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:
-
Video of Wildwood Inn, where Bundy abducted Caryn Campbell in 1975. (From Timmy)
Thread commenter Richard A. Duffus wrote a 2012 book about Ted Bundy, Ted Bundy: The Felon’s Hook (Excerpt | Image from the book)
Video interview of Kevin M. Sullivan (From Richard A. Duffus)
On this day..
- 1522: Didrik Slagheck
- 1887: Georgette and Sylvain Thomas, guillotine couples act
- 1981: Not Kim Dae-jung, South Korean president and Nobel laureate
- 1641: Not Manuel de Gerrit de Reus, chosen by lot, saved by hemp
- 1970: Three in Baghdad
- 1538: Anna Jansz, Anabaptist
- 1963: Lazhar Chraiti and nine other Tunisian conspirators
- 1846: Elizabeth Van Valkenburgh, in her rocking chair
- 1936: Allen Foster, who fought Joe Louis
- 1911: Shusui Kotoku and ten other anarchists
- Daily Double: The High Treason Incident
- 1938: Han Fuqu, Koumintang general
- 1992: Ricky Ray Rector, "a date which ought to live in infamy for the Democratic Party"
Wow, where is everyone?
Thanks Kevin. I hope you can see the value and even importance of this endeavor for crime researchers as well as the famalies of potential victims seeking closure -even at this late date; perhaps you might even be able to turn this into an article for publication.
JRJ
I am close to agree with post nr 1946.
I think Bundy – back in prison – when being interviewed by M&A was not only trying to make his guilt smaller- but he was also fantasizing, day-dreaming in his dirty, twisted way.
Of course – we cannot know this for sure – but I think – he was idealizing his approach to the victim (even in the third person) and the whole process of the crime.
He was telling what he had wanted to occur – not what really occured.
So he was telling his “ideal stories” on how he dealt with victims – and that was – IMHO – far from facts.
He was coward and pervert – he wanted his victims to be mute and defenseless – as soon as possible. Moreover, he preferred them to be a as dolls not as human beings.
This whole speeaches in front of victims, shouting, abusing – which we see in 2002, 2009 Bundy movies – are probably just script fiction.
I hope so – at least.
Lorraine–Thanks so much for the photos. It really helps to put into perspective the short distances you mentioned. It seems there was nothing at all “scary” about this section of OSU, which reinforces the idea that Kathy probably felt comfortable enough to go to the parking lot. I am a graduate student at a major university, so it’s easy for me to imagine spaces on my own campus that seem just as safe and non-threatening.
Vidor–Regarding #1860, yes, I agree with you (and my previous post) that there’s not much reason to believe the facts Bundy presented in the third-person confessions (though they are valuable for insights into how he perceived himself). I think in the case of the Kathy Parks abduction, all we know for sure is that she received massive trauma to the skull. In TB’s confession, he makes no mention of the one fact we know to be the true. Rather, he depicts himself as a rapist driving through WA state in a state of anxiety (and perhaps indecision) about what to do with his victim, rather than what he was–a murderer with an overwhelming desire to kill. I think from the facts we have from other cases–the skull fractures, and the condition of Melissa Smith’s and Laura Aime’s remains–there is not much to suggest that TB needed or even wanted conscious victims. I think it’s most likely that Kathy Parks was not conscious when she entered Washington State (or perhaps even the Corvallis city limits), but of course we’ll never know for sure.
Lorraine!!
What a great job you did with the pictures, and the info that goes with it! And I believe you’re correct about where Bundy most likely parked his VW. It was the most ideal place, and so close to his hunting grounds – the library – and as you say, dimly lit and very easy to walk to.
Seeing these pictures really gives one a “feel” for how Bundy must have quickly deduced the advantages of being at this spot on the OSU campus at that time of night.
Thanks so much for taking the time to go where most of us are unable to go; at least for the time being. and thanks for sharing them with us!
Kevin
I wonder also what would have happened if L’s and K’s paths had not crossed that very night?
We can assume:
Bundy was “after” L – starting from the library – attracted by her looks.
But L showed not interest in him at all at two occassiona back in library.
She was focused and on term paper
And she generally is a “strong teenager” – not a vulnerable one.
She remembered him a strange bag carrying man – without pencil.
So I think when L was going out of library (finally to meet K) – Bundy was following L just automatically – but he was in the
“unhappy” (for him) process of “dismissing” her.
He was just walking outside- to take a look around – and find someone else.
Then Kathy appeared.
That might be very controversive what I gonna say now- specially to L and her memories
But I think – if Bundy would still decide to try L – one more time again – whatever ruse he could try – he would probably end up running away beaten – if not just detained by campus security staff.
And L would turn to become very early version of Carole DaRonch.
I would be delighted to see Bundy in custody on early May 1974 instead of August 1975.
Dozens of lives would be saved.
But he probably sensed this danger.
In Crisis Center – that was something different as he was working on the phone and answering the calls placed by women in trouble.
But yes you are right Topelius – Bundy seems to be “devil incarnated”.with his “sixth sense” to detect and “consolate” woman in despair. He was good at it.
I can feel the same way – he select Liz K.
Woman in trouble, easy to manipulate.
That was probable scenerio of the how situation developed that fateful night in Cornallis.
He was good dresser, he was good looking, friendly, articulate.
He aproached Kathy, smiled and probably asked ”
“Why are you so sad, young lady? Maybe I can help you”.
Real horror – to think about.
Topelius, yes! I recall reading that too! Excellent point!
Lorraine
Ann Rule said that in Crisis Center, Bundy was most successful with women who had problems in their relationships and who were somewhat depressed.
I still wonder how long (or rather how quick) did take Bundy to talk Kathy to leave the cafeteria.
She was young, lost in many thoughts – – as it was described here – but serious person – rather not the one who goes out with a stranger after 10-minut chat?
Did they talk at the Summons much longer – like 1-2 hours?
I doubt personally – although I have nothing to corroborate this.
But still I wonder if he used some extra ruse to make it quicker.
She was worried about Spanish exam (among other things) – maybe he BSd her – that he had some Spanish grad students to help her in that tavern.
BTW Does anybody here have any knowledge of Bundy speaking any foreign language – beside from strange American English (with Canadian or British accent) – which with time is said to transform into normal English?
I wonder about it – because Georgeann Hawking who died only month later – was also worried about Spanish exam. Aside from the fact – he is believed to use “crutches” ruse with her.
Bundy – with his chameleon like looks – might have pretended – to be partially Latino.
But I have no knowledge about – forgive me the word – “interracial relations”
back in early 70s in the USA (West Coast).
I don’t know if playing Latino would be an “extra point” for Bundy for fulfilling his macabre tasks. After all, Kathy was California girl – Latino people probably were not something “spectular” for her. The other case with Hawkings who was – as far as I know – native Washingtonian.
