THE LIFE OF THEODORE ROBERT BUNDY: A BIOGRAPHICAL OVERVIEW “The mind is its own place,

and in itself

This chapter presents a historical overview of the life of Theodore Robert Bundy, also known as
The Lady Killer or The Campus Killer. His life history is chronicled from the time of his birth in 1946
to his death in 1989. The researcher ensured that the descriptions provided on Bundy’s life are
exclusively embedded within the unique social and historical contexts of the time. A section on
serial murder is also included.
The Significance of Social and Historical Contextualisation
Oftentimes, behavioural scientists and nonprofessionals alike instantly relegate the phenomenon
of serial murder to the realm of sin and evil. Indeed, Bundy’s acts of brutal sexual assault, torture,
murder, mutilation, necrophilia, and cannibalism have stripped his character of anything that
resembles humanity, and have eternally degraded him to the status of a ‘monster’ that lived
amongst men (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Raine & Sanmartín, 2001). While most may label
those who kill repeatedly as monstrous or animalistic, one cannot deny the human component of
such perpetrators – especially in the context of academic research (Skrapec, 2001). Therefore, in
order to achieve a complete and meaningful understanding of such a notorious individual as
Bundy, it is important for the researcher to afford the psychobiographical subject due respect, and
to practice reflexivity at all times (discussed in Chapter 6). Skrapec (2001a) stated that once
researchers accept subjects – but not necessarily their actions – as human beings, a window of
53
opportunity opens that permits the researcher to gain in-depth knowledge into the subject’s
personality development, motives, thought processes, behavioural repertoire, perceptions of the
self and others, and the external environment in which it was all fostered. For this reason, the
researcher was attentive to Pistorius’s (2002) description of serial murderers throughout the study
of Bundy: “Serial killers are not monsters; they are human beings with tortured souls. The tragedy
of serial homicide is its dichotomy – serial killers kill because they suffer, and by killing cause
immense suffering” (p. 5).
Ultimately, one has to look beyond the ‘what’ to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’. This means that in
instances where a researcher is dealing with a subject that has committed heinous crimes, she
should place the subject’s behaviour within a broader context to establish why they acted as they
did, and how outside influences played a role in forming their perception of the external world
(Elms, 1994; McAdams, 1994, 1996, 2006; Schultz, 2005a). To realise the aforementioned, it is vital
for the researcher to take into account the subject’s socio-historical context. Caprara and Cervone
(2000) and Santrock (2001) stated that a unique life narrative could only be created once the
researcher considers the cultural, economic, political, and religious climate in which the subject
lived, and what psychological impact the latter had on him. Likewise, the researcher should also
explore the subject’s familial environment and subsequent interpersonal relationships, as it plays a
substantial role in personality –and identity formation. For these reasons, it is necessary for the
researcher to provide a detailed, multidimensional depiction of Bundy’s life in the form of a
biographical overview that is both chronologically correct and contextually embedded.
54

Post-War American Life: The Emerging Customs of the Late 1940s and 1950s
The Second World War ended in 1945, approximately a year before Bundy was born. Rippo (2007)
reported that the years after the termination of World War II were characterised by feelings of
prosperity, excitement, and jubilation. Those who served in the military and armed forces were
met with celebratory parades and were regarded as unflinching American heroes (Rippo, 2007;
Rule, 2009). The cessation of the War also led to an exceptionally large number of couples who
thought it an ideal time to start (or extend) their families, since the American economy was
progressively recovering, and developing at a rapid pace (Cayton, Gorn & Williams, 1993).
Individuals that were born during this period are often referred to as Baby Boomers due to the
tremendous increase in overall birthrates that “...effectively created the most heavily populated
generation in American history” (American cultural background, para.1, n.d.). However, the mass
influx of male soldiers into the workforce thwarted any prospects that females had to grow or
establish themselves in social, political, or economic settings (Eisenmann, 2006).
According to Cayton et al. (1993), the general culture of the late 1940s and 1950s embodied a
socially conservative nature that emphasised rigid, traditional gender roles. While the men
returned from war and adapted to the role of hard-working breadwinners, the women were
expected to remain at home to perform domestic tasks such as cooking, cleaning, and child
rearing. Eisenmann (2006) stated that post-war American life required women to adhere to
domiciliary margins, as it was their “patriotic duty” (p. 12) to fend and protect the nation’s
“...democratic familial values against the threat of communism” (p. 237). On the rare occasions
that women did manage to work, it was more likely to be due to financial hardship and need than
to pursuing a career goal or finding emancipation from social, political, or economic constraints
55

(Cayton et al., 1993). Owing to the clearly defined and fixed moral tenets of the time, it was also
exceedingly shameful to birth a child out of wedlock (Sullivan, 2009). Illegitimacy was taboo, and
women who did unfortunately succumb to risqué sexual practices and became pregnant, were
ostracised from their family homes, placed in institutions catering for unwed mothers, and
criticised harshly by community members (Rippo, 2007). Women were publically branded as
promiscuous when their sexual activities became known. Ironically, society allowed men to brag
about their sexual profligacies and afforded them the reputation of being ‘alpha males’ or ‘studs’
(Rule, 2009).
Additionally, the upsurge in economic success and novel technological developments (for example,
television sets) in the 1950s were largely beneficial to the country and produced one of the most
extensive volumes of material wealth ever known to America (Cayton et al., 1993). America
formed a consumer culture, which prompted its society to spend money indiscriminately and to
indulge their worldly impulses and desires on a whim. Millions of Americans bought new homes in
upper-class suburban areas, started purchasing expensive cars and fancy appliances, and reveled
in eating in lavish restaurants and owning the latest fashion items (Cayton, et al., 1993). At the
time, the exaggerated consumerist behaviour present in America also fostered a distinguished
sense of conformity. Anything or anyone that attempted to transgress the norms unconsciously
stipulated by their society was met with unreserved suspicion and/or judgment. As a relatively
homogenous group, the majority of Americans seemed to possess a ‘like-mindedness’ in their
belief and value systems, and even exhibited similar haircuts and clothing styles (Cayton et al.,
1993).
56

America and Identity Formation

During the late 1950s and 1960s (when Bundy entered adolescence and young adulthood),
American culture attempted to form a new identity that was somewhat in opposition to their
previously applied notion of conformity. According to Erikson (1963) American culture converted
to a more individualistic and private existence where parents afforded their children the dual
status of being independent, yet orthodox and reliable. Lee (2001) explained that childhood had
become rather complex in that children “...were still cocooned within the family home, but were
simultaneously opened to a world of consumer choice in which they were important players in
their own right” (p. 76). Childhood ambiguity and complexity, especially during adolescence,
became highly prevalent (Lee, 2001). Erikson (1968) highlighted this sense of confusion by stating
that the identity formation of the American adolescent served as a “...tentative combination of
dynamic polarities” where great uncertainty existed in choosing whether to be “...migratory or
sedentary, individualistic or standardised, competitive or cooperative, pious or free-thinking, and
responsible or cynical” (p. 259).
The rapid changes in terms of both local and international immigration, urbanisation,
industrialisation, class stratification, and race and gender liberation caused additional emotional
tension among American citizens, which ultimately left their traditional sense of identity feeling
threatened (Erikson, 1968, as cited in McGivern, 2015). As a result, some Americans became
resolute and unwilling to change their established American ways, while others attempted to
adjust accordingly to the active changes of society by teaching their children the value of tolerance
and equality. Unfortunately, adolescents were situated in the middle of these opposing identities.
While they later learned that an attitude of acceptance and consideration was needed to ensure a
successful future for them, it also blurred their original sense of what was perceived as
57

‘right’ and ‘wrong’. Moreover, it created uncertainty in terms of what they thought of themselves
and what their opinions of others were (Erickson, 1968). Consequently, many adolescents moved
towards a less demanding, delinquent form of behaviour in order to ascertain some (or any) form
of identity. Wilson (2004) corroborated the above through stipulating that “the 1960s saw the
emergence of the next level: the crime of self-esteem, the criminal whose basic craving was to be
somebody” (p. 637).
Serial killers: A cultural manifestation. Wilson and Seaman (2007) maintained that the
phenomenon of serial murder – and homicidal tendencies in general – started to surface more
prominently after the period of the Second World War. In accordance, Knight (2006) stated that
the occurrence of serial murder emerged during a time of historical upheaval where America was
in the process of crystallising an alternative cultural framework (as discussed in the previous
section). Thus, Haggerty (2009) and Wilson (2004) suggested that the escalation of crimes
involving violence and aggression (particularly serial murder) was partly attributable to the shift in
social and cultural conditions.
Definition and context of serial murder. An outline of the basic definitional aspects of serial
murder and character traits of serial killers is necessary for the reader to gain a more complete
understanding of the individual under study. Over the last 50 years, professionals in law
enforcement, psychology, and research have struggled to generate a definition of serial homicide
that has the ability to classify and differentiate serial murderers from other types of killers without
error (Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2008; Ferguson, White, Cherry, Lorenz & Bhimani,
2003). Consequently, the research literature pertaining to the definition of serial homicide lacks
consensus and homogeneity (Keeney & Heide, 1994). Ferguson et al. (2003) argued that it is an
exceedingly difficult task to produce an all-encompassing description
58

of serial murder as “the critical components of serial murder exist not in broad, clearly identifiable
behaviours, but rather in the mind and motives of the perpetrator himself or herself” (p. 292).
Furthermore, the FBI (2008) stated that while most of these definitions include similar premises,
they vary in the number of murders or victims involved, the motivational typology attached to the
killings, and the temporal dimensions of the murders. According to Simons (2001), Special Agent
Robert K Ressler originally proposed the use of the word ‘serial killer’ in the 1970s while working
for the FBI in the United States of America to describe the grisly murders committed by Ted Bundy
(Pistorius, 2002; Wiest, 2011). Although difficult to define, Pistorius (2002) indicated that authors’
definitions pertaining to serial homicide have started to evolve, and have progressed from one-
dimensional, simplistic descriptions to more comprehensive and complex explanations.
Cormier, Angliker, Boyer, and Mersereau (1972) initially tried to clarify this sort of violent crime by
labeling it as ‘multicide’ and defined it as “...a number of murders committed by one perpetrator
and spread over a significant period of time...where the motivation was primarily pathological” (p.
335). Subsequently, Cameron and Frazer (1987, as cited in Pistorius, 2005) included a sexual
element to the concept of serial homicide by arguing that serial killers (usually men) murder their
“sexual objects” – be it other men, children, or women – by combining the act of murder with
“...sexual assault, rape, torture, and mutilation” (p. 73). Considering previous efforts, Ressler and
Shachtman (1993) attempted to refine the meaning of serial murder even further, and produced
one of the most comprehensive definitions to date: “a serial killer [is] a person or persons who kill
more than three victims, during more than three events, at three or more locations, with an
emotional cooling-off period in between [each murder]...premeditated
59

planning and fantasy are also present” (p. 6). The researcher, however, thought Pistorius’s (2005)
definition to be the most accurate, and inclusive account of serial murder:
A serial killer is a person (or persons) who murder several victims, usually strangers, at different
times and not necessarily at the same location, with a cooling-off period in between. The motive is
intrinsic; an irresistible compulsion, fueled by fantasy which may lead to torture and/or sexual
abuse, mutilation and necrophilia (p. 75).
The inclusion of cognitive and behavioural aspects such as cooling-off periods and fantasy
generation and repetition (as mentioned in the last two definitions) are fundamental to
understanding, and differentiating serial killers from any other form of murderer (Douglas,
Burgess, Burgess, & Ressler, 1992). Wilson, Yardley, and Lynes (2015) stated that cooling-off
periods occur when serial killers detach or separate themselves from the physical activities that
lead them to commit murder. This period is generally characterised by a form of re-integration
into normal societal activities where their offending behaviours become dormant for days, weeks,
months, or even years (Wilson et al., 2015). Fox and Levin (2005) furthermore described these
passive breaks between murders as “...having long time lapses between homicides, during which
time [the killer] maintains a more or less ordinary life, going to work and spending time with family
and friends” (p. 17). Besides a cooling-off period, the role of (sexual) fantasy is also one of the
most prominent and discriminating factors in the identification of a serial murderer (Bartels &
Parsons, 2011). Fantasy can be described as an “elaborate set of cognitions (thoughts)
characterised by preoccupation (or rehearsal), anchored in emotions, and originating in
daydreams” (Prentky, Burgess & Carter, 1989, p. 887). According to Schlesinger (2004), the
fantasies of serial killers are usually associated with images of sexual arousal or stimulation, and
are of an erotic nature. Thus, it can be said that fantasy acts as an internal drive or force for
60

repetitive behaviours such as sexual violence, and ultimately murder (Prentky et al., 1989). Bartels
and Parsons (2011) concurred with the above by maintaining that serial killers “are obsessed by
their fantasies of murder and are driven to repeat their crimes until these fantasies are perfectly
acted out” (p. 268). However, it must be emphasised that the physical act of murder only takes
place once their cognitive activities (that is, rich, abstract fantasy-life) translates to reality (Prentky
et al., 1989). MacCulloch, Snowden, Wood, and Mills (1983) explained this process in detail:
Once the restraints inhibiting the acting out of the fantasy are no longer present, the individual is
likely to engage in a series of progressively more accurate ‘trial runs’ in an attempt to enact the
fantasy as it is imagined. Since the trial runs can never precisely match the fantasy, the need to
restage the fantasy with a new victim is established. The more the fantasy is rehearsed the more
power it acquires and the stronger the association between the fantasy content and sexual
arousal. The repeated pairing of...fantasised cues with orgasm results in their acquiring sexually
arousing properties (p. 22).
In accordance with the above, Prentky et al. (1989) commented that serial killers moreover
demonstrated a higher incidence of paraphilia such as exhibitionism (exposing the genitals) or
voyeurism (spying on unsuspecting persons during private activities such as undressing) (American
Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). Bundy, for example, participated in voyeuristic activities
before his fantasies manifested into real-life murder. The presence of paraphilic behaviour in serial
murderers implies that they have an elevated preference for fantasy. Thus, activities’ relating to
peeping or indecent bodily exposure not only stimulate internal fantasies, but also grants the
serial killer with the incentive and/or motive to act out their fantasy (Prentky et al., 1989).
61

