycopath. I just don’t see how they could be unconcious, unless they were in a coma. I guess I remembered of what happened with Kristin French, she was held captive for three days by Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka and wasn’t gagged or tied.

    About the hichhiker death, well I think we have opposite opinions, lol. I think Bundy wanted Polly Nelson to like him, that’s why he lied to her about Lake Sam. However, the hitchhiker death is way too detailed, it would have been a too elaborate lie and he didn’t have much reason the make up details about this girl’s death. Plus, he didn’t think Nelson would reveal the nature of their conversations. But I agree with you about Hagmaier. He is probably the one closest to the true.

    About his final confessions, he would have many reasons to hide information, or lie. Besides having material to delay the execution, if he was executed he wouldn’t be seen as a sadistic monster, but as someone who did’n’t cause much pain and suffering. Of course, he would slip something, such as Julie Cunnigham final hours, and Culver’s death.

    Anyway, I don’t trust Bundy at all. I think much more happened we don’t know of.

    I’m very anxious for the next book. I didn’t know it was so close to complete. I’m sure it will be great.

  20. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    “a tremendous amount can occur”

    should read:

    “a tremendous amount of damage can occur”

  21. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Instead of “and most of not all of these”, it should read “and most if not all of these”

  22. May says:

    Hi Kevin,

    I’ve just finished your book and in my opinion is one of best books about Bundy out there and I’m happy to know there is another one on the way from you. What I liked the mo, besides the extensive research and the new details, t is that you remember the victims that aren’t usually remember, like Lynette Culver and Julie Cunnigham. You also don’t shy away in showing Bundy the sick and sadistic person he really was

    There is something I want ot share. It is about Bundy knocking out his victims with a crowbar. I read three books on Bundy and I’ve never seen something like that adressed before. I want to ask if you ever (or any other writer out there) checked and discussed with a doctor the damage it could cause.

    I ask this because my sister, when she was six years old, was hit hard on her head on the playground at school. She was unconscious during fifteen minutes and vomited. We took her to the hospital, and, thank God, she didn’t sustain any damage. Later I read that for a person to be knocked unconscious, the hit must be very hard (to break a china vase on the head would only cause a headache, for example) and for a person to die the blow, besides hard, must come at really great speed. It would be very difficult for a person to kill another person with just one blow on the head. Multiple blows it would be necessary to do such damage. Just like Chi Omega and Thomas attacks. Bundy hit on the girls again and again, broke their jaws, they lost teeth and didn’t die. And, as you know Margaret Bowman and Lisa Levy didn’t die because of the blows, they were strangled.

    I say this because I find very difficult to believe any of the women and girls Bundy took with him die with just one blow on the head. Campbell included. IMO from the little I read about head injuries, the damage Bundy did to them on that initial blow would only knock them out (or leave them dizzy and confused) for some minutes. It seems that initial atttack was to control their movements., nothing else. I think that’s why he carried the “murder kit” around. People discuss about how these items were found, but I see almost no discussion about how they were used. From what I could see, the pieces there were most for immobilization, to create terror (the masks), and physical torture (the ice pick). I don’t know why he would carry these things if the victims were unconscious for most of the time he was with them.

    Because of all this, I find it difficult to believe Melissa Smith and Laura Aime were unconscious during the time Bundy was with them. Only if he had a way to make them unconscious in which repeated blows on the head weren’t used. Chloroform for example. He may have used fear and promises to release them when it was over to control them. It wouldn’t be very hard. That is, if Bundy really kept them. There is a theory the cold weather may have preserved Melissa Smith’s and Laura Aime’s bodies.

    I’m saying this because I think Bundy lied to the end. It was obvious he was very worried about his image. His confessions(even his third person confessions) were evasive and he let many things out. What he told Idaho investigator about his murder of the hitchhiker is an incomplete form of what he told Polly Nelson (it seems Bundy emotionally tortured that poor girl). He didn’t want to be seen as a sadistic monster. He rather to be seen as someone who didn’t cause much pain and wanted to “finish” the whole thing soon as possible. I believe Bundy was a necrophiliac, but not to such extent Bob Keppel believed. I don’t know, IMO the whole necrophilia angle is exaggerated and Bundy as a « voracious necrophiliac » it always appeared to me based mostly on speculation. Yes, he visited some of the bodies and may have commited acts of necrophilia, but it always seemed to me he did this because he was relieving what happened.