Sorry if I insult here someone – but it is because my poor English, I didn’t have such intentions.
I am just asking questions – probably never to be answered.
I really should have proofread my last comment, sorry. “There are (and were) no taverns within walking distance to the tavern…” should of course, read “There are (and were) no taverns within walking distance from the campus….”
Ugh, can’t edit after you submit, lol. cafeteria) should be cafeteria”.
L
Hi guys,
I just realized that I failed to upload my picture of the library, which I will do as soon as I remember how we resized them for PhotoBucket.
Bart-The Commons was a frequent hangout after the library closed… the only place on campus to get coffee if you intended to “pull an all nighter” studying, for example, so I can only guess it was quite busy, and no, a “normal looking couple” would probably not have stood out.
If he had followed me from the library, I imagine he stopped and stood near the Commons steps as he watched Kathy and I talk, and perhaps watched her enter the Commons and followed her. There are (and were) no taverns within walking distance to the tavern, but “Mother’s Mattress Factory” was a favorite of Kathy’s, and if we believe that he lured her with a tavern in mind, she may have suggested it.
A couple of nights after telling Kevin about my library experience, I actually had my 1st nightmare in many years about this. As per Kevin’s suggestion in his book (Bundy perhaps following me from the library), in my nightmare, Bundy told Kathy how “unlucky she was”, because he was “following the girl you were talking to before entering the cafeteria). I woke up in a cold sweat, thinking that Kathy died hating me. I’ll never know exactly what happened of course, but it sure wasn’t a “good night’s sleep”.
Anyway, I am glad you two liked the pictures 🙂
Lorraine
This “photo story” is so valuable and so.. thrilling
This area looks so quiet and peaceful.
It was even almost the same time of the year – now April – then May.
I wonder what were Bundy’s moves that night?
Did he manage to eavesdrop on K. and L. talking?
Then did he follow K. to the cafeteria, then he sat close to her and started chatting?
Or maybe he first entered the cafeteria and waited for her – or for someone else.
Probably the first option is more plausible – as he is believed to follow L. from back the library.
I wonder how long was this chat between Bundy and K. until they left Commons?
This might be very short – maybe even a couple of minutes – because how come nobody at the Commons saw them talking?
Was the Commons almost empty at this hour of that night?
Or – oppositely – the Commons was full enough not to pay attention to some normal looking couple?
In “The Only Living Witness” – in its fragment relating to K. abduction Bundy says (in third person) that “the individual” offered the girl in cafeteria walk (drive?) to the tavern in the neighborhood. But afterwards he admits – he naturally never meant to go there – as he didn’t want to draw attention on him and K together.
The same case at the Commons – he probably focused on talking / luring K. out of the Commons as quickly as possible – “to the tavern”
BTW – what tavern might it be?
Some place very close to the Commons – so he could say for example to the girl “We can go there by foot , but I got a car over there so let’s drive”?
A word for Kevin, as he is the person whom I perceive a kind a host here and the most valuable man.
I am back here – because I am too much “addicted on topics here.
I know my “sins” – but I will change.
I promise I will strictly obey its forum rules.
I am not gonna “bully” anybody here– or even refer to anybody from this forum in person – even if I am abused.
And I am absolutely not gonna talk “victims topic” – the thing the was found so annoying. I decided to quit this project.
I know, Kevin – you are former minister – so you surely can believe in rehabilitation.
BTW as ar as I know Jesus never forbade anyone to take part in any discussion.
Lorraine, wow! you did an excellent job there.
No doubt, it was painful (but necessary) for you to revisit some of those locations. Thanks so much for sharing the photos with us. Whether or not the odd guy in the library was Ted Bundy, one thing is for sure, he way very close by. It sends an icy cold shiver down the spine to think that he was in such close proximity to you on that fateful night. In some ways, you were very lucky.
Note to Bart: Although, and i am sure this is the case, your intentions may have been good, your approach came across as callous, but you appear to acknowledge this now. Nobody hates you on here.
OOOps… what I repeatedly refer to as “Jefferson Street” is actually “Jefferson Way”.
L
I have completed and posted my pictorial at PhotoBucket (thanks again to Monica) but I would like to preface the link with a bit of information. Also, as Monica suggested, I have made the page private, so as to be available only to the readers here, so I will also provide you with the password.
The pictorial is sequenced in the order which pertained to Kathy’s journey that night, aside from the 1st picture, which is the map (and legend-scroll right if not immediately visable) and the 2nd, which is the “Welcome to OSU” sign, simply added for authenticity, lol. In the map legend you will note letter/number labels which correspond with landmarks (labelled in red) on the map and also with the pictures I have posted.
We begin at Sackett Hall, the dorm that Kathy and I lived in, and proceed down Jefferson Street toward the Memorial Union Commons, which was Kathy’s destination. I have included a picture of the exact place Kathy and I met and talked as she approached the Commons and I returned to Sackett Hall from my night at the library. I included a picture of Weatherford Hall, kitty-corner from the Commons, because that is where the group of men I had been tagging behind from the library (after my creepy encounter) crossed the street just as I spotted Kathy coming towards me.
I would like to draw your attention to the parking area on 26th street. This is where I believe Bundy’s VW was parked. It is easily reached from the rear exit of the Commons, also pictured, but is surrounded by lecture halls which, of course were vacant at 11:00 at night. You will notice a street lamp on 26th Street, but these were quite dimly lit, and few and far between. There are no living quarters or places of business on 26th Street, once you go beyond the Commons, located at the corner of 26th and Jefferson Streets. Directly behind the Commons and adjacent to the parking area is a large grassy field, also pictured.
I believe that Bundy was parked in the labeled area on 26th Street, and engaged Kathy in conversation inside the cafeteria. I believe he convinced her to leave with him, indicated that his car was “just out back” and led her out the back door of the Commons and down 26th Street.
26th is (was) dimly lit, because no one really would have cause to be there after classes ceased for the evening. Kathy (and Bundy) could easily have seen the parking area, so he could have said “there’s my car”; but by the time they reached the car, she would have been in a very dimly lit area with no pedestrian or vehicle traffic. They would have been barely visable to anyone walking down Jefferson Street, and it is extremely unlikely that anyone would have been anywhere nearby in either of the other 3 directions.
If Bundy had planted his crowbar beneath the car, he could easily have incapacitated Kathy, restrained her and put her in his car without anyone seeing or hearing anything. After classes were over for the night, virtually no one took the rear exit when leaving the Commons.
When I made my trip to Corvallis, for the 1st time since formulating my theory, I was actually sickened by the distances, remoteness of the parking area while still so close to the Commons, and the minimal amount of light given off by the street lamps on 26th Street. They all made my theory so plausable….