Lastly, authors such as Douglas and Olshaker (1997), Geberth (1996), Hickey (1997), Holmes and
Holmes (1998), Keppel and Birnes (2003), Krafft-Ebing (1886), Miller (2000), and Ressler and
Shachtman (1993) noted several characteristics that apply to most (but not all) serial killers. These
include:
 a dysfunctional family life with the presence of abuse and/or neglect;
 a father that is either literally or symbolically absent, and exhibits controlling and/or
authoritative behaviours during their formative years;
 a mother that is either rejecting and punitive, or smothering, controlling and/or infantilising1;
 a negative affect, outbursts of uncontrollable rage, incomprehensible, random mood swings,
and an unappeasable sex drive;
 an early presentation of criminal activity such as petty theft, arson, or grand theft auto during
adolescence that usually escalates into violence towards others;
 instrumental drug and/or alcohol abuse;
 a vivid (usually violent or aggressive) fantasy or imaginary world;
 a manipulative demeanor and/or the propensity for deceptiveness/deceitfulness;
 a history of cruelty towards animals;
 the ability to come across as ‘normal’ and sociable in front of others;
 a general lack of conscience and emotional attachment; and
 the inability to take responsibility for their actions.
1 To treat someone in such a way as to deny him or their maturity in age and/or experience – an
externally imposed form of regression where the ‘other’ is reduced to an earlier or lower
developmental stage. A parental figure or caretaker generally commits this act.
62

Regarding their victims, Krafft-Ebing (1886) moreover noted that most (but not all) serial killers:
 objectify, humiliate, and/or degrade their victims;
 take souvenirs or trophies from their victims;
 seldom harm or murder their partners (for example, girlfriends of wives)
 experience sexual and psychological enjoyment or satisfaction from the infliction of torture or
pain on others;
 generally possess a signature that they leave behind at a crime scene (that is, an invariable
‘personal touch’ that has no direct association to the execution of the murder itself, but fulfills a
psychological need, for example, a serial murderer that forces his victims to wear red stilettos
before murdering them);
 always include an idiosyncratic modus operandi (or, mode of operation) when committing a
murder (that is, a changeable technique or routine that facilitates the killer (practically) to commit
a murder, for example, using a knife during the crime, restraining the victim with cable ties, using
gloves to avoid fingerprint detection, or only attempting to murder during the early hours of the
morning while it is still dark outside);
 tend to return to their crime scenes and/or locations of body disposal;
 intensify the degree of violence they impose on their victims over time.
In terms of diagnosis, serial killers do not form part of a specific classification of disorders listed in
the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). However, they do possess
pathological personality traits or diagnostic features that may indicate the presence of one or
more personality disorders (usually Cluster B), paraphilic disorders, schizophrenia spectrum
disorders, psychotic disorders, dissociative disorders, mood disorders, and/or
63

substance-related or addictive disorders (APA, 2013; Gebreth, 1996; Hickey, 1997; Miller, 2000). It
should, however, be noted that serial killers who manifest psychotic symptoms are extremely rare
(Hickey, 1997). Otherwise known as psychopaths, serial killers are said to mostly exhibit features
specific to antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and narcissistic
personality disorder (Gebreth, 1996; Hare, 1993; Money, 1990; Schlesinger, 1998). The official
diagnostic criteria for these can be found in Appendix A.
Types of serial killers. In addition to defining serial killers, many authors and forensic professionals
have attempted to sort them into different categories based on the way in which they commit a
murder. However, the most widely cited classification of serial murder is Ressler, Burgess, and
Douglas’s (1992) organised/disorganised dichotomy model (Canter et al., 2004). According to
Ressler et al. (1992), all serial killers, irrespective of sex, method, or motive are likely to fall into
one of these two categories. Organised serial killers generally have an average to high intelligence
quotient, are socially competent, function normally in terms of sexual activities, prefer stable,
educated labour, and have the ability to control their mood and emotional reactions successfully
during the execution of a crime. The term ‘organised’ also indicates a higher order of cognitive
thinking (that is, logic and critical thinking). This allows the offender to execute a thoroughly
planned murder without leaving any evidence behind (Canter et al., 2004; Pistorius, 2002; Ressler,
Burgess, Douglas, Hartman, & D’ Agostino, 1986). In contrast, disorganised serial killers usually
exhibit below-average intelligence or cognitive abilities, have underdeveloped or inadequate social
skills, are sexually immature and/or dysfunctional, have a poor employment history, and are
reactive and impulsive whilst committing a crime (Canter et al., 2004; Douglas et al., 1992;
Pistorius, 2002; Ressler et al., 1992). In terms of the crime scene, the disorganised serial
murderer’s is unplanned, disordered, and chaotic. Evidence such as
64

semen, fingerprints, blood, and hair are often left behind. The victim’s body and/or weapon are
also commonly displayed in open view (Canter et al., 2004). Although the above two categories
seem to be fixed, Ressler and Shachtman (1993) do, however, warn that in some cases, serial
killers could also display characteristics of both.
Despite the above-mentioned, the phenomenon of serial murder remains somewhat of a mystery
– highly complex and difficult to comprehend fully (Hickley, 1997). Knight (2006) summarised the
latter statement as follows:
All of these theories go in some way to contribute to the conceptualisation of serial killers’
behaviours, but in isolation, they maintain a focus on a certain aspect while necessarily ignoring
other aspects. It is for this reason that there is a consensus that what makes a serial killer is a
combination of many complex and interrelated neurological, social, physiological, environmental,
and psychological factors (p. 22).
A Chronological Portrayal of Theodore Robert Bundy’s Lifespan
Infancy and illegitimacy. Theodore Robert Cowell was born on 24 November 1946 in
Burlington, Vermont in the United States of America to 22-year-old Eleanor Louise Cowell (better
known as Louise) (Sullivan, 2009). Being young and unmarried, Louise entered the Elizabeth Lund
Home for Unwed Mothers in her seventh month of pregnancy to avoid the stigma attached to
birthing a child out of wedlock. On the sly, many of the locals referred to the maternity home as
“Lizzie Lund’s Home for Naughty Ladies” (Rule, 2013, p. 9). The norms of the 1940s regarded out-
of-wedlock pregnancies as disgraceful and taboo, and normally brought shame upon the family
name. Abortion was not an option either, as it was against the law (Dobbert, 2009). According to
testimony from Dr. Dorothy Otnow Lewis, a defense psychiatrist and professor at the New York
Medical Centre who evaluated Bundy in 1987, Louise left Bundy
65

at the Elizabeth Lund Home “for three months” (Vronsky, 2004, p. 103) while she decided whether
she should give him up for adoption (Rippo, 2007; Rule, 2009). Even so, Louise reportedly chose to
give her son the name ‘Theodore’ as it meant “gift of God” (Wilson, 2004, p. 531) and dotingly
referred to him as ‘Teddy’ (Rule, 2009). A few months after his birth, Bundy and Louise moved
back to her parent’s home in a working class neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Dawson,
2015; Dobbert, 2009). In terms of health, Sullivan (2009), and Michaud and Aynesworth (2000)
outlined that Bundy was a normal baby boy who manifested no physical abnormalities or apparent
developmental delays.
Embarrassed by their daughter’s insubordinate behaviour, Louise’s parents initially raised Bundy
as their own child, and led him to believe that Louise was, in fact, his older sister (Dobbert, 2009;
Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2009). This story was supposedly fashioned to protect Bundy
and his biological mother from social reprisal and criticism that civilians often directed at single
mothers of the time (Rippo, 2007). To exacerbate matters, the Cowell’s were thought to be deeply
religious Methodists. Thus, having a child who fell pregnant before marriage was not only shocking
or scandalous to both them and the community, but was thought of as sinful (Rippo, 2007; Rule,
2009; Vronsky, 2004).
In terms of Bundy’s biological father, his identity remains unknown to this day. Rule (2009),
however, stated that an Air Force veteran named William Lloyd Marshall is listed on Bundy’s birth
certificate as his father, along with the word illegitimate stamped below his name. Conversely,
Louise conveyed that she had a brief romance with a sailor named Jack Worthington whom she
claims might have been Bundy’s father (Rule, 2009; Rippo, 2007). Many authors and researchers
(for example, Dawson, 2015; Dobbert, 2009; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Newton, 2006; Rippo,
2007; Rule, 2009; & Wilson, 2004) have also speculated whether Bundy
66

may have been a product of an incestuous relationship between his mother and grandfather,
Samuel. However, these inferences have never been validated or confirmed.
Apart from being misled about his familial relationships, Bundy observed and endured many
domestic disputes that manifested in the Cowell household (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000).
Despite the fact that Bundy’s grandfather was a Deacon at their church, the idea of living a morally
righteous life seemed to escape Samuel at home (Rippo, 2007). Family members described him as
“an extremely frightening individual” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999, p. 330) who could
instantaneously become physically violent and aggressive at the slightest of provocations. A good
example of his uncontrollable fits of rage dates back to when he reportedly pushed his daughter,
Julia, down a flight of stairs for waking up at 9:00 A.M. in the morning, which according to him,
was too late (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2009). The family moreover portrayed Samuel
as an abusive man who took pleasure in kicking the dog and cruelly spinning the cats by their tails.
They also depicted him as a blatant racist, and stated that he regularly engaged with hardcore
pornographic material (Newton, 2006; Rule, 2009). Strangely, Bundy recalled his grandfather as a
“mythic figure [that] he adored, identified with, respected, and looked up to as a little boy...and
clung to in times of trouble” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 18; Rule, 2001, p. 8). To make
matters worse, Bundy’s grandmother, Eleanor, was hospitalised on several occasions due to
severe mental health problems. According to interviews, she suffered from depressive psychosis,
experienced intense panic attacks, and had a long history of agoraphobia (Michaud & Aynesworth,
2000).
Childhood and Family Dynamics. Aside from the unstable and unfavourable environment
prompted by his grandparents, Bundy seemed to have a good relationship with his mother, and
stated that he ascribed his excellent verbal skills and ability to think on his feet to her. He
67

furthermore told Michaud and Aynesworth (2000) that his mother was an incredibly intelligent
and popular woman during high school, and that she excelled in academic-related activities. Yet,
he felt that she masked her intellect and that she never fully lived up to her potential.
Unfortunately, Louise was also an intensely private and emotionally distant person. During the
taped interviews with Michaud and Aynesworth (2000), Bundy reported that his mother “certainly
had a lot of character, but [by no means] projected it” (p. 19). He furthermore mentioned that she
“was not a socializing-type person” that partook in gossip with friends or small talk with the
neighbours (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 18). Bundy articulated the above account as follows:
My mother and I...didn’t talk a lot about personal matters. Certainly never about sex or anything
like that. I don’t resent it, but I don’t know why this is. There’s something in her background that
prevents her from opening up...There’s this log-jam of feeling in her that she doesn’t open up and
explain (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 18-19).
Figure 1: Bundy with his mother as a young boy (n.d.).
68

During their stay in Philadelphia, Bundy’s aunt Julia reported that she occasionally witnessed him
behaving in strange and troubling manners (Sullivan, 2009). She recounted that when Bundy was
approximately three years old, she awoke in the early hours of the morning to find him slipping
kitchen knives under her duvet cover and arranging them around her body. She recalled this
incident saying, “He just stood there and grinned” (Newton, 2006, p. 30). Upon telling her parents
what happened, she claimed that “nobody did anything” and that she was seemingly the only one
who thought Bundy’s behaviour to be bizarre (Vronsky, 2004, 107). It was also during this
particular time that Bundy and his cousin Bruce would sneak into his grandfather’s greenhouse to
view his large collection of pornographic magazines. It is, however, unknown to what degree the
pornography was sexually violent and explicit (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999; Rule, 2009). Nelson
(1994) moreover asserted that even as a young child he would have periods where he would
transform into a very different person – from normal, to unusual. In his own words, he explained,
“Ted had had episodes where he would seem to turn into another, unrecognizable, person. A
great-aunt who had witnessed one such episode suddenly, inexplicably, found herself afraid of her
favorite nephew as they waited together at a dusk-darkened train station” (Newton, 1994, p. 154).
In an attempt to escape from their adverse circumstances, Bundy (four-years-old at the time), and
Louise moved to Tacoma, Washington to live with her uncle, Jack Cowell. Jack was an
accomplished pianist, composer, and music professor at the University of Puget Sound (Sullivan,
2009). The move away from his ‘parents’, and especially from his treasured ‘father’ Sam, caused
Bundy a great deal of distress and grief. However, he found support and comfort in his great uncle
Jack, and viewed him as a role model - someone after whom he could pattern his life upon. Jack
was “a refined gentleman...who exuded a great sense of accomplishment and
69

[had] an aura of extreme wealth”, and Bundy made it no secret that he wanted to be exactly like
him (Rippo, 2007, p. 49). During this time, Bundy also referred to Louis as both his mother, and his
sister – but only to his friends (Rippo, 2007).
Figure 2: Bundy playing in the snow outside his family home (1950).
In an odd turn off events, Louis decided to change Bundy’s surname from Cowell to Nelson. Louis
later admitted that, “...she didn’t want her young son subjected to ridicule because he shared the
same last name as his great-uncle and his mother” (Sullivan, 2009, p. 48). She felt that Theodore
Robert Nelson was a conventional, commonplace surname that would not attract any unnecessary
attention, and as a result, would give Bundy adequate anonymity when needed. Rule (2013)
mentioned that Louise “never wanted him to hear the word bastard” (p. 9). Furthermore, Bundy
claimed that although his time living with his uncle was not a nightmare, life was not as
70

terrific as it was for him in Philadelphia. The confusion initiated by his separation from his parents
made him feel as if he was living a constant lie (Rippo, 2007; Sullivan, 2009).
After a while, Louise seemed to find her feet, and located a job as a secretary at the Council of
Churches office. It is here where she met John Culpepper Bundy (better known as Johnnie) - a
Navy cook who worked at the Veterans Administration Hospital near Tacoma (Dobbert, 2009).
Kendall (1981) indicated that Bundy exhibited noticeable feelings of frustration and anger when
his ‘sister’ married Johnnie on May 19, 1951, as he reportedly forcefully “stuck his hand into the
wedding cake” at their wedding reception (p. 24). Before he turned five, Johnnie adopted young
Bundy as his own, officially changing his surname for the second time to Theodore Robert Bundy.
This would remain his surname for the rest of his life (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000). The newly
formed family lived a nomadic life until they finally settled down and bought a house on Skyline
Drive, Narrows Bridge, Tacoma, when Bundy was approximately seven years old (Rule, 2009;
Sullivan, 2009). Once his mother got married, Bundy’s life changed drastically, as he went from
being an only child, to the eldest of four stepsiblings. Linda was the first to be born of their marital
union in 1952, followed closely by Glenn (1954) and Sandra (1956), and later, Richard (1961)
(Sullivan, 2009). Years later, Bundy would admit that although he loved and cared for everyone in
his family, he shared a special connection with his mother and Richard. Being 15 years Richard’s
senior, Bundy reported that he felt an almost paternal connection to his youngest brother
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2013; Sullivan, 2009). In an interview scheduled a day before
his execution, Bundy described his family saying:
I grew up in a wonderful home with two dedicated and loving parents, as one of five brothers and
sisters. We, as children, were the focus of my parents’ lives. We regularly attended church. My
parents did not smoke or gamble. There was no physical abuse or
71

fighting in the home. I am not saying it was Leave it to Beaver, but it was a fine, solid Christian
home (Bundy, television interview, January 23, 1989).
Although Bundy’s explanation of his family sounded like the ideal family situation, he
failed to mention his adamant rejection of his newly established connection to Johnnie Bundy.
Even though he assumed his stepfather’s surname, he never ceased to identify himself as a Cowell
(Rule, 2013). Despite his stepfather’s best attempts to integrate him into the newly formed family,
Bundy rebuffed such efforts from every angle; he would rather spend time alone, than spend time
with Johnnie (Dobbert, 2009). As an adult, Bundy revealed that this “early habit of isolation no
doubt contributed to his later inability to integrate himself socially” (Michaud & Aynesworth,
2000, p. 22). Johnnie’s presence in his life made Bundy feel uneasy and upset. Michaud and
Aynesworth (2012) conveyed that Bundy saw his stepfather as an interloper – an intruder that
wanted to steal his mother away from him. Furthermore, he supposedly viewed Johnnie as
intellectually slow and feeble-minded man. This was partially due to his Southern drawl when
speaking (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
According to Terry Storwick, Bundy’s closest childhood friend, Bundy and Johnnie would
frequently become involved in intense verbal altercations. Bundy’s verbal assaults often led
Johnnie to grow physical with him. However, in Storwick’s opinion, “Johnnie wasn’t an
unreasonable man...his temper was a reaction to Ted’s animosity towards him” (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 1999, p. 63). Apparently, Johnnie oversaw the role of disciplinarian in the home and
believed in using corporal punishment to control his children. Louise would often have to act as
the intermediary between Bundy and Johnnie to refrain them from taking their arguments too far.
Bundy stated that he would regularly provoke Johnnie by turning Louise against him
72

(Sullivan, 2009). When Michaud and Aynesworth (2000) asked Bundy whether his mother or
father had a greater influence on him as a child, Bundy responded:
There is no question that I was more influenced by my mom than by my dad. Because, my dad
injected himself even less into the psychological [and] intellectual development of his children.
Mom sort of ran the roost in many respects, although he was acknowledged as the head of the
family” (p. 19-20).
Figure 3: Bundy (on the right) posing for a photograph with his mother and stepsiblings (1965).
Mrs. Oyster, Bundy’s first-grade teacher, was the first person to witness his behavior outside of his
home environment. Louise asserted that her ‘Teddy’ adored Mrs. Oyster who described him as an
intelligent boy, who was at ease in front of his classmates, and had the ability to express himself
verbally well beyond his years (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). Unfortunately, a substitute teacher,
Miss Gerri, replaced Mrs. Oyster when she left for maternity leave. Her absence reportedly
unnerved Bundy to such an extent that he became quiet, shy, and
73

uncomfortable in class. It was also around this time that he started to stutter when he became
anxious, and exhibited compulsive behaviours such as nail biting and nose picking (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 1999). Bundy seemed to loathe Miss Gerri, and described her as “a doctrinaire
Catholic...with the shape and menacing attitude of a cannon ball about ready to explode”
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999, p. 58). As a Protestant, Bundy felt that she discriminated against
him, and actively recounted how she broke a ruler over his hand after he hit another child in the
nose during a playground brawl. Schechter (2003) recalled that, “despite [his] intelligence and
superior grades, [Bundy’s] recurrent temper tantrums were violent enough to worry teachers” (p.
161). Storwick and Warren Dodge – another of Bundy’s close friends – corroborated Schechter’s
statement by revealing that they witnessed Bundy’s temper flare up on a number of occasions
during school, and outside settings such as at Boy Scouts (Rule, 2013). Storwick described Bundy’s
fits of rage as follows:
It was real easy to see when Ted got mad. His eyes turned just about black. I suppose that sounds
like something out of a cheap novel, but you could see it. He had blue eyes that were kind of
flecked with darker colours. When he got hot, they seemed to get less blue with darker colours. It
didn’t have to be a physical affront, either. Someone would say something, and you could just see
it in his face. The dark flecks seemed to expand (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999, p. 55).
Storwick and Warren moreover recalled several instances at Boy Scouts where Bundy’s short fuse
overwhelmed his ability to remain poised. For example, Bundy propelled a ceramic plate at
another scout’s face for hacking at a small tree with an axe. On a different occasion, he also struck
a fellow scout, John Moon, over the head with a weighty branch after a meaningless, run- of-the-
mill argument (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999). Storwick recounted the event as “a very
74

deliberate attack on another person. The way John described it, he was attacked from behind”
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999, p. 60).
Pre-adolescence: Junior high school. Despite his obscure nature, Bundy was well received by most
at Hunt Junior High School. He presented with above-average academic skills, showed talent on
the track field, and was an active member in Boy Scouts as well as in the Methodist Youth
Fellowship of his community congregation (Dobbert, 2009). However, Egger (2003) claimed that
teachers found it very difficult to discipline Bundy effectively. They stated that “when things went
wrong, he would blame an authority figure or the system...he felt that he was beyond reproach”
(p. 143). In terms of sport, Bundy conveyed that he always felt too small, and that he did not have
the desirable weight or physique to participate in such extracurricular activities. In actuality, this
was not true, but he never seemed to push himself either (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). During
his interview with Michaud and Aynesworth in 1980, Bundy recalled that his stepfather had no
interest in coming to the football games that he did happen to play. Moreover, his mother would
not support him, as it cost too much money. He summarised his experience as “never having that
parental stamp of approval” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 22). He went on to explain that
when he failed to make the school’s basketball and baseball teams, he felt terribly traumatised. In
his own words, he stated that, “I just didn’t know what to do. I thought it was something personal.
I always thought I should do better. It was a source of some agony” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000,
p. 22-23).
McClellan (2006), Rule (2013), and Sullivan (2009) reported that there were also many rumours
attached to Bundy’s pre-adolescent years. During school, Bundy allegedly refused to shower in the
presence of the other boys, and was teased and bullied mercilessly because of it (McClellan, 2006;
Rule, 2013). He apparently also masturbated in the broom closet of his
75

classroom on several occasions. During such incidences, some of Bundy’s classmates would throw
open the closet door and drench him in ice-cold water, after which they would tease him
relentlessly (Sullivan, 2009). When asked about these occurrences, Bundy vehemently denied any
of it ever happening.
At home, Bundy encountered a severe sense of deprivation. Bundy stated he felt “ashamed of his
family’s lower class status” (Rippo, 2007, p. 50) and experienced humiliation whenever someone
would see him in his father’s dilapidated Rambler automobile (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012;
Rippo, 2007). Likewise, Bundy made it very apparent that he hated the house and neighbourhood
that his family lived in. He declared that he was embarrassed to bring friends over because he had
to sleep in the basement where the renovations were never completed (Kendall, 1981; Rippo,
2007). Louise reportedly confirmed Bundy’s attitude towards their working class livelihood by
stating that “Teddy was deeply materialistic...he wanted possessions” (Michaud & Aynesworth,
1999, p. 59). Ironically, Bundy’s school friends asserted that he acted as if he was more mature
and superior than the rest of his class. Buss (2005) encapsulated his behaviour by stating that,
“[Bundy] now found himself in the very position and situation that appalled him, while obsessed
with avoiding and covering up” (p. 222).
During this time, Bundy also became increasingly isolated and often found solace in his bedroom
listening to late night radio talk shows. He later indicated to Dobbert (2009) that he found listening
to others’ conversation comforting, and that after a while, it became pleasurable and sexually
arousing to him. Apparently, sex was on Bundy’s mind from a young age, as he called his fourth-
grade teacher a “voluptuous disciplinarian” (Sullivan, 2009, p. 50) and rummaged through the
neigbourhood’s trash bins in search of pictures of naked women and detective magazines
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rippo, 2007).
76

77
Figure 4: Bundy (right) and Storwick (left) at Boy Scouts (1954). Another friend, Doug Holt, is
pictured in the center.
Adolescence: Senior high school. By the time Bundy was a senior at Woodrow Wilson High School
in 1960, he felt stunted in terms of his social and emotional development (Michaud & Aynesworth,
2000). He expressed that he found it increasingly difficult to make new friends, and struggled to
adapt to the normal changes usually encountered during adolescence (Sullivan, 2009). He
moreover stated that he constantly felt left behind and out of place amongst his friends, as they
“...moved into broader spheres of life and he didn’t” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 23). During
Bundy’s interview with Michaud and Aynesworth (2000), he briefly explained this conflicting phase
in his life:
It was not so much that there were significant events (in my boyhood), but the lack of things that
took place that was significant. The omission of important developments. I felt that I had
developed intellectually, but not socially. In junior high, everything was fine...I had no problem
learning the appropriate social behaviors...But I got to high school and I didn’t make any
progress...at some point my emotional growth just stopped...I felt lost (p. 23).

In terms of interpersonal relationships, McClellan (2006) and Rule (2013) reported that Bundy kept
his social circles small, and did not entertain the idea of building any intimate or close
relationships. Those that attended school with him characterised Bundy as athletic, good- looking,
well mannered, and academic, yet introverted. Although girls found his piercing blue eyes, dark
hair, and relatively athletic frame attractive, Bundy maintained that he could not tell when a girl
was interested in him, and that he never saw himself as physically appealing (McClellan, 2006;
Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). To compensate for his lack of social skills, Bundy reportedly
pretended to be a serious scholar that regarded himself as ‘above’ attending frivolous teenage
parties and drinking alcohol. He articulated his insecurities to Michaud and Aynesworth (2000):
To some degree, [it] was my way of defending myself against something I didn’t want to admit I
desired to be a part of...I used [those excuses] to compensate for my outright fear of
socialization...it was a way to protect myself because I couldn’t achieve those kinds of social goals
that I wanted (p. 24).
Due to the above-mentioned, Bundy reasoned that he thrived in formal situations such as the
classroom, as his performance was measurable, and the rules were strict and transparent - unlike
in social settings. Here, he could flaunt his intellectual abilities without having to mimic
appropriate social practices (Schechter, 2003). Berry-Dee (2003), an investigative criminologist,
explained Bundy’s success in class by stating that those who display early signs of anti-social
personality disorder often show “...improved behaviour in structured settings” (p. 40).
For the most part, Bundy’s domiciliary circumstances remained unchanged from his earlier years.
While Louis and Johnnie were both hard-working individuals, Bundy became progressively more
ashamed and self-conscious of their lower class status, and thought of his
78

parents as being “very frugal” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 21). Storwick claimed that Bundy
also felt incredibly envious towards any of his peers who displayed financial wealth (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012; Rippo, 2007). To rectify his monetary constraints, Bundy started to deliver
newspapers in his neighbourhood, and earned additional money mowing lawns with three other
boys (Sullivan, 2009). Not feeling exceptionally satisfied with performing manual labour, Bundy
resorted to petty theft as an alternative method of material gain. Bundy and a group of friends
also constructed a ‘forgery ring’ where they would counterfeit their own tickets to go ski on the
slopes without charge over the weekends (Rule, 2013; Sullivan, 2009).
By the age of 15, Bundy was an adept shoplifter and a fervent Peeping Tom. Rippo (2007)
indicated that although Bundy was faring very well at school, he frequently snuck out of his home
after dark to masturbate while watching women undress. Bundy later revealed that his late- night
escapades aggravated his sexual fantasies, and led him to seek literature that “discussed violent
sexual activity and death” (Dobbert, 2009, p. 107). As a teenager, police officers arrested Bundy on
more than two occasions for larceny and grand theft auto. However, the details of these crimes
are still unclear, as juvenile caseworkers are, by law, sanctioned to destroy the criminal records of
minors once they turn 18 (Rule, 2013; Sullivan, 2009). Ironically, Bundy intended to pursue a
career in law enforcement once he graduated from high school (Rippo, 2007). It was also during
this time that Ann Marie Burr, an eight-year-old girl, vanished inexplicably from Bundy’s
neighbourhood. Although he adamantly denied any knowledge or responsibility for her abduction,
the FBI still considers Bundy as a prime suspect in Ann’s disappearance. Interestingly, Ann Rule,
one of Bundy’s former friends, and author of the book ‘The Stranger Beside Me’ “...revealed that
she once received an email from a women ‘hinting
79

that Ted, a ninth grader, had taken her...a young teenager to see where he had hidden’ [a girl’s]
body’” (Rule, 2001, 547).
Figure 5: Bundy pictured in his high school’s yearbook – Class of 1965.
Many authors also regarded Bundy’s adolescent years as the period when he first learned of his
illegitimacy. Although conflicting accounts exist regarding how and when Bundy discovered that
his sister was, in fact, his mother, Storwick recalled that they were in high school when Bundy first
mentioned his illegitimacy to him (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). When Bundy revealed that
Johnnie was not his biological father, he apparently seemed bitter and deeply hurt. Storwick went
on to tell Michaud and Aynesworth (1999) that, “this [matter] was important to [Bundy]...When I
tried to make light of the situation, he said, ‘Well, it’s not you that’s a bastard’” (p. 63). After
discovering the truth about his illegitimacy, Bundy’s attitude towards Johnnie changed for the
worse, and their relationship disintegrated even further. Bundy displayed
80

his defiance towards his stepfather through suddenly refusing to call him ‘Dad’ after doing so for
years. After a while, ‘Dad’ became ‘Father’, and finally, ‘John’ (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Early adulthood: Acquiring independence in a new environment. In 1965, Bundy graduated from
high school and enrolled at the University of Puget Sound (UPS). However, he initially failed to
declare a major (Sullivan, 2009). With five children to support, Louise and Johnnie could not afford
to put Bundy through university as well. Thus, during his first year of studies, Bundy continued to
live with his parents while trying to earn additional money to pay for his tuition fees. He did this by
bouncing from one menial, dead-end job to the next, working as a shop assistant, shoe clerk,
restaurant bus boy, and sales representative in a department store, respectively (Dawson, 2015;
Rule, 2009). Dawson (2015) reported that Bundy’s employers described him as unreliable, since he
failed to show up for his shifts on numerous occasions, and never gave notice before quitting
either; he just left. In her interview with Michaud and Aynesworth (1999), Louise conveyed that
although Bundy succeeded academically in his freshman year, “he never got into the social life of
the school at all. He’d come home, sleep, study, sleep, and go back to school” (p. 61). Likewise,
Bundy recounted that he felt isolated and lonely at UPS, and did not make any new friends.
Furthermore, he rejected the idea of joining a fraternity house, as the other students seemed
wealthy and self-assured. This exacerbated Bundy’s feelings of financial inadequacy and low self-
image (Dawson, 2015). Bundy detailed this period in his life to Michaud and Aynesworth (1999):
My social life was a big zero. I spent a great deal of time with myself. It was a lonely year for me,
and it was worse because I didn’t have my old neighborhood buddies around. I didn’t feel socially
adept enough. I didn’t feel I knew how to function with those people. I felt terribly
uncomfortable...I didn’t know what made things tick. I didn’t know what made
81

people attractive to one another. I didn’t know what underlay social interactions (p. 61 & 66).
Bundy buys a Bug. The purchase of a second-hand 1958 model Volkswagen (VW) Beetle
reportedly gave Bundy a new sense of independence and freedom in his otherwise ‘socially
inhibited’ life. He later expressed his fondness of VW’s when he bought a second Beetle – a light
brown/tan 1968 model – which gave him the option to escape the social stressors of college with
his border collie, Lassie, whenever he felt the need arise (McGivern, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth,
2012). VW Beetles clearly became Bundy’s vehicle of choice. Wilson (2005) asserted that in the
1960s and 1970s, VW Beetles were symbolic of the Hippie Movement, and represented peace and
love. Ironically, Bundy’s Beetle became a mechanism of destruction, as he would use his ‘Bug’ to
lure and kidnap young, female students. His VW later also implicated him in his own crimes
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Figure 6: Bundy proudly posing with his Volkswagen Beetle (n.d.).
82

Chinese. While attending a lecture at UPS discussing international affairs and the Orient, Bundy
developed an instantaneous passion for the Chinese language (Dobbert, 2009). Bundy regarded
Mandarin as a window of opportunity where he could stand out above the rest of his peers - a
chance for others to take notice of him. Sullivan (2009) reported that Bundy’s brief encounter with
Chinese linguistics created a desire in him to “...one day work for the State Department in an
academic position, such as in trade on Mainland China...he wanted to gain a position of authority
to improve the relationship between the United States and China” (p. 53- 54). As a result, he
applied as a transfer student to the University of Washington (UW) in the fall of 1967 to become
involved in a program that offered studies focusing on Chinese history and language (Sullivan,
2009). Bundy told Michaud and Aynesworth (1999) that he viewed the Chinese language as
“exotic, glamorous, a bright cloak in which to wrap himself” (p. 67). Michaud and Aynesworth
(2012) speculated that it was during this particular phase in Bundy’s life, that he started to
fabricate a mask; a public persona that convinced those around him that he was charming,
intelligent, witty, and attractive. It was as if he developed an aura of assertiveness and self-
confidence overnight. It was also in this period that Bundy met and developed an intimate
relationship with fellow student Stephanie Brooks (pseudonym) – the so-called girl of his dreams
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Love at first sight. As best he knew how, Bundy felt the need to bond and build a ‘normal’
relationship with a female after his relocation to the University of Washington (Sullivan, 2009). He
later told a psychologist that he “had a longing for a beautiful coed [but] didn’t have the skill or
social acumen to cope with it” (Sullivan, 2009, p. 52). However, when Bundy met Brooks, it was
love at first sight; she was everything he ever wanted in a woman. Brooks came from an affluent
Californian family, and was beautiful, smart, and sophisticated. She was a driven young
83

woman who knew exactly what she wanted out of life (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). Bundy felt
particularly pleased when he and Brooks became a couple. He was especially proud of the fact that
he now had a girlfriend “who’d been raised in an atmosphere where money and prestige were
taken for granted” (Rule, 2001, p. 13). His friends were equally intrigued that Bundy was dating
someone of such high stature, and recalled that “he showed her off like a possession” (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012, p. 68). Louise confirmed that Brooks was a friendly, pleasant girl, but stated
that she felt uneasy about how intensely serious Ted was about her. In his prison interviews with
Dr. Paul Dawson (2015), Bundy spoke of how desperate he was to impress Brooks. He stated that
he would often exaggerate his accomplishments, and would lie to make himself seem more
successful than he actually was.
In the summer of 1967, Bundy transferred to Stanford University in an attempt to demonstrate his
commitment to Brooks. Here, he would continue to study Chinese, whilst being closer to her in her
home town of San Francisco. However, Bundy struggled to adapt emotionally to the move away
from home, and subsequently started to flounder academically (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; &
Sullivan, 2009). With Bundy’s immaturity and academic failure now exposed, Brooks terminated
their relationship after her graduation in 1968. She reasoned that although his boyish charm
initially appealed to her, his lack of overall maturity, drive, and motivation for a prosperous future,
eventually led her to end the relationship (Dawson, 2015; Rule, 2013). She also had a “niggling
suspicion” that Bundy used people to get what he wanted (Rippo, 2007, p. 53). Bundy shared this
experience with Dawson (2015):
[Brooks] pointed out that I was immature, had no future, and was not husband material for her.
She dumped me, broke my heart and I was obsessed, or haunted by her for years...I was
84

very depressed over Stephanie rejecting me. It just confirmed all those old tapes, those old
echoes in my mind that I didn’t fit in. I was less than and not part of the in-crowd... (p. 128).
Bundy’s brother, Glenn, corroborated Bundy’s reaction after his split from Brooks by stating that,
“[Stephanie] screwed him up for a while. He came home and seemed pretty upset and moody. I’d
never seen him like that before. He was always in charge of his emotions” (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 1999, p. 69). Devastated and shocked by their break-up, Bundy returned to the
University of Washington and withdrew from the Chinese program altogether. Instead, he decided
to pursue a career in architecture, and enrolled for a course in urban planning. He apparently
chose this field of study because Brooks once mentioned to him that she admired Albert Finney’s
role as an architect in the 1967 film Two for the Road (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). He
moreover landed a job parking cars at a local yacht club to fund his studies (Sullivan, 2009). It was
here, at the yacht club, that Bundy experienced his first sexual encounter. According to Michaud
and Aynesworth (2012), Bundy had sex for the first time with a 60-year- old widow named
Beatrice Sloan, who worked at the club’s bar. Apparently, he was completely passive during the
act wherein the woman assumed the dominant role. Unfortunately, Bundy failed to attend any of
his scheduled architecture lectures, and did not write any of his examinations either. He finally
dropped out of college completely in early 1968 (Tanay, 2013). Mentally, Bundy started to unravel.
He needed to alleviate the emotional tension that was causing him to experience an internal
meltdown. He decided to get away from Washington for a while, and travelled to Denver,
Philadelphia, and Arkansas to visit with family members (McClellan, 2006; Sullivan, 2009).
Ted did not understand what had happened to him, why the mask he had been using had failed
him. This first tentative foray into the sophisticated world had ended in disaster. It
85

would usher in another period of isolation in which he would brood on his situation, keeping to
himself until a better, more workable mask could be fashioned (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999, p.
69).
Figure 7: Bundy and Stephanie Brooks (1973). Brooks’ eyes are covered to protect her identity.
Adulthood: A volatile period. In an attempt to reestablish his life, Bundy returned to Seattle in April
of 1968 after a three-month ‘therapeutic getaway’ (Sullivan, 2009). On his return to Washington
State, Bundy once again found a low-grade day job at a local Safeway store, while also working as
a kitchen helper at the Olympia Hotel by night. However, his employment at the hotel was short-
lived, as allegations started to surface that Bundy was stealing. Although personnel never officially
fired or laid charges against him, Bundy quit after only a month (Sullivan, 2009). Shortly after his
resignation, Bundy started to involve himself in criminal activities such as burglary and theft. He
befriended a thief and drug user called Richard, who supposedly aided him in developing his
criminal skills, especially in the realm of shoplifting. According to Michaud and
86

Aynesworth (2012), Bundy did not necessarily steal with the intention of obtaining extra money –
he hardly ever sold any of his ‘acquisitions’. Instead, they reported that Bundy’s thieving behaviour
was motivated by his need to accumulate possessions, and purely for the thrill of it. The reasoning
behind Bundy’s motives for stealing would later echo in his interviews when he spoke about why
he killed. Before embarking on his shoplifting escapades, Bundy would often drink alcohol and
smoke cannabis to relax his inhibitions. He stated that it calmed him down in times of distress, and
sedated any sense of anxiety or nervousness that he experienced before committing an illegal act
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2013). In his own words, Bundy explained his use of,
specifically, alcohol: “Every time I wanted to get something just to pump myself up a little, I’d drink
a few beers, ‘cause I felt I wouldn’t have any inhibitions... [Before stealing] I wasn’t nervous – and
that’s important” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000, p. 38).
Bundy soon realised that he had become quite the skilled larcenist, and that he remained largely
undetected. He moreover learned that he could alter his physical appearance easily, since he
lacked defining facial features – he did not even have to use a disguise (see Figure 1). He could
simply grow a mustache or beard, comb his hair differently, or gain or lose weight, and his
appearance would change dramatically. During his murder trials, a judge even commented that
Bundy had “the face of a changeling...a chameleon” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999, p. 73). He saw
his anonymity as a primary trait for evading capture. Unfortunately, he would also use this quality
of anonymity to commit much more heinous crimes in the future (Rule, 2013). As luck would have
it, Bundy unexpectedly crossed paths with an old high school acquaintance that offered him the
opportunity to get involved in politics. Bundy did not think twice about it, and immediately
accepted the proposal (Sullivan, 2009).
87

88
Figure 8: The many faces of Theodore Robert Bundy.
Political dealings. During the summer of 1968, Bundy started working for Art Fletcher, a
city council member pursuing the Republican nomination for lieutenant governor of Washington
State (Sullivan, 2009). He embraced the opportunity to volunteer for Fletcher’s campaign, as he
saw politics as a possible avenue for him to gain a higher social status and financial success –
something he had always desired. From a young age, Bundy exhibited a keen interest in politics,
and had worked as a volunteer during a local political race during his final year of high school
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000). In his interview with Michaud and Aynesworth (2012), he recalled
the pleasure that he derived from the political field, as it gave his otherwise isolated life, meaning:
Politics gave me the opportunity to be close to people. To be socially involved with them...as a
consequence of working with them. You get very close. You drink each night –

and people sleep with each other. It’s a sort of built in social life. Which I never had...The reason I
loved politics was because here was something that allowed me to use my talents and
assertiveness. You were accepted...So politics was perfect (p. 25 & 65).
Bundy additionally became active in state and national politics including the presidential
campaign of Nelson Rockefeller (Dobbert, 2009). His excellent communication skills and articulate
and polished demeanor earned him great respect among his fellow coworkers. With unflinching
diligence (which was unusual considering his employment history), Bundy progressed from being a
volunteer political activist to working on a professional level for the Washington State Republican
Party (Dobbert, 2009). From an outsiders’ perspective, it seemed as if Bundy had a bright future
ahead of him. Yet, it was also throughout this period that Bundy developed an unhealthy taste for
sadistic forms of pornography – especially when it comprised of the forceful and violent sexual
domination of a female by a male (Dobbert, 2009; Sullivan, 2009). According to Sullivan (2009), his
voyeuristic nighttime activities had also escalated at this time, and served as a catalyst for his
ensuing murders.
A transitional period. The years 1969 through to 1974 proved to be prosperous years for Bundy
(Dawson, 2015). By the age of 22, he had matured into a sophisticated young man with a
promising future ahead of him – the type of man that Brooks had sought upon ending her
relationship with Bundy the year before. Nothing in Bundy’s behaviour seemed defective or
troublesome. In fact, Bundy’s charismatic and charming nature made him exceedingly likeable
amongst his fellow campaigners and even more popular in the political arena (Dawson, 2015; Rule,
2013). Bundy seemed to turn his life around. Over the next four years, he graduated with degree
in Psychology, entered into law school, held a steady, long-term relationship, and filled important
positions in various politically orientated professions (Dawson, 2015). Moreover, the
89
a

Seattle Police Department considered Bundy a local hero for apprehending a thief and saving a
three-year-old boy from drowning in Green Lake (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2009).
It was also during the course of his ‘reinvented life’ that Bundy decided that he needed to
establish and come to terms with the truth surrounding his parentage (biologically speaking). After
traveling to Vermont and searching through boxes full of his parent’s documents, Bundy’s birth
certificate finally confirmed his suspicions. Louise was, in fact, his mother, and his ‘parents’ were
actually his grandparents (Rule, 2013). He explained to Michaud and Aynesworth (2012) that the
discovery regarding the identities of his family members was not painful. He stated that his mom
loved him enough to birth him, and care for him, and that that was sufficient for him. Instead, he
saw it as an opportunity to decide whom he wanted to be in life, although he never revealed what
that decision was. Bundy’s former fiancée, Elizabeth Kendall (pseudonym) however, was skeptical
of Bundy’s version of events, since she reported the discovery somewhat differently (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 1999). According to Kendall, his mother’s dishonesty infuriated Bundy; he felt that
she caused him immense humiliation (Michaud & Aynesworth, 1999). Bundy would later admit, in
somewhat veiled terms, that it was after this shocking revelation that he began to act out his
fantasies of violent sex and murder (Sullivan, 2009).
Rule (2009) described Bundy’s life as being a dichotomy; he played the role of a hero, but was also
the villain. She explained that, “Ted Bundy took lives, [but] he also saved lives” (p. 28). According
to Dawson (2015), Bundy wore a socially acceptable mask between 1969 and 1974. When asked
whether he tried to ‘reinvent’ himself during this particular period in time, Bundy answered that,
“[he’d] substituted a false bravado – a fake it ‘til you make it approach” (Dawson, 2015, p. 128).
While Bundy appeared to be successful, confident, and stable to those around
90

him, Keppel and Birnes (2005) mentioned that some people reportedly found Bundy’s abnormally
intense use of eye contact and extended stare a bit strange.
Elizabeth Kendall. In the late summer of 1969, Bundy returned to Seattle, and settled down in a
boarding room in Ernst and Frieda Rogers’ house in the University District. The Rogers’s home was
one of several rooming houses where single students could find inexpensive accommodation close
to the university. Here, he met and dated Kendall, the daughter of a prominent Utah doctor, and a
secretary at the University of Washington, for approximately six years (Michaud & Aynesworth,
2012, Rule, 2009). Kendall and her three-year-old daughter, Liane, had recently relocated to
Seattle after she finalised her divorce from her former husband, a convicted felon. Rule (2009)
described Kendall as, “a diminutive woman with long brown hair – not pretty, but with a
winsomeness that made her seem years younger than she was...she was very small, very
vulnerable” (p. 28). In Kendall’s (1981) book, ‘The Phantom Prince: My life with Ted Bundy’, she
conveyed that she and Bundy had met in a college bar called the ‘Sandpiper Tavern’ on 30
September 1969. She wrote that she knew that Bundy “was a cut above the rest of the crowd” (p.
10) before they had even had a chance to dance. She believed that he was her “prince” (Kendall,
1981, p. 12). Soon after, Bundy and Kendall officially entered into a relationship that would endure
many obstacles in the years to come.
While Bundy and Kendall seemed like the perfect couple, Bundy’s dishonesty and unfaithfulness
reportedly exacerbated Kendall’s jealous streak, and made her feel very insecure in their
relationship (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). However, Kendall chose to overlook their issues
because she thought of Bundy as a tender and loving man who had the ability to succeed in life,
and took the role of a father figure seriously (Kendall, 1981). Although they had planned to get
married on several occasions, Bundy did not want to commit, as it would apparently
91