    It seems the more relaxed he was, the more details he would confessed. He wasn’t relaxed when he discussed Georgann Hawkins murder, for example. He didn’t considered Keppel a friend and he didn’t trust him What he told Keppel about the murders in general were the before and the after, leaving most of the rest for speculation. On other hand, when he discussed Kathy Parks murder with Michaud, he was relaxed and let his mask slip (he laughed remembering her terror) and told, though not in details, what he did to her. It seems to me this murder, the hitchhiker murder with Nelson and Lake Sam with Hagmaier (and maybe Julie Cunnigham with Fisher) were his most honest confessions. However, it is obvious to me that Bundy besides being a psychopath was also a narcissist. His image was very important, even with those confessions he did his most to show he didn’t want to cause terror and pain, he didn’t enjoy what he was doing really, his usual lies.

    I found a webpage where the author did an extensive research on the Washigtion, Utah, Idaho and Colorado murders. He used as sources many books (including yours) and visited many places. It is very complete and has details I didn’t read before, such as some details about the condition of Caryn Campbell’s body. There were multiple blows on Campbell’s head and signals of strangulation, suggesting Bundy lied about how she died, as usual.

    Here is the link : http://www.academia.edu/7870355/Ted_Bundy_a_visual_compendium_part_1_

    By the way, I’m sorry about any grammar and vocabulary mistakes. English is not my first language. Thank you !

  23. 0000 says:

    Could Bundy have passed through Iowa on his way to Vermont in 1969? Might this be one of his kills?

    http://www.iowaunsolvedmurders.com/beyond-1965-selected-unsolved-iowa-murders/appointment-with-death-murder-of-dorothy-miller-1969/

    1. Jana says:

      That crime doesn’t fit Bundy at all. Victim was in her late 40’s, and stabbed. Bundy didn’t stab his victims- he bludgeoned and strangled.

      1. 0000 says:

        He killed much younger women – girls, really – so why not older too? He’s rumored to have killed a man. We don’t know exactly when he started or when he “settled” on a “style” of killing so I think this one is possible. The “unnatural sexual act” is what makes me think he might have done this, and the timeline fits.

        1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

          I didn’t look up that particular murder, but Bundsy did not ever use a knife, until, that is, the killing of Kim Leach.

          1. Paul says:

            Bundy didn’t use a knife until Leach? Well… No one knows that, do they? The rape that happened close to Bundy’s residence a few weeks before Healy’s disappearance, which we can pretty much say was Bundy, involved the girl being threatened with a knife (probably the one from Liz’ car)… If we believe the story in Rule’s book about the woman who’s car was tampered with, then driven off with Bundy for ‘jumper cables’, also involved a knife. The Wilcox story in Michaud’s book involved Ted ushering her into a grove of trees at knifepoint, and didn’t he say he used a knife to threaten the hitchhiker in Polly Nelson’s book? There’s far too many incidents involving knives to confidently say he “never” used a knife.

          2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

            As far as we know, Bundy never killed anyone with a knife until Leach. That’s a better way of saying it.

        2. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

          Bundy quit his job at Griggs Lumber Mill in August, and began his job with Legal Messengers, Inc in September.

          Not only do we NOT know that Bundy was actually killing at that time, but in my view he would not have traveled so far to obtain a victim, when there were “victims” all around him (he wasn’t a mobile killer at that time).

          Plus, there is NO evidence Bundy ever killed a woman of that age. That age, in my opinion, wouldn’t have satisfied him.

          That the assailant committed an unnatural act (anal sex), with his victim is actually common in such circumstances.

          In my view there is nothing in this murder that points to Bundy, and actually, points away from him at every turn.

          Would Bundy have enjoyed reading about such a murder? Sure.

          1. Jana says:

            You would have also gotten an A in my Homicide Profiling class at John Jay, Kevin :)

            Like I said- not his victim type (nor preference), and not his ritual or signature. Like Kevin said- anal sex is very common in sexually motivated homicide. I think by the time Bundy killed Leach he was completely out of control and stepped outside of his MO with the knife. The Chi O house was not like him- it was pure frenzy- he hadn’t killed in so long and it was like he was drunk in blood lust. The real Ted took his time with his girls.

