Remove this Banner Ad

Solved Ted Bundy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lockyer24
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lockyer24

Lockyer24

Brownlow Medallist
Veteran 10k Posts
Joined
Jul 3, 2001
Posts
22,879
Reaction score
10,200
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Heat, Victory, Man Utd, Redskins
I find reading about a lot of serial killers they can blend into one for me but this guy stands out as he was intelligent and had a lot going for him but was just a bad egg deep down.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

30+ kills
A supposed ability to change his look
Penchant for young college girls
Left very little evidence
Necrophiliac

All this and it's believed a first girlfriend shunning him was the thing that set him off.
 
I've been interested in the Bundy case ever since I saw the film 'The Stranger Beside Me' a few years ago. Not a brilliant film by any stretch but a good enough introduction to Bundy and his crimes.

He was one very, very disturbed individual.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

raven echo said:
I've been interested in the Bundy case ever since I saw the film 'The Stranger Beside Me' a few years ago. Not a brilliant film by any stretch but a good enough introduction to Bundy and his crimes.

He was one very, very disturbed individual.
Click to expand...

Is that about him?, I bought the dvd purely for Tiffani Thiessen's hotness.
 
krisholio14 said:
Have a look at his final interview on youtube. Intriguing stuff.
Click to expand...
Cop out, blames pornography, makes you wonder with the advent of the internet why the world isn't full of serial killers, as for his explanation that most prisoners were all into pr0n, that might have something to do with incarceration, ie no women to look at, thank **** they don't interview death row prisoners everyday of the week, 50 plus murders and yet sheds a tear about pr0n in the 70's.
Pretty sure his m.o. was hit them with a hammer then have your way with them, the Yorkshire ripper did the same and so did the granny killer of Sydneys north shore. Think about getting hit with a hammer, it's basically how cattle are killed in an abbatoir.
 
jozeph said:
Pretty sure his m.o. was hit them with a hammer then have your way with them, the Yorkshire ripper did the same and so did the granny killer of Sydneys north shore. Think about getting hit with a hammer, it's basically how cattle are killed in an abbatoir.
Click to expand...


Bundy's classic M.O. was to feign an injury, such as an arm in a sling or cast, and ask a potential victim for assistance. With his looks, charm, and the supposed injury, most of the time they'd help him. The evil prick preyed on their goodwill. Then he'd strike with a hammer, as you said, or a tyre iron, or just punch them until they were unable to fight back. And he wouldn't kill them there, he'd move them to another location separate from the abduction.

This method was appropriated for The Silence of the Lambs, where Buffalo Bill abducts the senator's daughter after she helps him put a couch in a van. Interestingly, I believe the author of the book also got the idea for having the FBI consult Hannibal Lecter from when Bundy offered his 'expertise' to police investigating the Green River killings.
 
New Netflix doco out on Bundy worth the watch. Just binged all 4 eps tonight.

Very sick/twisted individual. Incredible set of circumstances regarding the escapes, the plea deal rejected etc.
 
Jatz said:
New Netflix doco out on Bundy worth the watch. Just binged all 4 eps tonight.

Very sick/twisted individual. Incredible set of circumstances regarding the escapes, the plea deal rejected etc.
Click to expand...
Haven't watched it but this is an interesting critique on it.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/conversations-with-a-killer-review-netflix-13567369.php

Netflix's Ted Bundy documentary is almost everything that's wrong with the true crime genre


What the documentary fails to inform viewers until the final 15 minutes — and even then, it’s glossed over — is that Bundy didn’t kill as a method of evidence disposal. He loved the power death gave him. Those unfamiliar with Bundy’s story might walk away from “Conversations With a Killer” thinking Bundy’s methods were (sadly) run-of-the-mill: rape, then a quick death.

Ted Bundy killed at least 30, but perhaps up to 100, young women across the United States in the 1970s. He would engage in necrophilia with their corpses, often for days after he’d killed them. He visited their bodies, too, enjoying watching them decompose.