If you’d like to view my pictures, simply click on the link http://s1009.photobucket.com/albums/af215/ForKathy/OSU%20-%20Kathy%20Parks/ (or, cut and paste it into your browser if you cant click on it), and type in the password “ExecutedToday”.
Vidor 🙂 it was your post that motivated me to do this, so I hope you see what I mean about it being unlikely that Bundy “waited in the shadows”. Kathy would certainly have remained on Jefferson Street (still amply populated with pedestrians) on her way to the Commons. Had he stood in wait on the dimly lit 26th Street, he could have stood there til daylight without a victim: Kathy ( or anyone else) would have no reason to go there. And, I get goose bumps as I type, because, while I never put 2+2 together prior to chats with Kevin, I also believe it was Bundy in the library, and that he was following me. I think his initial plan, and why I believe he parked where he did, is that he had done his homework, realized the Commons was the only place (on campus) open late at night, and while, at that point in his killing career he favored libraries for “hunting”, he probably hoped to find a victim in the library and suggest a “bite” at the Commons cafeteria (the parking area was just so PERFECT). This is my theory. I have given it a lot of thought. Geographically and situationally it fits. What do you guys think?
Lorraine
JRJ–
Didn’t we talk of this before? And didn’t I promise you (or somebody) that I’d get this info up at this site? And didn’t I then go on with my life and forget it? LOL!!!
Okay, give me a little time, and I PROMISE TO AT LEAST HUNT FOR THE INFO! The problem is this: I’ve got to retrieve my files from several file cabinets and begin the search, and with everything else on my plate, it’s like I just don’t have the time. But I promise you I’ll make time. There are literally thousands of pages I will need to look over, but with any luck, I’ll be able to move through a lot of it rather quickly. I’ll try to post something late in the week or over the weekend (I have to submit a book proposal to a publisher in the next few days, but I’ll “git ‘er done” as that comedian likes to say.
Can I break silence for a moment?
Even me – who is now absolutely aware (thanks to KYGB) that I “lack the investigative skills, sophistication, and command of the English language”.
Plus now I DO know (again thanks to KYGB ) that ” I have shown absolutely no skills whatsoever in my ability to contact these people (“vicitim surviviors) and converse with them.
Again – even me – “bully” or “bull in china store” – I am deeply disturbed with refering to “victim survivor” with Bundy quote.
“Send my love to my friend and my family” – come on, folks – addressing this to the the person who was close to victim – who was last to see her alive before her friend fell prey to creepy monster – it is nightmare!
It is not black humour – it is crossing of all boundaries.
One can find no excuse for it.
It like disguising as Nazi police officers and scarying my Mother who as 4-5 y kid survived Nazi-occupation – and has many traumas even after 70 years.
lol I was the first to blame for putting Mrs L in discomfort and make her withdraw from this thread – but I have a feelling I lost my “champion status”.
After all, I am still the most-hated person here.
Vidor–
“She recounts Ted’s description of the murder of the Idaho hitchhiker” Some food for thought:
First, I believe Bundy did in fact tell Polly Nelson those things recorded about the Idaho hitchhiker murder contained in her book. However, if he was referring to the Sept. 2, 1974 hitchhiker, then he may have lied to her. And here’s why:
Bundy told Polly Nelson “he had been driving around the hills of Idaho”. However, in Bundy’s confession to Russ Reneau, he states he spotted her while traveling on 84 at the top of the on ramp of the freeway, on the outskirts of Boise (see my book) and after giving her a ride, they road along this freeway for awhile, apparently without incident. Also, the passage in her book that they “drove across the state line to a secluded…” This was virtually impossible, if it’s the Sept. 2, ’74 murder, as he wouldn’t have changed directions; and in fact, gave no indication to Reneau that he did so. I also highly doubt that he returned the next day to mutilate the girl, as he told Nelson. In the Idaho confessions, he simply said he placed her in the river, along with her clothes. Her backpack he discarded in salt lake City.
Now, I say again, I do believe what is stated in Nelson’s book did in fact come from the mouth of Ted Bundy. All I’m saying is that I doubt its veracity, and I believe Bundy “came clean” with Russ Reneau. Keep in mind, Bill Hagmaier was with Ted as well. And of course, I follow this trail in my book.
Kevin, recently you once again (# 1881) mentioned that you have come across a number of cases with Ted’s MO written all over them. Any chance of you coming up with a list of POTENTIAL additional Bundy victims? This would be indispensible to future researchers of the case!
Here’s mine list of 11 Additional Potential Victims (Not all of which I would agree with):
Ann Marie Burr (8) 13 Aug 1961
Lonnie Trumbull (20) 23 Jun 1966
Lisa Wick (20) 23 Jun 1966
Susan Davis (19) ~27 May 1969
Elizabeth Perry (19) ~27 May 1969
Rita Curran 19 Jul 1971
Jeanntte Kamahele (20) Apr 1972
Unknown Hitchhiker May 1973
Rita Lorraine Jolly (17) 29 Jun 1973
Vicki Lynn Hollar (24) 20 Aug 1973
Carol Valenzuela (20) 02 Aug 1974
Thanks,
JRJ
kris, here’s why we don’t believe the link you posted:
Because no one else ever wrote anything remotely like that.
Now, given that, you have to ask how did this person find out this information? As far as I know, the Bundy family has never talked to anyone in the media, ever. I think Kevin wrote something upthread about Louise Bundy being in a nursing home. Ted’s been dead for 21 years. Where did this story come from? If it were real, then it must have been a new revelation, as none of the Bundy writers have ever mentioned it. What’s the source?
Now, more pleasant matters…
I basically agree with the evaluation of the “canon” in post #1910. Liz Kloepfer’s book is pretty much superfluous. All the best anecdotes in it have already been printed in other books. Also, she’s a little bit too worshipful of Ted, still. And reading it gives one the creepy feeling that she’s never have gone to the cops if Ted had remained in the Seattle area instead of sailing off to Utah and leaving their relationship hanging. Easily skippable.
Larsen’s book contained little of value, I think, other than the anecdote of when he met Ted in 1972 and interviewed him, and the story of the interview he got b/f Ted went to jail for kidnapping. Plus, there’s that weird story about Ted being seen in the company of Laura Aime, which is mystifying.
Rule’s book is worth buying for nothing more than her account of working alongside Ted at the Crisis Clinic. But she’s not a very good writer, she exaggerates the importance of her relationship with Ted, and there are a couple of really ridiculous bits in the book, like her notion that she, Ann Rule, had a chance to bargain with the Florida authorities to have Ted sent back to Washington.
The M&A books are the best on Bundy. Simply indispensable. Stephen Michaud is in fact an oustanding prose stylist. Absolutely brilliant. Plus the fact that, through their “speculations”, they got closer to Ted’s inner world than anybody except for William Hagmaier, who never wrote a book.
I agree that Polly Nelson’s book is odd. I wouldn’t be as harsh about it but it is a weird book–she does get too close to Ted, the book is cluttered up with legal minutiae, and she actually believed her and Jim Coleman’s ridiculous incompetency argument. But it is still indispensable. She offers unique insight on Ted’s pathology. She recounts Ted’s description of the murder of the Idaho hitchhiker. And she offered more information about Carole Ann Boone than anyone else ever did. A bad book, yes, but one that must be read by students of the case.
Keppel’s book is also indispensable. But one should realize that it’s actually about highlights from Bob Keppel’s career, not a Bundy bio. Keppel offers a detailed history of the investigation in Washington state, more detailed info on his consultations with Bundy about the Green River Killer, and finally still more detail on Bundy’s confessions to Keppel regarding the Georgann Hawkins murder. But there is very little in the book about any of Ted’s crimes outside of Washington state except for his confession of the Cunningham murder, which Keppel does include, maybe to compare it to the very similar Hawkins murder.
Yes, i totally agree with Kevin and Barry on this one. It is fine to disagree with each others points of view/and or theories( everyone on here is perfectly entitled to their own opinion),but it should be done in a mature way, without the need to insult one another. It has gotten to a stage where it has become petty (each needing to have the last word), and uncomfortable for others on here. I, for one, don’t like confrontation, it is upsetting to see other people’s feeling’s hurt.
Sorry for the ? question mark typo in my post above lol
yeah thanks Kevin for making that point clear. getting very tired of these pointless arguments and its very frustrating after reading a few interestin posts u have to go through all the argument ones.
Anyway yeah lets start anew as kevin says.
-Kris
very interesting point regarding the war vetereans and bundy and as kevin pointed out although some soldiers may take a little excitement or pleasure in killing another, they dont do it for there personal pleasure and humilate and mutate victims.
-Topelius
yeah that lieing point was interesting but what if the interviewer was sitting to the right of bundy then i guess he would have to look to the left wen hes lieing LOL
Well i read and interesting comment a guy left on a bundy youtube video. He said this:
In his country (Sweden i believe) there was a guy who killed 3 girls and inside of? the victims clothes the killer had left pictures of Ted Bundy.
Really interesting. I contacted the guy who left the comment asking him for more information or news articles about it. Im waiting on a reply back so im not sure how truthful the story is yet but i guess whoever this killer was saw ted as an inspiration.
Barry
KYGB, regarding posting images from Photobucket back to this site: when you click on your album (or and individual photo), just copying and pasting the address that comes up in the search bar, appears to do the trick. To try it out, i have uploaded some comical Ted Bundy images. They are really funny, check them out!
http://s984.photobucket.com/albums/ae327/catty_013/Ted%20Bundy%20-%20Funny%20Images/
Just click on the individual pictures to see the enlarged version.
Lorraine, i forgot to mention: Be sure to Make your album “Private”, if you only want to share the photographs with us here on this forum. You will find that option under “Account settings.”
My I step in for a moment?
I am not casting blame on anyone at this site for any of the mini arguments that have erupted over the last week or so. True, I had to clamp down on Bart, who was beginning to show the unmistakable tendency of one who wishes to control things; something I was not about to allow if I could stop it in its tracks.
Beyond this, however, there have been accusations cast about for whatever reason, and i understand, since we are all opinionated folks (LOL!) that we will not always agree on everything. And that’s okay. However, we must maintain our civility at all times, and as such, I am going to ask everyone of you to please make a concerted effort to be especially nice when you do not agree with something; as it’s okay not to agree. But PLEASE, be respectful in doing so. Doing things this way will ensure that the feeling of others will not be stepped upon, and we can still have a good time learning about Ted-the-monster, the victims and their families, and every aspect of this case.
On a personal note: One might be inclined to think that, since I’ve written a book about Ted Bundy, I know everything there is to know about the case. Well, this is not true. I do consider myself an “expert” in discussing the life of Bundy, because you can’t do the type of research that I’ve done, and you can’t write an entire bio of a person like THE BUNDY MURDERS without knowing about that life intimately, and so on. And when you do these things you get a “feel” for the case, and from that, make judgments about certain things which may be- probably are in fact- true. For example, when I wrote about Kathy Parks and her meeting with Lorraine Fargo only moments before she was abducted, I stated the following two things which have turned out to be true: 1: that Bundy may have spotted Lorraine first, and 2: the letter Kathy mailed to her boyfriend, post maked May 7th, ” may have been mailed that evening, possibly placed in a mail box just a short time before her disappearance.” P. 28 of my book.
Well, these are things I felt were most likely accurate for that night, and prior to the publication of my book, I had not had any contact with Lorraine to see if she could shed any light on these (some would say trivial, but I don’t) things.
Well, for God’s sake, can you imagine my surprise when I learned from Lorraine the story about the guy bothering her in the library (and I personally believe it was Bundy) and then that she SAW THE LETTER IN KATHY’S HAND AS THEY TALKED, AND THAT THEY WERE VERY CLOSE TO THE MAIL BOX WHICH SHE MUST HAVE PLACED IT IN AFTER THEIR CONVERSATION? !!!!!! Now, does everyone see the importance of this site? A couple of valid questions were answered pertaining to the case where it relates to Kathy Parks!
Now, I was right on target in my assumptions, but oh, how nice it would have been had I known this when I was writing the book. I could have mentioned the letter in her hand as they talked, and how this strange fellow was bothering Lorraine as she was in the library.
So these are important things folks, and there are more things to be discovered about these crimes. As such, let us all be nice and polite, so as not to create problems; especially when we are supposed to be having a good time and learning things in the process.
And no, I am not pointing the finger at anyone. We are all okay in this matter now (right?) and so let us start anew.
OMG, Kris has now called me an egotist, COMPARED ME TO BUNDY, and in the same paragraph, suggested I “give her love to my friends and family”. That’s over the line, lady.
I didn’t come here for abuse, nor will I tolerate it.
L
Hi Kris–
Terrible things happen in war. Innocent people (not combatants) are sometimes killed along side the armies fighting it out. If, in these cases, the deaths were unintentional, then I believe the ultimate blame must rest with those who started the war. After all, without a war, they wouldn’t be dead, right? Now, God’s ways are higher than our ways, so I do not presume to speak for God. That said, the aforementioned info, I believe, may be the best way to look at it, at least for the present time, LOL! I know that whenever compassion can be shown in war, it should be. But again, tough choices must be made when conducting combat. And when the lives of your people are on the line, you must move swiftly and violently against the enemy to bring about your intended aims. It’s a dirty job, and when it needs to be done, you need to do it right. After all, it was ONLY because we, the British, and the Russians kept killing Germans in such large numbers, that they stopped making war and killing Jews. They didn’t stop because we asked them to stop. We had to force them to stop.
As far as Christian theology is concerned, we (everyone) must truly repent of our sins, and turn to Christ for forgiveness. That is, we must recognize that what he has done on the cross (the paying for our sins) is enough, and we need to call on him, asking for his forgiveness and to save us. According to Romans chapter 10, verses 9 and 10, this is what we must do.
Now, as to Ted Bundy, and what I think about his “conversion”. Well, I do not expect to see him in Heaven. And not because God wouldn’t have forgiven him. On the contrary: God very much wanted to save Theodore Bundy, but the hang up was, in my opinion, Bundy was too far gone to actually feel the need to repent, or otherwise fell badly about what he had done.
See ya…
At this risk of starting more trouble, dept…
I, too, found Rhawn Joseph’s article problematical. I have some of the same concerns that others have mentioned, but I also found fault in a couple other areas.
He states that Ted grew up in an abusive home both with his grandparents and in Johnny and Louise’s home in Tacoma. The abuse problems with Sam Cowell have reached legendary status. But Johnny Bundy abusing Louise (and Ted presumably)? I’ve never read a word about that. Johnny Bundy was a very quiet guy. If he is ever criticized, it was for being an underachiever. i don’t know where the author got that information. If there is some kind of footnote on that one, I’d like to see it.
The other point that seemed strange was the fact that Rhawn Joseph said Ted killed 40 young women. I’ve seen lot’s of different figures credited to Ted. 35, 36, over 100, but never have I seem the number 40 used as his total of murder. Where did Rhawn Joseph get that number? Did he have 40 names or did he pull that figure out of hat?
I really don’t put a lot of credence in that article. The tone of it seemed strange to say the least.
Man, this site is hopping today. Need to take care of some “old business”. Lorraine, I’d like to return your post of thanks by saying you are most welcome.
You really didn’t have to thank me with that post. I got all the thanks I’ve needed by your great posts about your time with Kathy Parks. That post about Bundy cruising you in the library will probably go down as one of the best posts ever in this huge thread. So thanks back at ya.
As far as Photobucket, I’ve used that one. It’s pretty good, but a little tricky. Can’t say I’ve figured out how to post photo’s back to this site. Better get your ‘tech staff” to help you do that one.
Be sure to post those pics when you get it figured out. I would sure like to see ’em.
Kevin,
Thanks for explaining that. It has me wondering, though, if those in the government who give the actual order to kill without caring for whom gets “murdered” along the way (including innocent bystanders- women and children), would be held accountable in some way.
I agree that murder for pleasure is clearly the worst, but war killing is often “killing for power”, or (even further back) killing to conquer and take land.
On the same topic, do you believe ted really converted in the end and believed God might forgive him for his sins? Don’t some faiths believe that you automatically receive God’s forgiveness as long as you confess to your sins and ask for forgiveness?
Thanks for all your insights here.
Oh Lorraine, please don’t lose your head over all this. You’re right- it is ridiculous! You clearly don’t get what I was trying to say and I clearly don’t like your egotism and belittling. Instead of your taking my words out of context anymore, let’s just get back to productive discussion here about all things bundy and his victims. Go ahead, feel free to get the “last word” if you feel so inclined. Bundy had that need as well. I’m gonna take the high road here and say that I hope you can forgive me for any pain I may have caused you unintentionally in my posts. But I understand that kind of forgiveness is of God; if you have it, you have it, and if you don’t, maybe you’ll find it someday. And please give my love to your family and friends.
Topelius, as far as Bundy glancing to the right while lying… watch his final interview- he glances all over the place like a cross between a cat and a little boy trying to think up excuses to get out of trouble.
Topelius–
I believe glancing to the right means one is lying, but I’m not entirely sure, LOL!
As far as I’m concerned, Bundy is a very bad liar, and I’ve seen all of his interviews. He is a very bad liar, actually.
Hi Kris–
Excellent question about war, killing, murders, and how God fits in with it all!
Okay, first off: Killing a person, does not have to be murder. That is, killing in true self defense (someone trying to kill you, your family, other innocent people) is morally okay, and is within the confines of the law. Now, it may be a sad act, and one that follows the emotional life of the one who pulls the trigger, as it were, but there is nothing wrong with the act, as it saved innocent lives. So this is not murder.
Now, Ted Bundy committed murder, in the taking of innocent lives, and for his own pleasure. This is murder at its worst.
But when armies do battle, a rather strange thing occurs. First, in God’s eyes, I’m sure he can see the “right” and the “wrong” in all wars. And while not all wars are so clear to us as to which side is wrong or right, in WW2, it was very clear. Germany was attempting to take over their part of the world, and the Japanese were bent on conquering the Pacific. Okay, now lots of people were killing other people on both sides. And God knew what the Germans were doing, and I’ll bet if he was a betting person, he’d have been laying money on (and hoping) that Germany would be defeated. Having said this, however, it doesn’t mean God or anyone else should always blame the average soldier frighting on the wrong side of the team, if you will. In wars, people are drafted, etc, and armies are filled with all kinds of people; many of whom are normal individuals in peace time. Still, they kill each other in this thing called war, and while the result is technically speaking the same (death for an individual) it is certainly not the diabolical killing Ted Bundy was involved with, or any other murderers who prey on the innocent. Yes, soldiers kill, but almost always they are placed in that position by a government, unless, of course, they are soldier of fortune. This would place them in a somewhat different category.
Just remember, not all taking of life is wrong. At least, that’s my opinion.
I hope this helps.
Take care,
Kevin
Kris,
This is ridiculous. Please site the # of the post in which I claim to be an authority about Ted Bundy. Oh wait… never mind, there isn’t one, lol, but “I’ll forgive you” for suggesting that there was. All along I have made it very clear that until quite recently, I avoided all information about Ted Bundy.
Not that I owe you ANY explanation, (in fact I’ve grown very tired of your repeated attempts to justify your blatant rudeness to me) but, since you either do not retain what you have read, or you simply have not read my previous posts, I will say it one more time….. .
When my son googled my name one day, he discovered that I was “in a book”. After all these years, I was astonished, and, to make a long story short, began exchanging emails with the author. That person happened to be Kevin Sullivan. After several email exchanges, Kevin suggested that I check out this site, and perhaps join the discussion, with the idea that I could bring a different perspective because of my friendship with Kathy, my experience earlier that night in the library, and the fact that I was the last person known to have seen Kathy the night she disappeared. I decided to give it a shot, and here I am.
This all began @ 2-3 months ago, and Kevin’s was the FIRST book I had ever read about Bundy or his crimes. I have read all of them since that time, but the only thing I have ever “professed to know” had to do with that which I personally experienced
Your most recent post that contained a link received SEVEN, count ’em SEVEN, responses, all indicating that the link was hogwash, and not worth discussing. Interestingly, none of them came from me, while 2 (#1882 and #1899) came from Monica, who you now say “understands” you. Three came from Kevin (#1874, #1889, and #1904) who has done enough research to certainly be qualified to seperate the “intriguing” from the “BS”. The other two came from regular participants in this thread who have already proven their ability to converse knowledgeably on the topic.
I have noticed that the number of posts have dropped off markedly since your diatribe. I have also noticed that not ONE person wished to discuss “the likelihood of there being any fact” in the link you provided. Are you clueless? The people here are informed and intelligent individuals who wish to discuss the psychopathology of Bundy, the various cases, and the individuals involved in the case, whether it be victim, detective, judge, or…..
I have been extremely impressed by the knowledge, intellegence and research behind most of the posts I have read here. Being able to sift through “new” information and determine whether or not it is worth further consideration seems to be a skill acquired by most. You have been given suggestions from several people on how you might also acquire that skill; I hope you consider implimenting some of them. I have never seeked your “forgiveness”, though you have now offered it twice. There is nothing I feel the need to be forgiven for, so I’ll opt out.
I see no need for continued exchanges with you, Kris. I (the 8th respondant) indeed questioned the pertinence of the post that included the link. Your subsequent posts have gone downhill, however, and I can’t imagine that there is anything you might add in the future that will matter to me, one way or the other.
Lorraine
As far as “attacking you”, that is nonsense. I have read all of the books in a short span of time, and so, all of the information presented is very fresh in my mind. I am very aware of what information is accepted as fact, and what ideas are considered speculation, and when I read anything that directly conflicts with known facts, I dismiss it.
I was surprised to read that you had read the books. It seems that anyone who had would never waste their time even considering some of the information you have offered links to. You have not addressed any of the issues pointed out in my previous posts which explain why I, and all of the others who took the time to respond to you, have rejected the ridiculous speculation by some guy who, as far as we know, had no connection to Bundy whatsoever. You dared to put Kevin in that category?! Kevin did his homework before offering it to us, the reading public, and this is easily verified.
Not significant, but fairly interesting I think.
I recently read an article about liars. It stated that more than 90 % of people tend to look to the right while they`re are telling lies. Now, I watched the interview of Bundy, made in prison. They showed it in evening news, I guess this was in 1977.
When the lady asks Ted if he has ever physically harmed anybody, Ted says “have I ever physically harmed anybody? No……no”, and immediately starts glancing to the right.
Okay, that proves nothing, I know. But it was odd though.
Wow! I came on here to get an opinion on some possible motives and I get beaten up by the girlfirend of one of Ted’s victims. LOL. I couldn’t have seen that one coming.
Lorraine, you are right on one thing, my remarks may sound “catty” because I am indeed female. I forgive you for referring to me as a “he” the first time around as you clearly thought about it for a while after reading my post and in questioning it, came up with a more factual conclusion.
.
I don’t come on this board to fight or smear decapitated head blood in people’s faces, as evidenced by all the posts I have made over the months. I’ve been a productive member on this board for months now and I’ve never been a bully. I have never once tried to get the “last laugh” over any of my posts, as history clearly reveals. People are looking for a catfight where one does not belong. Just don’t belittle my ability to look outside the box. I have brought nothing but interesting discussion and questions. Sorry if I don’t find you to be the authority on Ted bundy, Lorraine. It’s okay to disagree with other’s opinions.
History has proven, especially in this case, that the answers come later, after continued pondering and questioning. Ann Rule didn’t believe Ted had commited necrophilia until over 10 years after she wrote her bestseller about him.
So for the umpteenth time, I never said the Rhawn Joseph article was true! I was simply asking for others opinions on it without expecting to get catscratched. Just because the author of the article didn’t know Ted personally doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Even Kevin didn’t know ted, but he still brought some facts to the table about him. hmmm.
Monica, you are the one who seems to get it. I was not trying to be mean to Lorainne at all, I just don’t agree with all of her her opinions. I think it’s great that the friend of a ted victim is willing to chat on this board and offer information.
However, neither she or anyone should be trying to belittle me for questioning anything. She’s not the authority on ted and most people on this board know just as much on the subject matter as she does. I’ve questioned thousands of things. I mean, how does anyone here know that Rhawn Jospeh didn’t talk to William Hagmaier, Diana Weiner, or someone else that has “private” information while working on his article? We don’t!! So it’s worth examining. In fact, I heard from Mr. Hagmaier some facts that nobody has mentioned on here about what was going on inside teddy’s head while he was doing this stuff. That’s right, FACTS. Does that make me full of BS, because I got some answers by questioning the source? No, it makes me more knowledgeable about certain aspects though yet I’m not claiming to be the king of the jungle. lol.
Now let’s get back to productive discussion and declaw the feline attacks.
Kevin, I agree with your earlier statements that not all things happen for a reason. And I think it’s great that you were a minister so you can share some of your faith insights. Here is something I have pondered and would like to know your thoughts (or what are the main thoughts by the church on this:). Soldiers who go to war may, in their run, kill scores of people. These same people will one day be judged just like Ted Bundy. How is it perceived that a killer who has “so-called” justified means for killing would be judged compared to someone like ted who killed because he wanted to. Both are killers. One killed for himself, the other killed for the government. Still, the soldier may have enjoyed what he did, just like ted did. What’s the consensus on this?
Hi Monica,
Thank you very much for the link 🙂 I am going to give it a shot myself, but ultimately will need my daughters help with piecing it all together. She works all day and has class in the evening, so I’m thinking, realistically, it will probably be Thursday night before we can get it completed. I am looking forward to this project, so I will surely get it up and running as soon as possible
I would add to the “Bundy Canon” a few magazine articles such as “The Roots of Evil,” by Myra McPherson in Cosmopolitan and “The Making of a Monster” by Philip Nobile in Playboy.
I would also include chapters about Bundy such as Mello’s “Dead Wrong,” and von Drehle’s “Among the Lowest of the Dead.”
All of these add depth and detail to various aspects of the story.
As far as any of them being well written, I don’t care. Each contains perspectives and facts not found elsewhere and therein lies their value. “Happy New Year – ted” for example contains a wealth of raw data so, regardless whether or not one appreciates the writing style or the theory presented, it’s an important contribution.
Hi all. In regard to the books written about Bundy, they are all over the map in terms of quality and veracity. Kevin’s is in many ways the best of them all, because he has the newest, most up-to-date information. As you all know how highly I regard Kevin’s work and the fact that I previously reviewed it in this thread, I will leave his book out of the following review of the Bundy books:
I like the Michaud-Aynesworth books the best because they actually had access to Bundy. That is a distinct literary advantage. And while it’s true that we should regard everything Bundy said with a grain of salt, it’s obvious he was making some oblique confessions in CWAK. Also, Stephen Michaud is an exceptionally talented writer.
I’m very fond of the Riverman, partly because I know Bob Keppel fairly well and regard him as the consummate professional. In terms of a look behind the scenes of a serial murder investigation, this book has no equal. Moreover, Keppel includes transcipts from his interviews with Bundy during his final days. Get the second edition if you can; that one includes Bundy’s chilling recitation of Julie Cunningham’s abduction and murder.
Ann Rule’s book is good, but hasn’t aged as well as the others. The best parts of the SBM are Ann’s updates, which she added over the years. Those are quite good.
I’m not a great fan of The Phantom Prince. It’s thin and weak, and sheds no significant light on Bundy. I ended up just feeling sorry for the author. This book is really about a fractured love affair.
Similarly, I’m not enamored with The Deliberate Stranger, either. Dick Larsen fancied himself as the ultimate Bundy expert, but he was really nothing more than a reporter who watched from the sidelines as the Bundy saga played out. The fact that he knew Bundy (although not very well) doesn’t really add much drama to this book.
The Killer Next Door is interesting because it’s the first book published about the Bundy case. That is also one of its flaws; the book ends long before the Bundy story was over. This book cries out for a new edition with an update.
Defending the Devil is a terrible book. It’s laden with legalese and meaningless courtroom machinations. Also, it’s clear the author was totally duped by Bundy…she’s just another one of his many victims, albeit a living one. Its one saving grace is a long interview with Bundy that appears near the end of the book. I dare you to read this and then still insist he didn’t start killing until 1974. It’s obvious he started as early as 1969, if not sooner.
There’s my take…weigh in with your opinions.
Ted
Hi Lorraine!
It would be very interesting, indeed, to see those photos. As for a site to upload them to, Photobucket is a good one, and very simple to use. Here is a direct link to it:
http://photobucket.com/
P.S.
In retrospect, I believe I was in error when I referred to Kris as a “he”. The statements directed at me sure have a “catty” ring to ’em, lol.
L
Again, re Kris, post 1901: “I don’t mean to be mean, but frankly I don’t care if you personally want to read the link or not. I posted it for those willing to look outside the box for more answers and question it’s truthfulness. Shame on me for being so inquisitive that I actually looked outside of the “most well known works on Ted’ for further answers”. LOL.”
Again, Kris, there is a difference between “looking outside the box”, and gullibly reading internet hype that directly contradicts what we already know to be factual. As indicated in posts from Barry (#1872), Kevin (#1874, #1889, #1904), Monica (#1882, #1899) and Vidor (#1905), reasonable, knowledgeable people do NOT “question its truthfulness”, because it is so obviously absurd! LOL at yourself!
I am sure that after typing your most recent post you were feeling a “Well, I sure told her ‘touche’ moment”, lol. I will merely state that I am comfortable enough with my own ability to reason that I find several of your linked references to be ridiculous. I am a strong enough woman to not feel at all “put in my place” by your childish attempts to make me look foolish, and I think by way of your defensive statements to me you have simply placed yourself in a questionably immature light. While I appreciate those of you who felt the desire to “rescue” me following Kris’s diatribe, rest assured, I can hold my own 😉
Lorraine
Well, LOL, hello again!
I have just returned from a personal mission to Corvallis, where I took a number of pictures in hopes to post them, complete with an aerial google map of the portion of the OSU campus significant in detailing Kathy Parks’ walk from our dorm (Sackett Hall) to the Memorial Union Commons on May 6,1974, just before her abduction.
As we were gone a good part of the day today, and I will need my daughter’s help to post the map, pictures, etc in a way that I can provide you with a usable link to access them, my project will have to wait until my daughter has the time to assist me. If anyone knows of a site where I can access a linkable “repository” for these things, I might attempt to get started on my own. If you know of a site where I can accomplish this, I would be most grateful if you would post a link to it here at ET.
I decided to do this for two reasons: First, it is the one and only time I have returned to the campus and the particular “landmarks” relevant to the story of Kathy’s abduction with that as my sole purpose in more than 30 years, and I hope that this project will help me in my continuing quest for personal emotional resolution. Secondly, after reading Vidor’s thoughts on how Kathy may have been abducted, it occurred to me how difficult it might be to imagine the limitations of Bundy’s “approach” possibilities without being familiar with the surrounding area. It occurred to me that I might be able to be of help to other readers by offering a visual explanation of where this took place. If I am able to set up my linkable “pictorial” the way I envision it, you will be able to see why I believe what I believe regarding Kathy’s abduction. I have a very solid idea in my mind of where Bundy had likely parked his car, how he and Kathy left the commons cafeteria without being noticed, and how he could have managed to take her from a place bustling with people to a very desolate area in a matter of seconds, without her realizing her vulnerability until it was too late. As I said, I had not been back to these areas since formulating my own theory, and after 30+ years, wasn’t sure if my perception of distances, memory of allowable parking areas, and “mental placement” of all exits from the commons were accurate. It was when I stood at the corner of 26th and Jefferson (where the commons entrance is) to take a picture of the area where I suspect Bundy had parked his car, that I realized how perfectly my scenario fit the actual geography, and where my emotions first got the better of me.
As I suspected, I had several “emotional moments” during today’s outing, most specifically involving my trip to Kathy’s room in Sackett Hall and in my attempt to get a good photo that shows both the area where we last spoke, and the entrance of the Memorial Union Commons, which was Kathy’s destination the night she disappeared. Emotionally, it was not an easy “mission” for me today, but I am glad I made the trip.
I hope that I can get these pictures, the map, and my description of the when’s and where’s online soon, and I will do the best I can. After doing so, I will post the link.
To those of you who feel I might be alienated from the site by Kris’s comments, I assure you that I won’t. I stand by what I said as far as being able to distinguish the plausable from the absurd, (re: post #1871 “Let’s start with this and we’ll get into some of the other things mentioned in this article after I hear your thoughts on this. Thanks!”) and I suspect that since Kris got basically none of the banter he had expected from other readers and posters here, that I am not alone in my feelings on this.
Kris went on to say, directly to me, (re: post 1901):
“It sounds to me like you are simply willing to just take the “known” facts that have been previously published and accept them as the see all/end all.”
I’m sorry to hear that “that’s the way it sounds” to you, Kris. I merely try to keep my BS filter in the “on” position when reading “facts” about Ted Bundy, and as Kevin so elequently suggested that you do in the course of reading various Bundy information, I take a look at the source. How likely is that source to have “new information”? Was the source personally involved with Bundy or his family so closely that he/she is likely to be privy to information never before published? And equally important, if said source doesn’t successfully pass the test of my first two questions, what might this person possibly gain by making such claims?