            I’m not sure why they necessarily think it was a serial killer in the case Steve listed. There was overkill (way too many stab wounds in her back) which is often indicative of personal rage. I also find it strange that she went to meet a man alone on a rural property in a Saturday evening, which her family said was unusual. Could she have been having an affair and ended it? I’d be curious to know if her shirt was pulled over her face? It just says it was raised above her chest (and that can mean more than one thing- but was it in the neck area or covering her face?).

            Unless there were other sexually motivated murders with a similar MO close around that area, I think they wanted to attribute it to a serial and sound sensational. They didn’t list any real evidence to give any credence it was indicative of a serial except that it was sexually motivated. I think it sounds more like someone she may have known or at least had met previously and who saw an opportunity and took it. If it was serial, surely they would have linked similar cases to make them think such. Granted, just my opinion.

          2. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

            I would have gladly taken that “A” Jana! lol! :)

  24. Steve says:

    This is about Ted and possible murders of younger victims.

    I know Kevin mentions that he believes Ted killed more younger victims. Like Leach and Culver. While he may have. I feel that a lot of it comes from his comment to Bob Keppel about things a serial killer would never talk about. Murdering at a young age, murdering young children, and doing it at home.

    Anyone ever thought that he made that comment to Keppel in the hopes that it might make Bob think that Ted had killed a bunch of kids. And that would encourage Bob to try to make sure he wasn’t killed, so that it could all get sorted out?

    Ted wasn’t anywhere near as smart as the media and some people in law enforcement made him out to be. But he was really freakin clever.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Well, he absolutely killed Lynette Culver (12 years old) and Kim Leach also 12. Plus, when he was arrested in Florida, he had a YOUNG GIRLS cheerleader magazine in his car.

      I think the evidence is “in” on this one.

      1. Steve says:

        I never said he didn’t kill them. I know he killed them. I was taking about other young girls.

        He wanted to live as long as possible. Him hinting that he may have killed more young girls. Which I think he was hinting at.

        Obviously, we could think of Ann Marie Burr. But, I think he was wanting Keppel to think he may have done it many times. Just to see if he could live longer based off the idea that that they might want to get that all sorted out before his end date.

        And yes, he had the cheerleader camp thing. But that was him being his normal perverted self. He used it to get horny, to be honest. It got him in the mood. Much like the alcohol boosted his confidence and lowered his inhibitions.

  25. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi all…

    Well, I’m putting the finishing touches on the new Bundy book, and I must say, it contains a lot of new info on the case. I can’t be more specific now, but I’m very pleased. And if I’m pleased you guys will be pleased as well, lol!

    I’ll keep everyone posted on the publication date.

  26. Arnar Þór Þórsson says:

    Hi all. It’s been a long time since i posted on this thread. It seems my interest in Bundy comes in phases, as if i have to take a break from reading and researching things on the man. That being said, has anyone watched the Florida trial that was posted on youtube some while ago? Is there anything that should be taken into consideration while studying his mannerisms and so forth. Greetings from Iceland, Arnar.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hi Arnar!

      Glad you stopped by as it’s been a long time. I have not watched the trial, but I am putting the finishing touches on the new Bundy book I’m writing. It’s a companion volume to the first book, and does contain new info.

      Take care,

      Kevin

  27. 0000 says:

    I haven’t read through this entire thread yet. Is there a search feature? I was wondering what ever happened to Diane Edwards, for one thing. Also, does anyone have the exact dates or the route or any other info about Bundy’s trip to Vermont where he got his original birth certificate?Do we know what towns he passed through, specifically in NY State and Vermont?

    1. Paul says:

      No, but I’m damned sure he killed Rita Curran while visiting his birthplace. She was raped, bludgeoned and strangled. In her basement apartment. Directly across from where he was born, and we know he went on a ‘find himself’ trip across the country in the early 70’s, and very likely stopped by Vermont. It’s far from proof, but it’s yet another coincidence Bundys wrapped up in.

      1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

        Lol! Yes, there are lots of those maybes in the Bundy case. That’s why I say, despite all of the many provable things I’ve discovered for both books, there’s still a sense of mystery attached to these maybes.

  28. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Steve:

    Yes, I have also lost a long post before, and it’s irritating, lol!

    I can’t remember the Macy’s vs Sears comparison, but I know that Bundy did not come from the same background as Diane Edwards, and he knew this. And i think it bothered him.

    Glad you’ve joined the conversation.

    Kevin

    1. Steve says:

      I’ve been wanting to post for awhile. But I wanted to finish the while thread before I did.

  29. Steve says:

    I’m a first time poster.

    When it comes to Diane Edwards, I do not believe he ever really planned some sort of revenge on her. I think he simply realized that the new and improved Ted was a lie, and that once she realized that, she’d have dumped him first. Which is why he did it to her. He was using friends cars and places to make it look like he was really successful.

    But it was a façade, used to make himself look to her like he had made it in life. He had low self esteem and felt that, that was the only way he could be viewed as worthy to her.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      Hey Steve,

      Thanks for stopping in and adding your comment. :)

      1. Steve says:

        It’s nice to see you responded.

        I feel his issues with her have been overstated. Had it made him snap like it’s claimed, then he probably would’ve shot up a school or something like that. Instead of doing what he did in the manner he did it in.

        The guy had mental problems from the day he was born.

        He clearly had Antisocial personality disorder.

        His constant lying and manipulating, violating of other peoples rights, lack of empathy, impulse control, and most of all, his grandiose view of himself.

        That grandiose view is what got him the chair. Even more so than the actual murders.

        He clearly wasn’t sane. No sane individual rejects a plea deal for life in prison, so that they can play a game of lawyer in front of an audience. All the while knowing full well they could be given the chair for their decision.

        1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

          If you have a chance to read my book, do so. I follow Bundy’s life from cradle to grave. And I go into great detail on his relationship with Diane Edwards (I call her Carla Browning in my book). Here’s the way I see it:

          Bundy was devastated after she broke off the relationship. Of course, the relationship was doomed from the start, but Bundy had a very hard time with the breakup. As such, I believe it was his plan from the start to “win” her back so that he could dump her. For what he did to her was exactly what she had done to him. For Bundy, it was payback.

          Could i be wrong about this? Sure. But from the facts I have I believe this is exactly what occurred.

          Yes, Bundy was not sane like you and me. To do what he did sets him apart mentally from the rest of us. But he was sane as to his own person (a guy like Richard Chase wasn’t), and he understood exactly what he was doing. Therefore, under the law, he was legally sane. Now, in the “real world” he’s considered nuts, and I would agree with that lol!

          1. Steve says:

            I still have yet, and maybe there is, any real proof that he got back with her to break up with her. I feel that he broke up with her, because the new Ted was all a lie. And he felt that the lies were the only thing holding it together for him.

            Correct me if i’m wrong. But didn’t he once compare her to Macy’s and himself to Sears? Could have been a different store for her. But yea, a lot of positive self esteem for Teddy there.

            Yes, he was legally sane. Since he wasn’t trying to bite off the nipple of everyone he came across. But he wasn’t sane. It’s just that there was no way that the state, nor the judge was going to stop Ted from taking the lead role in his own personal death play.

            I originally had a longer reply. But I forgot to open another tab before I tried to switch to my Facebook page. LOL Gotta love when you lose everything you type.

    2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Well, I do believe there was a revenge element to it, and that would match with Bundy’s personality of not being able to let things go. But that’s just my opinion. :)

  30. jane says:

    Thanks, Hal, on your comments on DNA. You’re probably right and that the FBI has tested his parentage and just don’t care to divulge it at this point.

    Someone above mentioned the dumping of the “Stephanie” relationship. I don’t think revenge was the top motive for that relationship ending. “Stephanie”: would have been an impediment to his murderous hobby. From what we know about her, she’d have not put up with him leaving in the middle of the night without explanation, finding odd, ominous items like bags of other women’s clothing, hatchets and handcuffs in her/his car, etc. as Liz Kloepfner did. Liz was an enabler, no doubt the result of her self-admitted insecurity. She put up with anything from Bundy – even a threat to “break your f—— neck”. “Stephanie” doesn’t sound like someone who would put up with that crap for a minute.

    So I think he HAD to end it with “Stephanie” or give up his dead “lovers” – and he wasn’t about to do THAT!