Sometimes he cut off their heads with a hacksaw so he could admire them in his apartment. When he tired of them, he’d throw their heads and bodies in the woods for the animals. He said he burned one head in the fireplace of his then-girlfriend’s home.

"I don't like being treated like an animal and I don't like people walking around and ogling me like I'm some kind of weirdo,” Bundy snarls in one tape. “Because I'm not."

Of course he was. He was the definition of abnormal. Every minute “Conversations With a Killer” spends on yet another anecdote about Bundy’s normal life is a minute wasted. We could learn about his victims — most of whom get barely a passing name-drop — but instead, the documentary legitimizes Bundy’s fantasy of normalcy. Bundy knew he wasn’t normal. Every action was a performance, from getting good grades to volunteering at a suicide hotline. He didn’t do nice things because he had a grain of goodness inside of him. He did them because they helped him blend in. Even from beyond the grave, he is manipulating us into believing this lie.

"Conversations With a Killer" focuses on building up this myth of Bundy, the attractive, ordinary man with the devil inside. Or, as Bundy puts in the closing moments of the show:

“The really scary thing is you can’t identify them. People don’t realize there are potential killers among them. How could anyone live in a society where people they liked, loved, lived with, worked with, and admired could the next day turn out to be the most demonic people imaginable?”

Bundy wanted us to live in fear. He wanted us to believe he could have lurked, handsome and normal, among us forever. But the cracks were always going to show. We found him out. He is wrong, as his capture and conviction show.

In ending on this quote, “Conversations With a Killer” wants you to be afraid.

But it has been three decades since we buried Ted Bundy. We don't have to give him that power anymore.
 
I reckon Bundy believed he was 100% normal for 99% of the time, at least on the outside.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Sure thats one side of an argument and yes the victims should never be forgotten nor trivialised

But

It is indeed that veneer, that normalcy that scares us the most

The guy living on his own , hardly engaging with his neighbours and staring at the passing traffic is visible to us. Bundy reminds us that behind every lace curtain the ''normal'' person hides many secrets
 
revo333 said:
I have watched the first episode, I guess i might find out the answer later but i am intrigued on why he used his real name when introducing himself to his 2 victims at the park when 40,000 were there on the same day.
Click to expand...

Not the first time he'd done that. A girl who took a ride off him and survived an attack said he told her what his name was and that he was a law student. Then he said "And you know what? I'm going to kill you."

A supremely confident psychopath.
 
[QUOTE="shellyg, post: 59454316, member: 178298" A supremely confident psychopath.[/QUOTE]

I’ve watched the first 4 episodes now. Just an unlikeable guy.
 
Last edited:
BlueE said:
Haven't watched it but this is an interesting critique on it.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/conversations-with-a-killer-review-netflix-13567369.php

Netflix's Ted Bundy documentary is almost everything that's wrong with the true crime genre


What the documentary fails to inform viewers until the final 15 minutes — and even then, it’s glossed over — is that Bundy didn’t kill as a method of evidence disposal. He loved the power death gave him. Those unfamiliar with Bundy’s story might walk away from “Conversations With a Killer” thinking Bundy’s methods were (sadly) run-of-the-mill: rape, then a quick death.

Ted Bundy killed at least 30, but perhaps up to 100, young women across the United States in the 1970s. He would engage in necrophilia with their corpses, often for days after he’d killed them. He visited their bodies, too, enjoying watching them decompose.

Sometimes he cut off their heads with a hacksaw so he could admire them in his apartment. When he tired of them, he’d throw their heads and bodies in the woods for the animals. He said he burned one head in the fireplace of his then-girlfriend’s home.

"I don't like being treated like an animal and I don't like people walking around and ogling me like I'm some kind of weirdo,” Bundy snarls in one tape. “Because I'm not."