Certainly between the time we all began to learn about Ted Bundy, (his crimes, psychopathology, and his family) and now, if his mother was suspected of being seriously mentally ill herself, it would not have taken this long for us to become aware of it. I am a mother, and I could not possibly read an article suggesting that “Ted’s mother, after being beaten by her father, took Ted to their room, stripped naked and ‘soothed’ him”, without being convinced that the woman was clearly deranged. Moreover, the “stripped naked” portion of the sentence seems awkwardly and intentionally inserted in an effort to spark interest in a naive reader. Since Louise has never been described as being deranged, I would certainly have tossed the “fact” into the BS heap, asked myself the above mention questions about the source, and moved on.
You are certainly free to ponder and/or believe whatever you choose, Kris. For myself, I am very open to any new information that comes to light; I simply have confidence in my ability to identify obvious hype/BS, and don’t wish to spend my time reading about it or discussing it.
Lorraine
I too hope Lorraine sticks around. Thanks to her for the perspective on my apparently unlikely theory.
I would say kris in #1901 owes Lorraine an apology. Look, we know what the Bundy canon is.
The Killer Next Door
The Stranger Beside Me
The Only Living Witness
The Deliberate Stranger
Defending the Devil
The Riverman
The Bundy Murders
Now, some of those books are good and some of them are not so good (and I still haven’t read “The Killer Next Door”, just not motivated), but they were all original reporting by people who were either involved in the Bundy case or interviewed people who were. What we know about his history comes mostly from those books, supplemented, I guess, with what one can find from periodicals and newspapers that are still available. So if we come across something on the Internet–a place where anybody can say anything–and it contains some inflammatory info that isn’t included in ANY of the books, we are on solid ground when we dismiss it.
Apropos of nothing, there is a Facebook page, “The Ted Bundy Group”, which has an impressive little photo album of crime scenes.
Well, I go away for a few hours, and look what happens, LOL!
Kris– Bundy may have repressed memories, but which memories, and by what authority do we know this? When seeking the truth (as say, when writing a book) it is of utmost importance to verify every bit of information as it comes to you. Otherwise, you are left with speculation only, and the last thing you want is a book of speculation. So check out the source of the info, and ask this: What connection did they have with Bundy or his family? Has he/she been connected to someone who was close with Bundy, and etc. See what I mean? You must always be careful to separate the BS from the factual. This is so very important. Don’t run off with something just because it sounds interesting or even reasonable. Verify!
Fiz — As always, thank you for the kind words. I swear, I sometimes feel like Linda and I know you and your husband! If we ever get back to the UK we’re gonna look you all up!
Hello to everyone else!
LOL, thanks, Fiz! I will stick around (but will try to refrain from posting as much).You’re right, there aren’t many women poster’s on here, and it is good to see you back (after a long break) and participating again!
Honestly, Fiz, i don’t think that Kris was being mean to Lorraine, only disagreeing with her on a few points.
With all these mean remarks to Lorraine I would not be surprised if she does not come back, which is a great pity as Kevin coaxed her to talk to us. Kevin is a good man, and KYGB, kudos for telling Bart to stop bullying Lorraine and to Kevin for saying this bit of Jason’s site would stay as it was instituted. It’s run for well over a year with very little trouble and now Bart tries to tell us how he wants it changed! A last word to Bart – Ann Rule has been extremely ill since before Christmas with a spinal infection, so It is no good bombarding her with requests as she is still in hospital. Try buying her last updated paperback which was published about two years ago. Monica, please stay as it’s nice to have other women here!
Lorraine,
I understand you haven’t been here posting half as long as I have, so I will excuse you for asking questions like “have I even read any of the books”. I’ve read them all. I simply want to know more. It sounds to me like you are simply willing to just take the “known” facts that have been previously published and accept them as the see all/end all. Well, I’m sorry to disagree with your perception, but I for one, can tell you without a doubt in my mind that there is information out there about Bundy that has yet to be revealed to the public…stuff that can really help us piece together what he did with more understanding. That’s exactly why you’ll find me on a board like this, because I want to talk about those things that we don’t know yet instead of beating into the ground the same things we do know.
Having said that, I am not saying that I fully believe what was written in that Rhawn Joseph article, I was asking if these “new” details could be true. Just because the Ted/Mommy thing might have been “speculative” doesn’t mean everything else was. In fact, most of the article coinfirms many of the same facts we have read elsewhere, which is why I brought it up in the first place and inquired into these other possible facts. And of course, I wanted to run this by Kevin as he has done much investigating, and I wanted to see if had had run into any of this during his investigating.
Now, like yourself, I mean no disrespect Lorraine, but if you had actually read the post, it didn’t say anything about simultaneously biting off nipples while sodomizing victims. You actually threw the word “simultaneously” in there on your own. It simply stated that ted had done both of these things, which in fact we know he did.
I’m here to ponder more answers. To get more answers. Isn’t that what this is largely about? I don’t mean to be mean, but frankly I don’t care if you personally want to read the link or not. I posted it for those willing to look outside the box for more answers and question it’s truthfulness. Shame on me for being so inquisitive that I actually looked outside of the “most well known works on Ted’ for further answers”. LOL.
We learn the most when people Cooperate and Share information, and the ted case shows us this more than anything! He knew all the jurisdictional issues would just create more problems because so many people are too stubborn to share and cooperate.
I prefer to share what I discover and get opinions on it.
Anyhoo, back to the digging. Kevin, Isn’t it possible that Ted may have simply repressed all the memories of his mother’s physical abuse by his grandfather? Repressed memories often reveal themselves through bizarre acts years later…
In response to KYGB… While we have both posted here on a regular basis, I have failed to thank you for your kind responses to my comments, and to take the time to note that I find your posts to be a great contribution to this thread. You bring knowledgeable insight with your posts, and I am always pleased to read your new comments.
I have to agree with you regarding Bart’s quest. While I never meant to be harsh, I can tell you by virtue of how the Bundy murders relate to me personally, that being contacted, out of the blue by a complete stranger and asked to comment on such a painful and difficult subject would have upset me a great deal. As I have mentioned many times, for my own emotional well being, I avoided all media information regarding Ted bundy. I am here solely because, after 36 years, I decided to break my position of avoidance. Had I been contacted by Bart or anyone else in the course of the 36 years, I would have been very upset. Had it been Kevin, and he stated that he was in the process of writing a book, I would have been less upset than someone seeming to simply be invading my well-being out of curiosity, but it still would have rattled me. Friends and family remember their loss as though it were yesterday. We cope with it in whatever way we deem best, and for some it is an easier task than for others. There are times in the past 36 years that I would have been more or less able to cope with inquisitive emails from a complete stranger, but in your quest, you have absolutely no idea what state of coping the recipient of your emails might be in. On behalf of all people personally affected by Ted Bundy’s murders, I will ask that you (Bart) follow KYGB’s suggestion and build a site where people can choose to comment or not on their experiences. You might actually get some willing participants who have a lot to offer. But please, do NOT continue to invade the privacy of unsuspecting people with questions that cannot be anything other than disturbing to them.
Lorraine