  31. bart says:

    I think Bundy as a killer was driven by such a mixture of desires, motives and other factors – that more or less normal people cannot even imagine and clearly summarize it. There was anger towards girls perceived as subjects that he could not afford so as a kind wicked kid he wanted to destroy it so nobody could use it. There was his deep fantasy seeking a a way to be surfaced and acted, fuel by decades by his own imagination and detective stories / the they porn. There could be also class factor and even this repressed homosexuality factor that Richard Duffus emphasized in his book. Bundy killing rage was kind of endless mosaic. I think only Mr Hagmaier was able to really approach the inside of Bundy killling mind and “understand” it. Remember, each person who tried to study alive Bundy was asked by him to really “understand” him. That sounds a like madman’s request to understand a killer of dozens of young lives – but in his Bundy twisted mind he found kind of justification of all what he did. He was OK with it and looked for people who would agreed with him:) OK, have a good night, it is almost midnight in my time zone.

  32. Kevin M Sullivan says:

    Or : that was the only criteria he had for hunting victims

  33. bart says:

    Moreover, many Bundy victims didn’t come from wealthy families at all. Both Lake Sam victims for example. But OTOH Bundy was kind of an opportunity killer – in my opinion. If he could not get “the best” he needed – he took what (who) was “available”. I suspect there were many victims with whom Bundy was not “satisfied”. I also read that Bundy once said that he never really took from his murders the whole range of “gratitude” what he’d excepted. I wonder what the hell he excepted from it? What was his ideal murder / victim ?

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Bart, what am I to do with you? Lol!

      Bundy was an opportunity killer. But your thinking that he was looking for the “best” and then would settle for others is absurd. Absolutely absurd. Bundy WAS NOT out to kill rich women. If they came from wealthy families, that is just a fact that had nothing to do with why he snatched them.

      Bundy was into killing young white college age women and young white girls. That was the only criteria he had for hunting for victims

    2. NWgal says:

      Bart – think back to the day at Lake Sam. The place was full of all sorts of people – young, old, etc. There were plenty of children playing in the sand and water. It was one of our beautiful NW summer days! Who did Bundy go after? Young white women.

      The PNW is diverse. There are men and women of many cultures and ethnicities, especially in the Seattle area. If Bundy had focused, for example, on Asian women, he would have been able to be just as “successful”. He didn’t. If he had wanted to focus on homosexual men, same.

      He focused on young white women, and sometimes girls.

      My theory is this had something to do with his mother, who at college age gave birth to him out of wedlock, lied about it, and took him away from his family across the country to Tacoma where he landed in a blue collar rather than middle class family. He described his mother as very smart, able to go to college but without money. I believe he looked down on his stepfather, and was angry with his mother. I think the rage started there. He felt that much was taken away from he, and he deserved it. Hence the entitlement – stealing, lying to get what he wanted.

      Just my option.

  34. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    College coeds and those of college age, I should have said.

  35. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Or, “why she was there or with whom”.

  36. bart says:

    Thanks, it was just a thought.
    But still there was this upper-class factor to who Bundy murdered. I think he “did it” in case of Caryn Campbell in Aspen. It is obvious he did know that wealthy people used to frequent that resort, he might have noticed kind of medical congress was going on inside and took Caryn as some affluent doctor wife, maybe even a doctor herself?. Anyway, there is still chance that he just wanted attractive girl to abduct and kill, and thoughts about her background never crossed his mind.

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      You’re wrong Bart. There was no “upper class factor” in who he murdered. This is just another one of your wild speculations. :)

      Caryn Campbell was young, pretty, with long dark hair, and Bundy just wanted to kill her. That’s all. It had NOTHING to do with money, class, or why or with whom she was with. Nothing at all. You are barking up the wrong tree, as we say here in America. :)

      1. 0000 says:

        I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss class issues as part of Bundy’s rage and sociopathy. Remember…he got revenge on “Stephanie” by dumping her after he seemed to be on a path to success. He did tend to kill young women of some means; after all, he hit a sorority house in one of his most brutal acts. That’s a bastion of privilege. He was very deeply ashamed of his family background.

        1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

          Oh, I’m not dismissing class as an issue with Bundy, as he felt inferior in so many ways, including what “class” he sprang from. That shouldn’t have bothered him at all, mind you, but like others aspects of Bundy’s life, he was beyond help in this area as well.

          My point to Bart was that from what I have learned about him, he killed women for three reasons: Race (they had to be white); college coeds (his first preference); and young white girls. From what I can tell, their monetary background just didn’t matter when it came to murder. If you go over name by name those he killed you’ll see them from all economic backgrounds. If anything, he had a “coed” thing, and a “library” thing, but again, that has nothing to do with class.

          He’s still a bit of a mystery, isn’t he?

          Take care

  37. bart says:

    It is not very clever issue – not surprise from me lol. But assuming Bundy hated life-achievers, why he did not attacked wealthy and influential attractive women like businesspersons, laywers, managers etc? If I hate successful people , the ones who “made it” – I attack them – not young girls who are just coeds and maybe they come from rich families (like Kathy Parks, for instance) but unnecessarily on the path upwards towards success (well, Bundy terminated that path.) Probably young girls were more attractive to Bundy desires, but using this “I hate achievers” logic he could have stalked and attacked 30-40 years old successful ladies who still even back in early 70s – could look sexually attractive.

    1. Tony says:

      Bart,

      I think Bundy ‘hunted’ the sort of women he had access to. He most likely wouldn’t have been able to convince a lot of wealthy or affluent women to go off alone with him (or had access to the sort of events and locations where he would meet such women in the first place). College women and chicks hanging out at the beach/in bars were more his forte. Rich women would likely frequent swankier bars, and even schools for that matter, than Ted could have been confident of his ability to “blend in.”

    2. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      Bart,

      Bundy killed college woman and girls because that was who he wanted to kill. It had nothing to do with how successful one was. Read my book lol!

  38. bart says:

    Shelley, just such things used to happen to bad guys who are very mobile :) But it is just a joke and your parallels are interesting. Interesting is also the area of killer’s hunting grounds. I think Gary Ridgway operated within quite a small area. Comparing to Bundy (in this very aspect) he was just a midget. :)

  39. Shelley says:

    Pee Wee Gaskins was a serial killer with an interesting parallel to Bundy. While at the Florence County courthouse in South Carolina, a deputy had removed his handcuffs while he waited for his attorney and prosecutor, Pee Wee escaped by jumping thirty feet out of a second story window. He went into the swamps and evaded re-capture for a few weeks.

    Another parallel – Bundy wasn’t the only one caught by patrol officers. Here’s some more:

    Randy Kraft:
    An illegal lane change with a dead body in the passenger seat.

    Joel Rifkin:
    Driving his pickup truck without license plates with a dead body in the back.

    Cody Legebokoff:
    Officer suspected the vehicle of speeding and signaled for it to pull over and observed blood on his clothing.

    David Berkowitz:
    Parked his car near a fire hydrant and was issued a ticket that put him in the area of one of the killings and the police followed up on that.

    Larry Eyler:
    Stopped by a cop for parking on a highway. His passenger was tied up.

    There are other lesser known killers and other criminals.

    Hats off to alert patrol officers doing their job!

  40. Hal says:

    Just catching up on a load of messages – thanks to whoever posted the link to the recent documentary.

    Someone asked about DNA and Bundy’s parentage. I posted about this before – to the best of my knowledge, this question can be answered definitively by comparing Bundy’s DNA (in the file) to that of a step-sibling (presumably not already in evidence).

    If ‘Jack Worthington’ is Bundy’s father, the results would be as expected between half siblings. If Bundy’s biological father was Louise’s father, Bundy would have no DNA not shared by his siblings.

    There would be no doubt at all. If he was fathered by *any* blood relative of his mother’s, it would show up. The problem would be getting a half sibling to submit blood for testing, especially if they knew why. And for someone looking into Bundy at this late stage to have the desire to find out. It’s entirely possible, I suppose, that no one is interested.

    I’m not entirely sure about this, but from my limited knowledge of DNA, I also have a suspicion that they could work it out on Ted’s blood alone. His grandfather would be the source of 75% of his make-up, not 25% and I *think* specialists can determine that sort of thing.

    It’s also possible that the answer to this is known already, they just see no reason to announce it to the world.

  41. bart says:

    Sorry if this topic was raised earlier in this thread. Actually it is not my idea, but Richard Duffus “question mark” pointed out in our private correspondence. Namely did the families of Bundy’s FL victims sue the state of Colorado of ignoring the danger of Bundy after his first escape? And if not, why is that? It was/it is legally impossible to perform? Why wasn’t Bundy transferred into some Colorado maximum security prison? Colorado didn’t have the ones like this? :) At the time of his first escape Bundy wasn’t just a regular prisoner – like car thief – he was convicted on DaRonch case, major suspect in dozens of murders in Washington and Utah and awaiting trial for Caryn Campbell abduction and murder. Wasn’t the reaction of Colorado prison authorities after Bundy recapture weak and inadequate? Wasn’t it worth a lawsuit?

  42. jane says:

    Wow Chuck. Sounds like a very relaxed attitude on the part of law enforcement. Wasn’t anyone afraid of a hostage-taking situation, especially with you being an unarmed child and the door clanging behind you? Apparently not.

    1. Chuck Halverson says:

      I know doesn’t it? Especially if they “surrounded Aspen” to catch him. Believe me, I thought of all the angles too even getting a bit ticked at my dad for letting it happen. He’s been gone for 12 years now. I was born in 1970, So I was at least 7 when it happened. I still remember the atmosphere being loose and jovial.

      1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

        Hey Chuck…

        Are you sure that was Bundy? I’m not so sure he would have had such freedom for that to happen. But no matter, that’s quite the story, and you certainly “brushed shoulders” with Bundy, as that’s where he was being housed.

        Glad you stopped by…

        Kevin

        1. Chuck Halverson says:

          Oh yes, I wouldn’t really have thought about it again, until my parents brought it up again in the late 80’s, asking if I remembered that jail visit and having the zap moment of connecting the events in Florida.

          1. Chuck Halverson says:

            events in Florida in the news I mean.

          2. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

            Thanks for sharing, Chuck. :)

  43. Chuck Halverson says:

    I personally got a jail tour of the Garfield County jail by Ted Bundy after he was caught in Aspen. My dad got his EMT pagers recharged at the Sheriffs office in Glenwood Springs (the one he escaped out of ceiling) and we went on a Saturday and a guys was leaning out through the bars and somehow it being the 70’s (is all I can figure) The sheriff asked me if I wanted a tour. My dad somehow told me to go for it and this Bundy put his arm around my shoulders and I walked a short distance down a hall with him and back. I saw another guy watching TV (which I thought was strange being a kid seeing a TV in a jail)…The worst thing at that time for me was the jail door being shut behind me…The whole thing didn’t last more than 5 minutes and I really had no idea what he had done at the time I saw him. It wasn’t until the late 80’s when he started showing up in the news again that I recognized him after my parents reminded me of him. What bugs me the most is that when I met him he was in between murders and its weird I met someone who went to the chair……….

    1. Brad says:

      Hi all,

      This may or may not have been posted, check it out if you’re on the bundy trail.

  44. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi All!

    The Kindle edition of my book, The Bundy Murders, is back at $3.99 for a limited time. But that means, once you purchase the Kindle edition, you can get the 12 hour audio book for only $3.99 too!
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Bundy-Murders-Comprehensive-History-ebook/dp/B002XDQGXC

  45. jane says:

    Kevin – My Bundy books and DVDs fly out of the house in a week when I put them on sale at Amazon (including yours). That’s good news for your new book – I’m sure it will fly off the shelves. I don’t keep them because I have lots of books and limited space.

    I say this because I have no refernce in front of me right now but I’m pretty positive it’s what Bundy told Thompson outside the law library. He may have also said it to the Florida detectives. He said the “digging” comment and the “straws to make a broom” comment.

    Isn’t Thompson the person who gave you the garbage bag? Why doesn’t he join the conversation here?

    1. Kevin M Sullivan says:

      No, Bundy never made that statement to Thompson. He was actually taunting the detective and wouldn’t have offered such a statement. However, he was forthright with the Florida investigators and willingly gave them that info. And I compare the two meetings in my book.

      Yes, Jerry did give me the Glad bag from Bundy’s car. But no, Jerry wouldn’t want to answer questions here. He’s not that kind of person.

      See ya!

  46. jane says:

    Fair enough. Still it would be a brilliant place to hide the unexplainable from a nosy girlfriend who’s already found your bag of different size women’s underwear.

    Rings & earrings: souveneirs that can be kept close by for reminiscences buried right there in the dirt. The pampering of the plant in front of people who noticed the pampering might be a double check that nothing is visible to visitors: “Hey Ted, there’s a gold earring in your plant.”

    Do you think the statement to Thompson: “The evidence is there. Keep digging.” (as reported by Thompson) meant nothing? It’s just an odd thing to say to a detective who is investigating him for murder, don’t you think?

    1. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

      I agree with you: It would be a good place to hide these things. And I’m not saying Bundy didn’t do that, or think of doing that. All we know for sure, is that he did like plants to some degree.

      The statement you’re referring to was uttered by Bundy to the Florida detectives. That said, Bundy did taunt Jerry Thompson, likening the gathering of evidence to the gathering of straws; and telling him he could build a broom that way lol!

      Of course, that’s exactly what Thompson did, and Ted got swept away by that broom.

      Bundy did have photographs of his victims stashed away in the utility room when Thompson and crew came to search his upstairs apartment at 565 First Avenue. Once he was out on bail, he got rid of them.

    2. Tony says:

      I wonder how Ted “explained away” all that ladies’ underwear to his significant other, LoL.

  47. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi Jane,

    I think Bundy just liked plants. I don’t think it meant a lot more to him than that. I remember once being told how Bundy one day stopped his VW, entered a department store and took a small tree from the display window and walked out the front door and drove off with it.

    In other words…I think Bundy had good taste as a decorator! Lol!

  48. jane says:

    Hi Kevin and all. I hope bloggers show up here on this spooky night. It’s the perfect night to blog on the topic waiting for the trick or treaters.

    Several books (more than one) mentioned that he had a beloved plant that he called “Fern” I believe (or another female name). He fussed over it and even took it to Utah. Seems like an insignificant thing to mention in books with so much high drama. Why would anyone even bring up this plant. UNLESS…..there is something subconcious about this plant that merited mention in their books.

    Remember Thompson’s encounted with Bundy at the Utah Law Library. He told JT “The evidence is there. Keep digging.”

    Knowing TB’s fondness for wordplay, it made me theorize what better place to hide souvenirs, such as jewelry, than in the dirt of that plant. Who would look there or empty out the dirt of a plant? “Keep digging. The evidence is there.” Why was more than one author putting information about A PLANT into their books? The subconscious mind is instinctive and intuitive, and I imagine something clicked with them without the authors really knowing why.that plant was worth mentioning.

    While it may be speculation, I think it’s ok to run with this kind of thing on a blog. Don’t you?.

    .

  49. Kevin M. Sullivan says:

    Hi all!

    Bundy was a user of people, and there’s nothing he wouldn’t steal; including cash. He was, in fact, an expert thief.

  50. jane says:

    Why on earth would you think he’d never steal cash? There’s not a doubt in my mind that if he could steal something valuable – be it cash or otherwise – he’d do it. Is borrowing & knowing you’d never pay it back stealing? As Fiz mentioned, he “borrowed” money from an older lady and never paid it back. That lady called his mother who – it is reported – laughed it off and basically told her she’d been punked: good luck getting that dough back. Bart, I think you are romanticizing this creep, as if he had any scruples at all. He didn’t have a decent bone in his body as far as I can tell. He “borrowed” from Kloepner too – tuition, etc. I’ll bet she never saw that money again either.

    He had a pathological lack of respect for the boundaries of other people, be it “peeping” into their houses, stealing money or valuables, or “stealing” lives. Why you think he would be above taking their cash is beyond me.

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!


Recent Comments

  • jimmy45: Incorrect. German military was OFTEN subject to summary execution in the field. 3 actual examples from...
  • Sarah Johnson: Well, G.D., while I don’t know Charles II’s specific reasons, I think Vane’s trial...
  • G.D. Hodgson: I have searched over many years without success to unearth just what this enigmatic historical...
  • Lynda Norris: Dear Rudy: You are family! Was Nestor Flores your father or grandfather? Travis from the above reply is...
  • markb: Hello, Bart. i am also into a writing project. i would recommend you take a good look at dennis rader, the...