On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 06:11:34 -0700, Paul C Bernhardt wrote: > >What was Bundy really like?
Ann Rule has written probably one of the best books on Bundy "The Stranger Beside Me" and she actually knew Bundy because they had worked together in a Seattle suicide crisis hotline center. The Wikipedia entry provides details on his background, some of the timeline of significant events in his life and his killings; see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_bundy With respect to how he performed as a student at U of W, one source is Michael Mello's "Dead Wrong", page 322 in http://books.google.com/books?id=yAPRAkkIvv4C&pg=PA322&lpg=PA322&dq=bundy+%22university+of+washington%22+letter&source=bl&ots=yHtYhGbsqi&sig=uhOxwKqpy5oFEnIp98svVJ8wfsk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gFsmUKm-IaPL6wH1y4GAAQ&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=bundy%20%22university%20of%20washington%22%20letter&f=false And from Ann Rule's book "The Stranger Beside Him", page 22; see: http://books.google.com/books?id=sWPBQQ5vl2MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22ted+bundy%22+%22university+of+washington%22+letter&source=bl&ots=PbOcI33Ww2&sig=tYVp9GtnCoLcWxhdngdkzyicG3g&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RV0mUOOVCe6_0QHQyICwCg&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%20%22university%20of%20washington%22%20letter&f=false Rule provide excerpts from Ronald Smith's letter for Bundy as well as related information. >I find this an intriguing comment on your part. >After all, was he not really a good student, also? Can't he be both a really >nice, intelligent and interesting student based on all your interactions and >you not know anything about his dark side simply because 1) you aren't a person >who or involved in situations that triggers that dark side, 2) the dark side >(mental illness) has not yet emerged in the person, 3) the person is acutely >skilled at hiding their dark side… etc. It is not known when Bundy started to kill people but there is some evidence that his first killing occurred while he was teenager. Quoting the Wikipedia entry: |Rule and Keppel both believe that he may have started killing as a teenager. |[60][61] Circumstantial evidence suggests that he abducted and killed |eight-year-old Ann Marie Burr of Tacoma in 1961 when he was 14, an allegation |he denied repeatedly.[58] His earliest documented homicides were committed |in 1974 when he was 27 years old. By then he had (by his own admission) |mastered the skills needed—in the era before DNA profiling—to leave minimal |incriminating evidence at a crime scene.[62] It appears that he was developing the skills to become an effective serial killer from adolescence into young adulthood, such that he was an efficient killer in the early documented murders (Bundy may have not talked to others about his early attempts because he probably wanted to be viewed as a skilled killer, not as a bumbling amateur which is likely what he was at the beginning). So, it is reasonable to assume that Bundy has been doing bad things for a good part of his life but went undetected. With respect to his "dark side", what it was is open to speculation; see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_bundy#Pathology Did he have an axis I or axis II disorder or some kind of pathology that we don't adequately understand, some sort of (compulsive) killing disorder which is rewarded in some contexts (e.g., wars, black ops, contract killer, etc.) but punished in other contexts (e.g., Bundy). The real problem is knowing other people without the filter of our "theory of mind of others" and heuristics and biases. There is a scene in the movie "True Grit" where Mattie Ross has just come to Fort Collins and is watching a legal hanging. An old woman points out to her the judge who has handed out the punishment of death to the men on the gallows and the old woman says something like the judge is so interested in justice that he watches every hanging for each person he has condemned. Mattie responds: "Who know what's in a man's heart?" That is, does the judge watch because he wants to see justice done or does he secretly relish watching the death of others. We may never know. But the skillfulness of a person to hide such feelings and thoughts is important. And though we are psychologists, we may not be the best judge of people even though the general public may think that is what we do. So, again, don't be surprised if someone you wrote a letter of recommendation for turns out for the worst and the media comes to ask you "Why?" >Your point that we only know a thin slice of the student's life and behavior is >particularly valuable and one of the messages I get from the 'how to write >letters of recommendation' sources I've read over the years. Their take-home is >this: Only comment on that which you know you can say you've observed, be more >behavioral and specific in description than trait and global in description. Be >able to justify with specific instances both the good and bad things you say. Yes, exactly, even though students and other non-academics may wonder why a particular person is not described as a "wonderful, fabulous person" or some other generality. All we have is our specific experiences and our inferences and conclusions about them. It would be helpful to know when we're being conned or lied to but that's another thread. -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=19656 or send a blank email to leave-19656-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
