So as many of you know, I'm a Justice Science student and an avid True Crime reader.
I enjoy reading about people like Charles Manson, Richard Ramirez, Dennis Rader, Jeffery Dahmer... But Ted Bundy pissed me off more than any of them.
In Conversations with a Killer (The Death Row Interviews) Bundy had the opportunity to talk through a hypothetical person who may be committing crimes similar to the ones Bundy is associated with, which Bundy claims he had no part of A N Y of the kidnappings, rapes, or murders of the 13 women. The entirety of this book is the recorded interviews of Bundy describing this hypothetical person, and he does not let you forget that he is not talking about himself, he is talking in hypotheticals.
You may be thinking, "Why would this make you so angry, Jessica?"
Well, it's because young Ted Bundy was a Justice Science and Psychology student, just like myself.
The entire time he's describing this hypothetical person, he's using basic textbook psychology terms and using the actually definitions to fit this person. HOWEVER no person would fit those terms absolutely perfectly. Bundy knew what he was doing, he knew what he was describing, and he was purposefully describing terms that would not have fit his M.O. and was leaving out the ones that would! He created a person who was so similar to himself that he did not realize we still knew who and what he was talking about.
So yes, Ted Bundy: Conversations with a Killer (The Death Row Interviews) was something that I longed to read for many years and now that I have, I wish I hadn't.