deprive him from his freedom of choice. During one of their many explosive arguments, Bundy
even ripped up the marriage license before they had the opportunity to sign the document
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Sullivan, 2009). Kendall added fuel to the fire when she fell
pregnant with Bundy’s child in 1972, and terminated the pregnancy without his knowledge. While
he later claimed to have supported her decision, Kendall maintained that Bundy was livid when he
found out (Kendall, 1981). Over the years, their relationship seemed to become increasingly
bizarre. Kendall later told detectives that Bundy’s sexual drive had diminished to almost nothing by
1974, but that he blamed it on pressure at work. He also repeatedly comforted her suspicions by
emphasising that he was not involved with any other woman but her (Rule, 2013). She moreover
stated that in the year before Ted had ‘lost’ his sex drive (that is, 1973); his sexual interests had
suddenly changed. Kendall explained to Rule (2009):
He got this book, this Joy of Sex book...He read about anal intercourse, and he insisted on trying it
[with me]. I didn’t like it, but went along with him. Then there was something in that book about
bondage. He went right to the drawer where I kept my nylons. Sometimes, after I was asleep at
night, I’d wake up and find him under the covers...looking at my [naked] body with a flashlight (p.
190).
Kendall furthermore recalled that she allowed Bundy to tie her to the four bedposts with her nylon
stockings before having sex. She described it as a distasteful experience, but agreed to carry out
Bundy’s sexual fantasies on two more occasions. However, during the third occasion, she reported
that Bundy started to choke her, and she had panicked. She indicated that she refused to consent
to such behaviour ever again, but that Bundy was unhappy with her decision (Rule, 2009).
92
Beside Bundy’s abrupt change in sexual behaviour, Kendall pointed out that Ted constantly lied to
her while they were together. She was also aware that he frequently stole things (Rule, 2013).
Before Bundy was arrested, Kendall reportedly found some unusual items in his car. These
included a meat cleaver, oriental knife, ski mask, crutches, and a pair of pantyhose with cutouts
for eyes. When she asked Bundy about them, he responded belligerently, and told her that “if
[she] ever told anyone about it, [he’d] break [her] fucking neck” (Kendall, 1981, p. 65). As an
afterthought, Bundy told her that the crutches were for his proprietor (Rule, 2009). On one
particular event, Kendall saw plaster of Paris in his boarding room. When she confronted him
about it, he admitted to stealing it from a medical supply center that he was currently working at.
She additionally found a paper bag full of women’s clothes and underwear in his room, but never
questioned him about it out of fear that he would verbally assault her, and accuse her of prying in
his personal affairs (Rule, 2009). Sullivan (2009) succinctly summarised that, “it would not be a
normal relationship. [Bundy] would not only secretly date other women at various times, but he
would also be transforming into the efficient killer we have all come to know” (p. 58).
Figure 9: Bundy and his former fiancée, Elizabeth ‘Liz’ Kendall (1972).
93

One such ‘mistress’ was Claire Frost, a slightly built, dark-haired woman who temporarily (and
unknowingly) caused a rift between Bundy and Kendall during the summer of 1972 (Rule, 2013). In
an interview following Bundy’s first arrest, Frost conveyed to detectives that “[Bundy] didn’t feel
that he fit in with my...my ‘class’. I guess that’s the only way to describe it. He wouldn’t come to
my parent’s home because he said he just didn’t fit in” (Rule, 2013, p. 202). She moreover
substantiated Kendall’s accounts of Bundy’s sudden bizarre sexual interests and rapidly changing
demeanor through the following statement to detective Kathleen McChesney:
We went on a picnic in April on the Humptulips River, and I had quite a lot of wine. I was dizzy, and
he kept dunking my head under [the water]. He was trying to untie the top of my bikini. He
couldn’t manage it, and he suddenly pulled my bikini bottom off and had intercourse with me. He
didn’t say anything, and he had his forearm pressed under my chin so hard that I couldn’t breathe.
I kept telling him I couldn’t breathe, but he didn’t let up the pressure until he was finished. There
was no affection at all. Afterward, it was as if it never happened. He drove me home, and he was
nice again...I just couldn’t understand the way he kept changing. One minute he was nice, and the
next he acted like he hated me (Rule, 2013, p. 202-204).
Psychology. In June of 1970, Bundy re-enrolled at the University of Washington as a psychology
major (Dawson, 2015; Rule, 2009). While completing his studies, he volunteered at Seattle’s Crisis
Clinic where he worked as a counsellor operating their suicide hotline. Ironically, many of Bundy’s
co-workers reported that he saved several lives during his late night shifts, and came across as
someone who shared a deep, empathic connection with his callers (Dawson, 2015).
94

During his time at the crisis clinic, Bundy befriended a fellow volunteer named Ann Rule. Rule
wrote an all-inclusive book documenting her personal encounters with Bundy called ‘The Stranger
beside Me’, which she released after his stay of execution. Bundy reportedly read the book while
he resided at Florida State Prison (FSP), but only commented that Rule’s portrayal of him was
inaccurate, and that she could not possibly understand the mind of a serial killer as well as he
could (Rule, 2009). However, Rule recalled that she was very fond of Bundy and that he always
made her feel safe and protected when they worked the late-night shift together. She also
expressed that Bundy showed her a great amount of support and kindness during challenging
periods in her life (Rule, 2009). In 1972, Bundy graduated his degree in psychology ‘with
distinction’, and began working as a counsellor at a psychiatric outpatient clinic at Harborview
Hospital (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Tanay, 2013). Regrettably, Bundy did not receive the same
praise at Harborview as he did at the crisis clinic. A staff member working alongside Bundy argued
that he was “not capable of being emotionally responsive to the needs of his clients and patients”
(Sullivan, 2009, p. 64). It was also rumoured that he had been involved in a brief sexual
relationship with one of his co-workers (Sullivan, 2009).
Law. Albeit for his love of Psychology, Bundy ventured back into the realms of politics shortly after
he graduated from Washington University. Bundy joined a reelection campaign where he served
as Governor Dan Evans’ right-hand and self-professed ‘spy’. He would supposedly record the
opposition’s conversations and report them to Evans. Michaud and Aynesworth (1999) recounted
that Bundy was so engrossed by his role as a spy that he took up acting classes to learn how to
apply costume makeup, and to acquire skills in the art of using disguises. Kendall (1981) stated
that he even bought a fake mustache that he would sometimes wear around the house. Once the
reelection was over, Bundy secured a position at the Seattle
95
Crime Prevention Advisory Commission (CPAC) where he acted as assistant director, and facilitated
the police in launching a pilot study on rape prevention (McClellan, 2006). In contrast to his
forthcoming murderous behaviour, Sullivan (2009) asserted that, “Bundy had a particular interest
in how attacks were committed, the ratio of arrests to convictions, and how the numerous police
and sheriff’s departments worked together to solve violent crimes” (p. 68-69).
By 1973, Bundy again felt the need to improve himself, and subsequently submitted an application
to gain entrance into the University of Utah’s law program (Sullivan, 2009). Despite obtaining
below-average scores on his Law School Aptitude Test, Bundy gained admission based on
recommendation letters written by several of his psychology professors (Dawson, 2015). One of
his recommendation letters read as follows:
Mr. Bundy is undoubtedly one of the top undergraduate students in our department. Indeed, I
would place him in the top 1% of undergraduate students...[he] has become intensely interested
in studying psychological variables, which influence jury decisions...It is clear that other students
use him as a standard to emulate...His personal characteristics are all of the highest standards.
[He] is a mature young man who is very responsible and emotionally stable (but, not emotionally
flat as many students appear – he does get excited or upset appropriately in various situations)...I
am at a loss to delineate any real weaknesses he has” (Dawson, 2015, p. 39).
His personal admissions application was even more surprising than that of his college professor’s.
In the final paragraph of his motivational letter Bundy wrote, “I apply to law school because this
institution will give me the tools to become a more effective actor in the social role I have defined
myself” (Rule, 2009, p. 39). He even had the audacity to include a paragraph stating that he was an
orphan that had been surrendered to several foster homes during his
96

childhood to gain sympathy from, and manipulate professors into accepting his application (Rule,
2009). No one could have guessed that Bundy’s success was the product of a well thought out
façade – a public persona that efficiently masked his fractured personality and experience of
internal chaos. By the spring of 1974, he had managed to kill several young women without
leaving a shred of evidence behind (Dawson, 2015).
Romantic affiliations. Apart from his solid occupational foundation and popularity as a law student,
Bundy also suddenly appeared to be every woman’s dream man (Dawson, 2015). Being in a
longstanding relationship with Kendall did not seem to hinder him from indulging in a number of
affairs with co-workers and random women that he picked up at bars. Bundy had also reemerged
in the life of Stephanie Brooks, and he later admitted that they had occasionally kept in contact
since the dissolution of their relationship back in 1967 (Rule, 2009). Bundy’s demonstration of
employability appealed to Brooks, as she perceived his success in law and politics to be undeniable
proof of his ever-growing maturity – a characteristic that she considered previously nonexistent in
Bundy (Dobbert, 2009).
Despite the fact that Bundy was still living with Kendall in Washington, he asked for Brooks’ hand
in marriage after a very short, yet intense, courtship. Rule (2013) reported that Brooks had
apparently said ‘yes’ without a moment’s hesitation. However, two weeks after her acceptance of
his marital proposal, Bundy abruptly broke off his relationship with Brooks in a similar fashion to
her earlier rejection of him – achieving his long-awaited retribution. According to Dobbert (2009),
Bundy left Brooks in San Francisco after the 1974 New Year, and returned to Seattle without the
slightest intention of ever contacting her again. Bundy explained his sudden act of revenge on
Brooks to Dawson (2015):
97

“Well it’s true, I blew-off Stephanie – that bitch had it coming. She was the love of my life and she
tossed me in the garbage. It was like she ripped my guts out. I was so goddamn depressed after
she dumped me. Turnabout is fair play...I got engaged to that bitch to turn around and get
revenge for her dumping me...As I told you, that sex-addict, porno-stoked malignant self, turned
me out into a new brutal level. [Thereafter] I couldn’t resist the killing obsession...” (p. 130-131 &
267).
Interestingly, all Bundy’s victims possessed similar physical features to Brooks, and had long, dark
hair parted in the middle (Rule, 2013). Even though he refused to see the similarities between
Brooks and his victims, detectives were convinced that there was a link. Kendall also shared this
resemblance. She corroborated the police’s suspicions by recalling that “whenever I talked about
cutting [my hair], he got very upset. He really likes long hair. The girls that he dated besides me
had hair just like mine” (Rule, 2009, p. 190-191).
Victims. Between 1974 and 1978, Bundy abducted, assaulted, raped, murdered, and dismembered
over 30 women across different states of America. Although Bundy ultimately confessed to 30
murders approximately a week before his scheduled execution, many law enforcement
professionals involved in his case suspect that his actual murder count was closer to 100 victims -
or even more (Dobbert, 2009). Michaud and Aynesworth (2012) moreover maintained that the
identities of many of Bundy’s victims would probably be unknown forever.
Before the victim profiles can be discussed, it is important to note that Bundy did not view his
victims as living beings. Rather, he objectified them through the process of depersonalisation as a
means to separate or detach himself from the ‘human’ aspect of his victims. This way, he could
feel no remorse for the pain he inflicted on them; their thoughts and feelings became insignificant
(Sierra, 2009).The theme of objectification clearly manifested itself in Bundy’s
98

explanation to Dawson (2015) about how he could murder so many innocent young women
without feeling the slightest sense of sorrow or regret: “the girls I killed were just symbols, images,
and objects. I was looking for an idealised, abstract woman – avoiding any personal connection.
Reasonable facsimiles of women as a class in the mythological sense” (p. 210). He further noted
that he could not even remember half of the females he murdered, since “a guy does not keep
track when he is having fun” (Dawson, 2015, p. 320). Bundy could not understand why there was
such major concern surrounding the disappearances of a ‘few’ women. In his perception, the
world was overpopulated anyway, and could do with a little less people. He emphasised his belief
by asking one of the court appointed psychiatrists: “What’s one less bimbo among billions of
people anyway?” (Dawson, 2015, p. 236). He ended off his conversation with Dawson (2015) by
apologising for the fact that his sex needs took precedence over some woman’s life, and
arrogantly added that, “that’s the way the cookie crumbles” (p. 353).
Victim profiles. Apart from the fact that all his identified victims had long, dark hair that parted in
the middle, McClellan (2006) stated that Bundy’s victims also shared various other similarities. All
of his victims were young, middle-class, Caucasian females between the ages of 16-26 years.
However, two of his victims deviated from his pattern of choice namely, Kimberly Diane Leach,
who was twelve, and Ann Marie Burr (suspected to be Bundy’s first ‘trial’ victim), who was eight-
years-old. Regarding his victims’ education and lifestyle choices, Bundy was predominantly drawn
to university students or graduates, who, generally, did not partake in high- risk behaviours. Only
two of his victims reportedly hitchhiked – an activity considered dangerous since it involves
climbing into a stranger’s car. While most of Bundy’s victims participated in controlled, social
drinking behaviour at restaurants, bars, or fraternity gatherings, none of them were involved in
activities such as excessive alcohol consumption or drug abuse
99

(McClellan, 2006; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2013). Michaud and Aynesworth (2012)
moreover conveyed that Bundy did not personally know any of his victims. Strangely, the women
that he did happen to date, marry, or live with, never came to any harm.
In terms of Bundy’s ‘killing strategy’, his modus operandi often varied according to his mood and
degree of intoxication, and to the opportunities that presented themselves in his environment (for
example, women walking alone in secluded areas on campus) (Dawson, 2015). On a few occasions,
he surreptitiously snuck into his victims’ residence at night, and bludgeoned them to death as they
slept. However, on other occasions, he employed a far more elaborate plan to abduct and
subsequently murder his victims (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). During his more convoluted
attempts, Bundy used his superficial charm and flattery to gain young women’s trust. His attractive
features and suave demeanor in combination with his ruse of fake casts, crutches, and/or arm
slings, allowed him to gain sympathy from his unsuspecting victims. By pretending to be injured,
Bundy distracted them from the ensuing danger and lured them to his VW Beetle. Here, he
overpowered, handcuffed, and assaulted them with a crowbar before transporting them to more
secluded or isolated areas. During one instance, he even impersonated a police officer to ensure
that his victim followed him to his vehicle. Bundy detailed that his “maneuvers and tricks worked
best with a susceptible, more defenseless woman who [he] could manipulate into a defenseless
position”, and added that lying is a prerequisite for anyone who wanted to abduct women
(Dawson, 2015, p. 204). He furthermore explained his choice of victim to Dawson (2015):
I picked the young ladies...if I sensed a kind of vulnerability, susceptibility, and receptiveness. [I
aimed for those who] were open to helping me – gullible enough to fall for my ruses, cons, tricks,
such as the arm-in-the-sling, undercover cop, injured guy who needed
100

a bit of help. I brought out the mother in some of them – and I don’t mean my mother. I wasn’t
hung-up on any guilt feeling, so the whole killing spree just snowballed (p. 211). After he abducted
his victims, Bundy typically bludgeoned, sexually assaulted, and
strangled them in a quiet area. He expressed that the more petrified his victims became, the more
it aroused him sexually (Dawson, 2015). Bundy furthermore stated that after his victim regained
consciousness, he found it highly amusing to pretend that someone else attacked them, and that
he was “a Good Samaritan taking them to the hospital” (Dawson, 2015, p. 217). Thereafter, he
finally strangled them with rope or stockings during which he raped them until they died. Bundy
detailed his experience of murder to Dawson (2015):
You feel the last bit of breath leaving their body...you’re looking into their eyes. A person in that
situation is God! You then possess them and they shall forever be a part of you. And the grounds
where you kill them or leave them become sacred to you, and you will always be drawn back to
them (p. 229).
On some occasions, Bundy admitted that he even used some of his victims to animate his sex
fantasies. He reportedly made them dress in certain outfits, and forced them to pose in ways that
recreated the pornographic images that appealed to him in magazines or movies (Dawson, 2015).
Post-mortem reports indicated that he moreover bit his victims on the breasts or buttocks
(McClellan, 2006). In many cases, their genitalia also showed evidence of severe physical trauma.
Pathologists working on Bundy’s case explained that some of the women’s genitalia had been
slashed with a sharp object such as a knife and that there were clear signs of forceful penetration
by inanimate objects. These objects included a splintered wooden bedpost and an aerosol can
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2009). Rule (2009) characterised the latter as actions of
“symbolic rape” (p. 57).
101

102
Figure 10: Photograph of the bite marks on Lisa Levy’s buttocks (1978). Experts in forensic
dentistry successfully matched Bundy’s unique dental features to the tooth impressions left in
Levy’s skin.
Once his victims were dead, Bundy disposed of their bodies at remote dumpsites. Depending on
his location, he either concealed their corpses behind hard-to-find bushes or shrubs, buried them
in shallow graves, or threw them into flowing river gorges (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
According to Dawson (2015), Michaud and Aynesworth (2012), and Rule (2013), Bundy often
revisited his secondary crime scenes to perform sexual acts with the corpses until the process of
decomposition drove him away. Bundy asserted that he had his own “garbage disposal method at
the dumping grounds where he left his kills – a whole bunch of beasties who would, in effect,
destroy every last shred of the victim” (Dawson, 2015, p. 86). Here, Bundy was referring to wild
animals, rodents, and insects that ate away at the victims’ dead bodies. This, in combination with
the natural elements, made the physical identification of many of his victims extremely difficult
(Keppel & Birnes, 2005; McClellan, 2006). In some instances, Bundy also beheaded his victims

with a hacksaw. He told Dawson (2015) that he carried the decapitated heads around with him for
days and have oral sex with them. Additionally, he took some of the bodies home with him, took
pictures of them, and groomed them by applying make-up on their faces. Bundy willingly admitted
that he found the cyanotic hue (that is, a blue/purple discolouration) of his vicitms’ fingernails and
lips intriguing (Sullivan, 2009). However, one of Bundy’s most disturbing confessions was that he
engaged in cannibalism. He told Dawson (2015) the following concerning his cannibalistic acts:
I did eat some flesh of some of the women – the ones who I dismembered and brought their
heads home. Sometimes I’d have several girls heads stored at my place. I’d cook and eat their
flesh. It was part of my sex-fantasy obsession (p. 365).
When investigators finally asked Bundy how he could take someone’s life in such a cruel,
sadistic manner, he avoided any form of accountability. He reasoned that women who were
walking alone were asking to be murdered. Furthermore, he argued that if a girl is stupid enough
to get into a strangers car, “she deserves everything she gets” (Dawson, 2015, p. 374).
103
Figure 11: Photographs of some of Bundy’s known victims.

Washington State victims. Bundy’s first documented attack on a woman occurred on January 4,
1974 in Seattle, Washington. Bundy entered Joni Lenz’s (pseudonym) basement apartment and
bludgeoned her with a blunt instrument while she was asleep in her bed. He then sexually
assaulted her with a speculum (a device generally used for pelvic examinations on women) to such
an extent that it left her with severe internal injuries. Lenz remained in a coma for ten days.
Although she survived the attack, Bundy left her with irreversible brain injuries (Dawson, 2015).
Lynda Ann Healy, a psychology major at the University of Washington, was Bundy’s next victim.
Bundy attacked and kidnapped Healy from her basement bedroom while she was asleep on
January 31, 1974. Co-workers reported Healy missing the following morning when she failed to
show up at the radio station where she worked as a part-time ski announcer (Dawson, 2015;
Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). Following Healy’s disappearance, Bundy traveled to Olympia,
Washington in search for another victim. On March 12, 1974, an Evergreen State College student,
Donna Gail Manson, went missing after she left her campus dorm room to attend a jazz concert.
Bundy had managed to seduce and abduct her without leaving any witnesses or evidence.
Detectives never found Manson’s body (Dawson, 2015).
Approximately a month later, Bundy made his way to Ellensburg, Washington. Soon after his
arrival, Susan Rancourt went missing. Rancourt’s friends indicated that she planned on meeting up
with them to watch a German movie after her dorm advisors’ meeting on campus, but she never
arrived. According to eyewitnesses, Rancourt was last seen after she reportedly helped a man with
a cast on his arm, carry books to his Volkswagen Beetle on May 6, 1974 (Dawson, 2015). Two
weeks later, Bundy drove 260 miles to Corvallis, Oregon in Washington State where he abducted
Roberta Kathleen ‘Kathy’ Parks on May 6, 1974. Parks vanished after she left her dorm room at
Oregon State University to get coffee with friends at the campus
104

Student Union Building. Bundy later admitted that he used the same ruse on Parks that he did on
Rancourt (Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). He moreover told Dawson (2015) the
following about Parks:
I’m afraid Parks was a particularly juicy, luscious, and succulent piece of ass. Normally, I would
have disposed of damaged goods at a remote dumpsite like the lower slopes of a mountain in
Oregon. I risked police detection and drove her from Oregon to Washington. I wanted more time
to ravish, fornicate, and abuse her body. Rape. Necrophilia. The whole nine yards I’m embarrassed
to admit (p. 163).
Bundy returned to his original ‘hunting grounds’ in Seattle in June, 1974. However, instead of
lurking around on campuses, he now changed his focus to local college hangout spots situated on
the outskirts of university terrains to pick up young women. Brenda Ball, a graduate of Highline
Community College, was one such woman. Eyewitness accounts last place Ball in the parking lot of
Flame Tavern at around two o’clock in the morning where she had been attempting to obtain a lift
home from anyone who was willing to take her. Her roommate only reported her missing 17 days
later. She explained that she was not initially concerned about Ball’s welfare, as everyone knew
her to be free-spirited and independent. The following year, investigators found the skeletal
remains of Healy, Parks, and Ball on Taylor Mountain. Due to weather conditions and various wild
animals, forensic teams could only locate their jawbones and parts of their fractured skulls
(Dawson, 2015; Keppel & Birnes, 2005; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Bundy’s next known victim was Georgann Hawkins, a sorority student at the University of
Washington. She was last seen socialising on Greek Row on the night of June 11, 1974. While on
death row, Bundy confessed that he had feigned a broken leg to persuade Hawkins to help
105

him carry a briefcase to his car. He explained that his ploy involved dropping his briefcase
repeatedly (because he had to use crutches) until someone – preferably a young girl – would take
pity on him. Once at his car, he stated that he hit Hawkins over the head with a crowbar until she
was unconscious, loaded her into his car, and drove her to a forested area before he raped, and
strangled her with a piece of rope. Bundy added that he then had sex with her corpse, and severed
her head with a hacksaw (Dawson, 2015; Keppel & Birnes, 2005). On July 14, 1974, Bundy
ventured to Lake Sammamish State Park where he abducted two women a mere four hours apart
in broad daylight. Witnesses claimed that a man in white tennis gear approach various women at
the lake, asking them to help him load his sail boat onto his car’s roof at his parent’s nearby home.
He apparently introduced himself as ‘Ted’. Unfortunately, Janice Ott and Denise Naslund fell for
Bundy’s superficial charm and attractive features, and consequently, died at the hands of Bundy.
On September 7, 1974, two hunters uncovered the remnants of Ott and Naslund in the Issaquah
hills – less than ten miles from the park off Interstate 90. They additionally found bones belonging
to a third, unidentified victim (Dawson, 2015; Keppel & Birnes, 2005; Michaud & Aynesworth,
2012).
106

107
Figure 12: An evidence photograph of Denise Naslund’s skull found in the Issaquah hills (King
County Archives, 7 September, 1974).
Utah victims. In August 1974, Bundy relocated to Salt Lake City to attend classes at Utah’s Law
School. Thus, no murders were committed until October 1974. As Salt Lake City is situated 850
miles from Seattle, police initially failed to connect the Washington State murders to the Utah
murders. Bundy’s first Utah victim was Nancy Wilcox, a high school student from Holladay (located
just south of Salt Lake City). Eyewitness testimonies suggested that Wilcox was last seen
hitchhiking on the night of October 2, 1974, after she had an argument with her parents. She
reportedly climbed into a light brown/cream Volkswagen Beetle with a young man. Wilcox was
missing ever since, and her body has never been found (Dawson, 2015). The daughter of Midvale’s
police chief was next on Bundy’s radar. Melissa Smith disappeared on October 18, 1974 when she
decided to hitchhike home from a teenage haunt nearby. Smith’s body was discovered ten days
later. Forensic pathologists revealed that her body showed clear signs of strangulation,
sodomisation, and rape. Bundy’s killing spree escalated as he murdered a third victim in that same
month (that is, in October 1974).

On October 31, 1974, Laura Aimee vanished from a Halloween party in Orem, Utah. According to
Aimee’s friends, they last saw her when she left the party to go buy a pack of cigarettes at a store
in the neighborhood. Police investigators found her naked body the following day dumped next to
a river in the Wasatch Mountains (Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). During this
period, police slowly started to consider the possibility of linking the Washington State victims to
the Utah victims, and publicised their first composite sketch of the man who called himself ‘Ted’ at
Lake Sammamish.
Figure 13: The first composite sketch that police furnished of Bundy (1974).
On November 8, 1974, Carol Da Ronch survived Bundy’s attack, and would subsequently serve as a
valuable witness when she testified in his ‘aggravated kidnapping’ trial in 1976. According to Da
Ronch, Bundy approached her in Fashion Place Mall in Murray, Utah. She reported that he
impersonated a police officer, and went by the name of ‘Officer Roseland’. Da Ronch furthermore
recalled that ‘Officer Roseland’ claimed that a thief had broken into her car, and that she had to
accompany him to police headquarters so she could sign an official complaint. Upon their arrival at
the ‘police office’, which was actually the back of a closed-down
108

laundromat, Da Ronch became suspicious, and attempted to climb out of Bundy’s Beetle. He then
struck her on the head with a blunt object and tried to handcuff her wrists. Luckily, Bundy had
inadvertently placed both handcuffs on her same hand, enabling Da Ronch to jump out of the car
and escape (Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2013).
Due to Da Ronch’s escape, Bundy became desperate to satiate his sexual urges. That same
evening, he drove 20 miles to the town of Bountiful, Utah, and abducted Debra Kent, a student at
Viewmont High School. Kent left to fetch her younger brother at a skate park during the
intermission of a school play, but never returned to the concert hall. Although her body was never
found, police later discovered a small key in Kent’s school’s parking lot that fitted the handcuffs
used to restrain Da Ronch (Miles & Huberman, 2012).
Colorado victims. In an attempt to avoid further police detection, Bundy proceeded to Colorado
(400 miles southeast of Utah) to seek out new victims. Caryn Campbell, a nurse on vacation with
her boyfriend and his two children at Wildwood Inn in Snowmass Village, Colorado, vanished on
January 12, 1975. According to her boyfriend, Campbell went to their upstairs hotel room to fetch
a magazine, but never returned to the lobby’s fireplace where they were initially conversing.
Campbell’s body was located a month later near a dirt road within a few miles range from the
Wildwood Inn. The forensic pathologists responsible for examining her body disclosed that
Campbell appeared to have died due to blunt force trauma to the head. She had apparently been
bludgeoned by a blunt instrument such as a crowbar. Evidence also suggested that Bundy had
slashed her body with a sharp knife before raping, and murdering her (Dawson, 2015). Bundy told
Dawson (2015) that he “stripped [Campbell’s] clothes off, raped her, and when she gained
consciousness, [he] played with her. She pled and beseeched [him] to let her go free. [He] couldn’t
help but laugh at her” (p. 170).
109

Bundy subsequently journeyed to Vail, Colorado, where he lured Julie Cunningham, a ski
instructor, to his car on March 15, 1975. Bundy later confessed that he pretended to struggle
through the snow on his crutches, and asked Cunningham if she would help him carry his ski boots
to his car. When they reached his car, Bundy allegedly hit her over the head with a crowbar,
handcuffed her, and drove her to a secluded area near Rifle, Colorado. He then strangled and
raped her, and returned to her body a week later to gratify his needs once again (Dawson, 2015).
Approximately a month later on April 6, 1975, Denise Oliverson went missing in Grand Junction,
Colorado whilst riding her bicycle to her parent’s house. Police later found her bicycle and shoes
under a viaduct near a railroad bridge. Bundy later told Dawson (2015) that he severed her head,
and incinerated it in Kendall’s fireplace to get rid of the evidence. Bundy’s last Colorado victim was
12-year-old Lynette Culvar from Pocatello, Idaho. Culvar was last seen at Alameda Junior School on
the morning of May 6, 1975. Bundy sexually assaulted her in his hotel room before drowning her
in the bathtub. He then dumped her body in the Snake River just north of Pocatello (Dawson,
2015; Keppel & Birnes, 2005; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Florida victims. On December 30, 1977, he went on to attack six known victims in Florida. Of the
six individuals, he unfortunately managed to kill two of the women and a young girl within a
month (Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2013; Sullivan, 2009). In the early
morning of January 14, 1978, Bundy snuck into the Chi Omega Sorority House on Florida State
Campus, and savagely attacked four female students with a chunk of wood while they were
asleep. He bludgeoned Lisa Levy over the head, and subsequently raped and strangled her to
death. Bundy moreover bit her on her buttocks, and nearly ripped her nipple off. Pathologists
involved with the Chi Omega murders stated that Bundy sexually assaulted Levy
110

with an aerosol spray bottle (presumed to be hairspray) (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). The
second young woman murdered by Bundy was Margaret Bowman. Bowman was killed in a similar
fashion to Levy, but had been strangled with a pair of pantyhose. Police officers on the scene
described the attack as frenzied, and detailed that both women’s skulls were fractured to such a
degree that their brains were exposed (Dawson, 2015). Karen Chandler and Kathy Kleiner
Deshields were lucky enough to survive the ordeal. The Chi Omega attacks were apparently not
enough to satiate Bundy’s pent-up sexual urges, as he fled the crime scene only to break into
another young woman’s apartment less than a mile from the Chi Omega House. Once he entered
the apartment, Bundy assaulted Cheryl Thomas by violently hitting her over the head several
times. However, he was interrupted, as Thomas’s neighbouring tenants called the police after
hearing loud, thumping and moaning sounds. Thomas survived the attack, but Bundy left her with
some permanent cognitive disabilities (Dawson, 2015). A detailed record of the injuries incurred
by Bundy’s Florida victims can be located in Appendix C.
Bundy abducted his final victim on February 9, 1978 in Lake City, Florida. Kimberly Leach was last
seen leaving her junior school with a stranger in a white van. Bundy had supposedly stolen the van
from a nearby university campus. After a statewide search for Leach, police found her
decomposed body in Suwannee County, Florida two months later. Table 2 provides a chronological
list of Bundy’s known and suspected victims. Important to note, is that Bundy’s 1977 and 1978
murders occurred during his second escape from prison.
111

Date Prior to 1974

1974
January 4 January 31 March 12 May 6
June 1
June 11 June 11 July 14
July 14 October October October November 8 November 8 1975 January 12 March 15 April 6
May 6
1976
1978
January 14 January 14 January 14 January 14 January 14 February 9
Date
TABLE 2: A Chronological List of Bundy’s Known and Suspected Victims
2 18 31
Identified Victims
Name Age
Suspected Victims
Name Age
Joni Lenz 18 Lynda Ann Healy 21 Donna Gail Manson 19 Susan Rancourt 18 Roberta Kathleen Parks
20 Brenda Ball 22 Georgann Hawkins 18 Janice Ott 23 Denise Naslund 19 Nancy Wilcox 16 Melissa
Smith 17 Laura Aimee 17 Carol Da Ronch 19 Debra Kent 17
Caryn Campbell 23 Julie Cunningham 26 Denise Oliverson 25 Lynette Culvar 12
Margaret Bowman 21 Lisa Levy 20 Karen Chandler 21 Kathy Kleiner Deshields 21 Cheryl Thomas 21
Kimberly Leach 12
August 31, 1961 June 23, 1966 May 30, 1969 May 30, 1969 July 19, 1971 June 29, 1973 August 20,
1973
May 27 August 2 August 2
Ann Marie Burr 8 Lonnie Trumbull 20 Susan Davis 19 Elizabeth Perry 19 Rita Curran 24 Rita
Lorraine Jolly 17 Vickie Lynn Hollar 24
Brenda Joy Baker 14 Carol Valenzuela 20 Unidentified woman -
Note: Adapted from Dawson, P. (2015). Faces of Ted Bundy: My prison interviews with Bundy.
New York, NY: Vistar Pictures; Michaud, S.G., & Aynesworth, H. (2012). The only living witness: The
true story of a serial sex killer Ted Bundy. London, England: Authorlink.
April 15 July 1 July 4
February
Melanie Cooley 18 Shelly Robertson 24 Nancy Perry Baird 23
Debbie Smith 17
112

The blame game. Whenever detectives, psychologists, or judges asked Bundy why he killed so
many young women, he always blamed one of three things: his addiction to hardcore
pornography, his dependence on alcohol and mood-altering drugs, or the ‘evil entity’ that resided
within him. He lacked the ability to take responsibility for any of the murders he committed, and
consistently attributed his sexually violent behaviour towards young women and girls to external
factors that were beyond his control (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000). In his prison interviews with
Dawson (2015), Bundy described pornography as the fuel that awakened his latent sexual desires.
He argued that the more he watched pornography that highlighted the idea of brutality and
violence towards women, the more inclined he felt to transfer his sexually deviant fantasies to
reality.
Bundy moreover accused alcohol and drugs for eroding the restraints he had in place that
prevented him from committing assault, and subsequently raping and murdering his victims. He
indicated that the marriage of pornography and addictive substances diminished his inhibitions to
such a point that it actually molded and dictated every facet of his behavioural repertoire
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000). However, Bundy’s favourite excuse for his murderous behaviour
was ‘the entity.’ He suggested that a malevolent force within him propelled him to kidnap, torture,
rape, and murder innocent young women (Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000). He
explained his repeated encounters with ‘the entity’ to Dawson (2015):
This individual – the killer – was inhabited by a contrary being. I’d call it an entity, the disordered
self. An evil or malignant being. When the desire met the fantasies, a negative energy or force
drove him to kill...While I was committing the murders, I felt as if I was possessed by something
cruel, vicious and alien. It led to the first wicked compulsion to rape and murder. Afterwards, I was
more or less satisfied...the fierce, atrocious entity pressure
113

fades...then I’m spent; that energy level regresses, retreats, and fundamentally I become myself
again (p. 55 & 97).
Ultimately, Bundy’s inability to take responsibility for his actions meant that he did not feel
guilty about them either. Instead, he continually justified or rationalised his behaviour – a classic
case of cognitive distortion (Freud, 1937; Meyer et al., 2008). He thought of guilt as an illusive
emotion that acted as a social mechanism to control people. Bundy explained that the experience
of guilt is “very unhealthy”, and that it “does terrible things to our bodies”. He added that, “there
are much better ways to control our behaviour than that rather extraordinary use of guilt”
(Dawson, 2015, p. 56). He supplemented this last excuse by asserting that his goal is to live in the
present moment – not to suffer unnecessarily because of past mistakes (Dawson, 2015). Ironically,
Bundy expected the public and the professionals working on his case during Death Row to show
him compassion and remorse even after a prosecutor listed 26 victims that Bundy mercilessly
attacked and killed. His response to the latter was not only illogical, but also laughable: “I look out
for number one – me. Where’s the remorse for me? My life is over. I’m stuck on Death Row and
expect to be executed next year! Who’s crying for me? Everybody wants to kill me!” (Dawson,
2015, p. 317).
The Bundy Trials. By August 1975, Bundy had murdered more than 20 women without drawing
any attention from law enforcement. His crimes lacked the necessary evidential value needed by
investigators to apprehend him – or anyone else for that matter (Sullivan, 2009). Bundy
unequivocally believed that he was immune to detection and capture, and that police officers
were “buffoons, jokers, and bumbling idiots” (Dawson, 2015, p. 311). He went on to tell Dawson
(2015) that, “...no matter how I fucked up, twisted, or rotated my plans, I was invulnerable,
exempt from being caught by cops” (p. 186). However, Bundy’s luck changed.
114

First arrest. While patrolling Granger, a residential area near Salt Lake City, a Utah Highway Patrol
Officer became suspicious of Bundy’s vehicle parked randomly on the side of a road. Bundy had
been sitting in his car at 2:30 A.M. on August 16, 1975 smoking marijuana and studying a map of
Salt Lake City, when Sergeant Bob Hayward suddenly shone a light at his Volkswagen. In order to
evade arrest, or any contact with law enforcement, Bundy sped off and raced through stop signs,
just to be blocked by two additional officers on the opposite side (Dawson. 2015; Sullivan, 2009).
Upon searching Bundy’s car, the officers discovered various paraphernalia that included items
such as a seven-foot white nylon rope, a ski mask, a single brown cotton glove, a pry bar, a black
leather ski glove, a pair of pantyhose with eye and nose holes cut out, a bag of Glad plastic trash
bags, a flashlight, a four-foot length of wire, an icepick, eight strips of white sheet, and a pair of
handcuffs (Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Sullivan, 2009). Bundy argued that the
masks were solely for skiing, that he had discovered the handcuffs in a nearby dumpster, and that
the rest were everyday household things. However, Hayward was not convinced, and
subsequently arrested Bundy for various traffic violations, evading an officer, and for suspicion of
burglary. What initially seemed to be an assemblage of burglary tools was later called Bundy’s
‘murder kit’ during his trials (Dawson, 2015).
According to Dawson (2015), Bundy’s first arrest “set in motion a multi-jurisdictional police
investigation”, and Bundy now became a prime suspect (p. 321). Jerry Thompson, a detective in
Utah, connected Bundy and his VW to the Da Ronch kidnapping case in which he was later
charged. His crimes truly started to unravel when detectives realised that Bundy possessed the
same type and brand of handcuffs used to restrain Da Ronch, and that his VW also matched the
description Da Ronch gave in her statement to the police. Consequently, investigators asked Da
115

Ronch to attend a police line-up where she positively identified ‘Ted’ as her attacker despite
Bundy’s efforts to change his appearance beforehand (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2013;
Sullivan, 2009).
Figure 14: Police photograph (1975). The items recovered from Bundy’s Volkswagen Beetle during
his first arrest.
Da Ronch trial. Bundy’s first trial began on Monday, February 23, 1976, where he stood accused of
kidnapping Carol Da Ronch two years earlier (Sullivan, 2009). Ironically, eyewitnesses sitting in on
his trial described Bundy as approaching his trial with his usual entitled and egocentric demeanor.
Bundy seemed relaxed, since he believed that no real incriminating evidence existed that could
possibly lead to a conviction (Dawson, 205; Sullivan, 2009). The state’s case, as well as Bundy’s
acquittal, relied entirely upon Da Ronch’s testimony.
116

During the trial, Da Ronch held firm that Bundy was, in fact, ‘Officer Roseland’, her abductor. In a
similar fashion, Bundy denied that he had ever seen Da Ronch before, but could provide no alibi
for where he was when the crime occurred. Dr. Loftus, an expert witness for the defense, focused
her testimony on the role of eyewitness memory, and unconscious transference, which she
described as “the mistaken recollection or confusion of a person seen in one situation as the one
who has been seen in a different situation” (Loftus & Ketcham, 1992, as cited in Dawson, 2015, p.
13). Her goal was to show the judge that Da Ronch could have mistaken Bundy for someone who
merely looks like him. However, Loftus’ argument did not hold in court. Thus, Stewart Hanson
found Bundy guilty of aggravated kidnapping and sentenced him to 15 years in prison with the
possibility of parole on June 30, 1976.
117
Figure 15: October 1975 - Bundy in the police line-up where Da Ronch identified him as her
attacker. Bundy is second from right in the line-up.

Following his conviction, Bundy expressed to Dawson (2015) that, “the only mistake I made with
Carol Da Ronch was that I should have killed her...but, the bitch got away and ratted me out to the
cops” (p. 325). The district attorney additionally described Bundy as “the most cocky person [he]
has ever faced” (Rule, 2013, p. 243). From this time forward, Bundy became a suspect in a number
of unsolved homicides in various states, and was shortly after extradited to Pitkin County
Courthouse in Aspen, Colorado where he faced murder charges (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012;
Rule, 2009; Schechter, 2003). Hereafter, Bundy escaped custody twice.
First escape. Bundy’s first successful escape occurred on June 7, 1977 while preparing for a murder
trial at the Garfield County Jail in Glenwood Springs. A new health regulation was put in place that
stated that Pitkin Jail could no longer house prisoners for more than 30 days. Consequently, they
had to commute Bundy back and forth from Aspen to Glenwood Springs on a daily basis (Sullivan,
2009). It was during this time that Judge George Lohr granted Bundy the permission to act as his
own defense lawyer. Mike Fisher, a Chief Investigator in Colorado, recalled that, “[Bundy] was so
very proud of himself. He thought the entire courtroom was welling up in admiration of his
knowledge of the law, and his formidable oration in support of his arguments” (Sullivan, 2009, p.
190). As Bundy was representing himself in court, he received slightly more freedom than a typical
prisoner would. His handcuffs and leg irons were removed so that he could make use of the court’s
law library to do research for his case (Dawson, 2105; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Sullivan,
2009). Moreover, he had consent to dress in normal clothes, rather than a jail uniform (Dawson,
2015). During a court recess, the guards left Bundy unattended in the library for a few minutes.
The prison guards were relaxed and casual around him, as he once again used his glibness and
victim mentality to manipulate them into believing he was harmless (Michaud & Aynesworth,
2000; Sullivan, 2009). Once he was alone, Bundy
118

used the opportunity to jump out of an open window on the second floor of the courthouse. He
had apparently been planning his escape for weeks by jumping from the top of his prison bunk bed
in his cell to strengthen his ankles for the impact of the fall. Police recaptured Bundy six days later
after he had become physically and mentally exhausted from hiding in the wilderness (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012). He was subsequently moved to El Paso County Jail in Colorado Springs
(Sullivan, 2009).
Second escape. According to Carlisle (2013), Bundy planned his second escape for months by
developing a fixed pattern in prison as to avoid provoking the guards’ suspicions. He furthermore
reduced his daily meal sizes in order to lose weight, and feigned illness in the mornings leading up
to his escape so that he could go undetected for a number of hours by pretending to be asleep
(Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). On December 31, 1977, Bundy escaped for a second time after
loosening a light fixture with a small hacksaw that he obtained from a fellow inmate. He then
hoisted himself up through the small opening in his cell’s ceiling and dropped down into a closet
space located in a small room utilised by staff, and walked out of the front door unnoticed
(Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). Prison authorities only discovered that Bundy was
missing 17 hours later, by which stage he had already travelled to Chicago (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2009).
After regaining his freedom, Bundy assumed the alias of ‘Chris Hagen’, and managed to steal
several vehicles as he fled towards Tallahassee, Florida. It was during this time that he committed
the Florida State Chi Omega Sorority House attacks and murders, assaulted Cheryl Thomas, and
killed Kimberly Leach (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Sullivan, 2009). Officer David Lee rearrested
Bundy on February 15, 1978 in West Pensacola, Florida after he identified the license plate
number on a stolen car, which Bundy was driving (Dawson, 2015). Bundy was
119

no stranger to using aliases in order to mislead others. Prior to his arrests, he operated under
numerous false identities, which included ‘Kenneth Misner’, ‘Richard Burton’, and ‘Rolf Miller’
(Taylor, 2017).
Convictions, appeals, and death row. Bundy’s extensive criminal career finally came to an end after
he was arrested (after his two escapes) and charged for numerous crimes including the possession
of burglary tools, evading a police officer, drug possession, breaking and entering, grand theft
auto, prison escape, kidnapping, assault, and murder (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). During his
trials, Bundy acted as his own defense, and insisted on representing himself, as he felt that the
attorneys representing him, were, ironically, ill-equipped to handle his case, and lacked experience
(Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2013). Throughout his court hearings and
trials, Bundy refused to take responsibility for his actions, and pleaded ‘not-guilty’ to the three
counts of murder he was being prosecuted for (that is, the murders of Lisa Levy, Margaret
Bowman, and Kimberly Leach). He also fervently rejected the insanity plea. In his interview with
Michaud and Aynesworth (2000), Bundy had the following to say about his choice to refuse the
insanity defense:
I said I wouldn’t have anything to do with an insanity defense. I was strongly opposed to...even
considering the idea because I knew I wasn’t crazy. I know I’m not crazy! Insane, incompetent, or
anything else. And I was insulted by even the suggestion by my attorneys that we should consider
the defense. They knew damn well I wasn’t crazy (p. 252).
Despite the overwhelming evidence presented against Bundy in court, his family continued to
believe in his innocence until he finally confessed shortly before his execution in 1989 (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2000; Rule, 2013). In fact, his mother came to his defense every chance she could
get, and subsequently told The News Tribune that, “Ted Bundy does not go around killing
120

women and little children! And I know this, too, that our never-ending faith in Ted – our faith that
he is innocent – has never wavered. And it never will” (Lynn, 2013, para. 6).
On July 31, 1978, the jury charged Bundy with the first-degree murder of Kimberly Leach, and
subsequently sentenced him to death in 1980. Soon after, he received an additional two death
sentences for the murders of Chi Omega sorority sisters, Margaret Bowman and Lisa Levy
(Dawson, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2013). Michaud and Aynesworth (2012)
asserted that although Bundy was only sentenced for three of his murders, he was in effect,
“sentenced in absentia...and therefore would dodge personal responsibility for his atrocities until
the very end of his life” (p. 306).
Figure 16: Bundy in court during one of his many trials (n.d.).
121

Bundy was placed on Death Row in Florida State’s Raiford Prison until his execution in 1989 (Rule,
2013). Bundy filed numerous appeals between 1980 and 1989, but appellate jurisdictions
dismissed all of them (Dobbert, 2009). Rule (2009) stated that Bundy unequivocally recognised
that he had lost his case, but continued to blame that loss on the police, prosecutors, and the
judge presiding over his trial. He described them as men who were “too weak, too timid, too blind,
and too frightened, to accept the cruel deception of the state’s case” (p. 251). Even after all of his
appeals were rejected, he continued to broadcast his ‘innocence’ to anyone who had half the
mind to listen to him. He declared the following to Rule (2009): “Lastly and most importantly, I
want you to know, I want the whole world to know that I am innocent. I have never hurt another
human being in my life. God, please believe me!” (p. 251).
Psychiatric (and psychological) evaluations. During his incarceration, Bundy underwent extensive
psychiatric and psychological evaluations over a number of years. Clinicians, psychologists and
psychiatrists alike seemed to take turns in diagnosing him with various personality and mood
disorders that ranged from Bipolar I Disorder, to Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Antisocial
Personality Disorder (or psychopathy), Borderline Personality Disorder, Schizoid Personality
Disorder, and Reaction Attachment Disorder (Dawson, 2015; Rule, 2013). These evaluations
predominantly served as proof of Bundy’s sanity (or insanity) that either the prosecution or
defense could use to strengthen their case. However, mental health professionals and law
enforcement agencies also saw it as an opportunity to gain insight into Bundy’s behaviour, and
what insight he could potentially provide on others that commit similar crimes (Keppel & Birnes,
2009).
Dr. Al Carlisle, a prison psychologist who assessed Bundy in 1979, reported that Bundy had an
exceptional ability to observe his environment and those around him (Carlisle, 2013).
122

However, he stated that, “I feel Mr. Bundy has not allowed me to get to know him, and I believe
there are many significant things about him that remain hidden” (Sullivan, 2009, p. 53). Dr. Van
Austin, a prison psychiatrist, agreed with Dr. Carlisle’s assessment of Bundy, but asserted that
Bundy’s withdrawal from deeper or more personal matters was due to his tendency to
compartmentalise and rationalise his behaviour. He indicated that, “there is much more to his
personality structure than either the psychologists or I have been able to determine. As long as
[Bundy] compartmentalises, rationalises, and debates every facet of his life, I don’t feel that I
adequately know him” (Dawson, 2015, p. 258). In his report, Dr. Carlisle additionally noted that
Bundy exhibited a strong sense of insecurity under his cool, calm, and collected façade. He argued
that the latter caused Bundy to seek structure and control in all aspects of his life on a continual
basis (for example, in his relationship with women, and in controlling his emotions). He
subsequently wrote that, “[Bundy] becomes somewhat threatened by people unless he feels he
can structure the outcome of the relationship” (Dawson, 2015, p. 256).
Mike Minerva, Bundy’s lawyer at the time, asked Dr. Emanuel Tanay to conduct a psychiatric
evaluation on Bundy in 1979, in order to determine Bundy’s psychological state and competency
to stand trial. Tanay (2013) maintained that Bundy’s pathologies – that is, Antisocial Personality
Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder - had an adverse effect on his overall behaviour and
thought processes. He continued by stating that Bundy had an inability to recognise the
implications of the evidence held against him, because his perception of reality was severely
distorted (Dawson, 2015; Tanay, 2013). Tanay (2013, as cited in Dawson, 2015) explained that
Bundy’s behaviour was orientated towards showmanship rather than discretion, and that he was
solely motivated by the need to be noticed and admired, rather than to help himself during his
trials. He added that it seemed as if Bundy “took a perverse pleasure in the
123

publicity” he was receiving (Tanay, 2013, as cited in Rule, 2009, p. 109). Tanay (2013) clarified the
above in his mental status examination:
Mr. Bundy dealt with me as if I was a reporter for Times magazine or some other publication. He
certainly did not deal with me as if I was a psychiatrist retained by the defense to assist in
defending him when he was facing a death sentence. [His image] was more important to him than
saving his own life. He was typically responding to a gratification of the moment (Dawson, 2015, p.
292-293).
In one of his prison letters to Ann Rule, Bundy’s conceited demeanor further substantiated Tanay’s
interpretation of Bundy, and once again highlighted his flawed sense of reality, emotional
immaturity, and disregard for logical reasoning (Rule, 2009):
I was whistling in the wind, yet in a curious sort of way, I felt a deep sense of fulfilment. I felt
relaxed, but emphatic; controlled, but sincere and filled with emotion. It didn’t matter who was
listening, although I desired each word to strike the Judge as forcefully as possible. Briefly, all too
briefly, I was myself again, amongst free people, using all the skill I could muster, fighting the only
way I know how: with words, and logic...and all too briefly, I was testing the dream of being an
attorney (p. 251).
Clinicians such as C.M. Guinn (2013) extended the above evaluations, by reporting that Bundy
demonstrated a lack of appropriate affective reactions, and that his emotional responses were
shallow and exaggerated. Bundy would, for example, seem excited when he talked of his prison
escapes, and exhibited no signs of empathy, guilt, remorse, or regret regarding his crimes.
Clinicians moreover described him as possessing characteristics that are directly associated with
psychopathy. These included pathological lying and deceitfulness, a need to manipulate, ignorance
of societal norms, passive-aggressive responses, hostility towards others, difficulty
124

controlling anger, and the devaluation of others in fantasy that extends into reality (Dawson,
2015). Lastly, Dr. Carlisle reported that Bundy’s recurrent use of marijuana and alcohol indicated
that he had difficulty in handling stress and adapting to change (Dawson, 2015).
Despite their qualifications, Bundy stated that those who evaluated him committed diagnostic
fraud (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2000). In his mind, “their diagnostic skills were pathetic, pitiful, and
absurd” (Dawson, 2015, p. 247). He moreover found their psychological analyses to be “malicious,
slanted, and infernal” (Rule, 2009, p. 248).
Death Row interviews. Bundy gave numerous professionals the opportunity to interview him while
on Death Row, including Dr. James Dobson (a Christian author and psychologist), and Dr. Paul
Dawson (a clinical psychologist working at state prisons). However, one of his most comprehensive
interviews to date was with Stephan Michaud and Hugh Aynesworth, who subsequently wrote a
biography on Bundy’s life called, The Only Living Witness. They additionally published a book, Ted
Bundy: Conversations with a Killer, which include verbatim accounts of Bundy’s Death Row
interviews with them. Keppel (2000) stated that, “Ted was resourceful and intelligent...Few - if any
- serial killers have ever talked at such length, and with such clear self-knowledge, as Ted Bundy”
(p. v). Bundy’s interviews with Michaud and Aynesworth (2000) began on March 27, 1980.
However, they soon recognised that Bundy’s uncanny ability to dissociate, rationalise, and
compartmentalise events was fundamental to grasping his complete mental construction (p. 17).
At times, Bundy was extremely vague and evasive during his interviews. Whenever interviewers
asked him direct questions about his crimes, Bundy often met their answers with a defensive
reaction (Dawson, 2015). Dawson (2015) furthermore claimed that Bundy was far more
comfortable with answering implicitly, or circumventing questions he did not like.
125

Due to the above, Michaud and Aynesworth (2000) asked Bundy to speculate what the murderer
did during each of his murders in the third person. This, in essence, would eliminate the
confessional ‘I’. Bundy could thus legally avoid any admission of guilt whilst describing his crimes
and revealing the workings of a serial killer’s mind (McGivern, 2015; Michaud & Aynesworth,
2000). Ultimately, Bundy’s third person narrative enhanced many investigators’ understanding of
him. It moreover provided valuable assistance in areas of research and murder investigations,
which were being conducted by the Behavioural Science Unit (BSU) of the FBI. In October 1984,
Bundy also offered his assistance and self-proclaimed expertise to homicide detective, Robert
Keppel, in their search for the Green River Killer (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Keppel & Birnes,
2005).
Carole Ann Boone. After Kendall broke off her relationship with Bundy, a woman named Carole
Ann Boone replaced her almost instantaneously (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). Sullivan (2009)
claimed that Bundy had a love-hate relationship with women – he wanted to erase the opposite
sex by murdering them, but also wanted to be loved and admired by them. Bundy had met Boone
in 1974 while they were both working for the Department of Emergency Services (DES). Their co-
workers described Boone as having a vigorous and lively temperament and saw her as embodying
a mother figure in the workplace. During their time at the DES, Boone recalled that she was
instantly attracted to Bundy’s sensitive, emotional nature (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
While he was serving his prison sentence for the kidnapping of Da Ronch in 1977, Bundy and
Boone kept in close contact through writing letters to one another, and called one another on
every other day. Boone would even later send Bundy care packages during his lengthy stays in
prison, and visited him on a regular basis. She claimed that over time, their friendship developed
126

into a meaningful, affectionate, and loving relationship (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). Boone
stood by Bundy’s side through all of his trials and convictions, and advocated for his innocence to
the media every chance she could get. Her devotion and loyalty to Bundy was palpable, as she
made him lunch on a daily basis, and attended each of his court appearances. She even relocated
to Florida to be closer to the incarcerated Bundy (Rule, 2013). On February 9, 1980, which
happened to be the anniversary of Kimberly Leach’s murder, Bundy and Boone exchanged vows.
They got married during a court session while Boone was testifying on Bundy’s behalf (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012; Rule, 2013; Sullivan, 2009). According to Michaud and Aynesworth (2012),
Bundy impregnated Boone behind a water-cooler in the prison’s visitation room somewhere in
January 1982. She reportedly gave birth to a baby girl, Rosa, in October 1982.
Figure 17: Ted, Carole, and Rosa Bundy (n.d.).
127

However, once Bundy confessed to his crimes shortly before his scheduled death sentence, Boone
divorced him, changed her and Rosa’s names, and moved to a different, unknown location. She
broke off all contact with Bundy and reportedly died in 2005 (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012; Rule,
2013).
Final confessions. Bundy maintained his innocence until January 23, 1989 – a day before his
execution (Dawson, 2015). He finally confessed to multiple murders, of which he had been
suspected of committing, as well as to a number of killings that were unknown to the FBI and
other investigators. However, Bundy still rebuffed detectives’ efforts to talk about his acts of
necrophilia, and adamantly denied being involved with the murders of Ann Marie Burr and
Kimberly Leach (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012). The day prior to his execution, Bundy granted his
final interview to Dr. James Dobson. He told Dobson that he blamed pornography for the
development of violent crimes. He went on to say that if pornography had not been part of his life,
he would have never progressed to such ruthless, sexual behaviour and murder (Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012; Rush, 2017). He furthermore stated that he had accepted the Lord, Jesus
Christ, as his Saviour, and hoped that other children being exposed to violence and sexual imagery
on television would not end up in the same way he has (Rush, 2017).
Execution. On November 17, 1989, law enforcement issued Bundy’s final death warrant (Dawson,
2015). After 18 appeals and 3 previous stays of execution in 1986, Bundy was finally executed on
January 24, 1989 at 7:16 am via the electric chair (Dawson, 2015; Dobbert, 2009; Michaud &
Aynesworth, 2012; Rippo, 2007). A total of 12 witnesses were present at his execution, which
included state troopers, detectives, district attorneys, his attorney Jim Coleman, and Reverend
Fred Lawrence. None of his family members witnessed his death (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Bearak (1989) reported that an observing news anchor raised his hand as a
128

signal that Bundy was pronounced dead as he was leaving the Q-Wing of Florida State Prison.
Approximately 500 people who had gathered outside the prison, cheered at the news of Bundy’s
successful execution. Some chanted ‘burn, Bundy, burn!’, while others banged on frying pans
(Bearak, 1989). It seemed that there was no sympathy for Bundy anywhere in the United States of
America. Bundy’s last words were, “Jim and Fred, I’d like you to give my love to my family and
friends” (Michaud & Aynesworth, 2012).
Figure 18: Spectators outside of Raiford Prison awaiting Bundy’s electrocution on 24 January 1989.
Conclusion
This chapter provided a chronological portrayal of the life of Theodore Robert Bundy within the
specific social and historical contexts in which he lived. By doing so, the researcher was able to
capture what influences Bundy’s external environment and relationship dynamics had on his
psychological development and subsequent behaviour. The following chapter considers
129

Kernberg’s theoretical framework in the exploration of Bundy’s life, through a psychological lens.