Of course he was. He was the definition of abnormal. Every minute “Conversations With a Killer” spends on yet another anecdote about Bundy’s normal life is a minute wasted. We could learn about his victims — most of whom get barely a passing name-drop — but instead, the documentary legitimizes Bundy’s fantasy of normalcy. Bundy knew he wasn’t normal. Every action was a performance, from getting good grades to volunteering at a suicide hotline. He didn’t do nice things because he had a grain of goodness inside of him. He did them because they helped him blend in. Even from beyond the grave, he is manipulating us into believing this lie.

"Conversations With a Killer" focuses on building up this myth of Bundy, the attractive, ordinary man with the devil inside. Or, as Bundy puts in the closing moments of the show:

“The really scary thing is you can’t identify them. People don’t realize there are potential killers among them. How could anyone live in a society where people they liked, loved, lived with, worked with, and admired could the next day turn out to be the most demonic people imaginable?”

Bundy wanted us to live in fear. He wanted us to believe he could have lurked, handsome and normal, among us forever. But the cracks were always going to show. We found him out. He is wrong, as his capture and conviction show.

In ending on this quote, “Conversations With a Killer” wants you to be afraid.

But it has been three decades since we buried Ted Bundy. We don't have to give him that power anymore.
Click to expand...
This is my biggest gripe with the show. It really didn’t go into the detail of what he actually did. They did make him seem like your run of the mill serial killer. He was so much more than that.

I binged the show in one night and while I did find it entertaining, I was also disappointed at the end of it.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

revo333 said:
I have watched the first episode, I guess i might find out the answer later but i am intrigued on why he used his real name when introducing himself to his 2 victims at the park when 40,000 were there on the same day.
Click to expand...

Rookie error. Seriously though, same thought crossed my mind.
 
Dee Snider said:
Rookie error. Seriously though, same thought crossed my mind.
Click to expand...
That's what came through most for me too, this apparently highly intelligent guy did things even your low level crook wouldn't be stupid enough to do, esp. the minor traffic misdemeanours.
-gets arrested first in Aspen(?) after routine traffic stop, driving without headlights (dumb!!)
-gets picked up after escape in Aspen after car observed 'driving erratically' though he may have been suffering exposure at that point
-gets arrested in Florida after routine traffic stop for 'driving slowly', oh, and he's in a VW beetle again!! (Red?
this time so at least he changed the colour, but come on!!)

And whenever he is caught it's 'stupid police got lucky'

the only reason he was so prolific was poor interstate police communication imo.

Thought they also showed clearly how he should have been saved from his own delusion of intelligence at his trial, should never have been allowed to represent himself.
 
PetterdHoisted said:
That's what came through most for me too, this apparently highly intelligent guy did things even your low level crook wouldn't be stupid enough to do, esp. the minor traffic misdemeanours.
-gets arrested first in Aspen(?) after routine traffic stop, driving without headlights (dumb!!)
-gets picked up after escape in Aspen after car observed 'driving erratically' though he may have been suffering exposure at that point
-gets arrested in Florida after routine traffic stop for 'driving slowly', oh, and he's in a VW beetle again!! (Red?
this time so at least he changed the colour, but come on!!)

And whenever he is caught it's 'stupid police got lucky'

the only reason he was so prolific was poor interstate police communication imo.

Thought they also showed clearly how he should have been saved from his own delusion of intelligence at his trial, should never have been allowed to represent himself.
Click to expand...
Was it because he was stupid though or was he just that arrogant that he thought it wouldn’t matter? I lean toward the latter.
 
Jatz said:
Was it because he was stupid though or was he just that arrogant that he thought it wouldn’t matter? I lean toward the latter.
Click to expand...
yeah absolutely, he felt he was super intelligent and everyone else stupid, a major misreading of the situation!

There wasn't a lot of sophistication around what he did either..whacking unsuspecting women over the head with a log etc...I must say that doco dispelled a lot of the aura this guy had for me as some kind of depraved mastermind. Just depraved.

The jailbreak was smart.
 
revo333 said:
I'm not seeing any genius in his craziness...

'So...if you talk in the 3rd person will you start confessing'

*grabs tape recorder*

'Ok'

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

He embraced the tape recorder holding it close to his chest, as if someone might try to take it off him ...... :think:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom