cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,297
Ted Bundy never cared who saw him out stalking...most "witnesses" got descriptions wrong even to the color of his VW.
In the most recent LE interview LE actually said several witnesses. I think BG was hanging around that day waiting for a suitable victim.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Interesting but how do you explain the pics and video taken on the bridge?It makes no sense to me that he'd follow them ALL the way across the bridge if he was hanging around and waiting for a suitable victim. He couldn't control: whether or not other people crossed the bridge, whether people were under the bridge (we know there's an active area under that bridge for people to play a certain game), people entering the area from the private drives/road below the bridge, etc. If he was trolling, wouldn't it make more sense for him to grab them closer to the trail head/parking area or force them down the path at the NW end of the bridge or into a waiting car than to walk across it?
He had to have known that even if the girls did try to flee towards the home on the SE end that they would be unsuccessful in obtaining help due to the occupants being snowbirds.
Her post reminded me of one of those EVP sessions seen on YT where dead people talk through the stereo or tv or some sort of electrical device.I kid you not. I was reading your post and I lost power. Well, the entire neighborhood went out. No idea (?) why. Out for only a couple of minutes. And no, my computer desk remained on the ground.
We will need some clarification on that little bit of information. From the post we all have tried to understand. My apologies if I don't get it.
Final Warning:REMINDER: Inciting conflict on the thread is a TOS violation and can result in a temporary or permanent loss of posting privileges. Post accordingly.
:wave:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/
To follow-up on cluciano63's comment above, about Ted Bundy operating and hiding in plain sight, unworried about witnesses, and directly related to accuracy rates of witness testimony.
It makes no sense to me that he'd follow them ALL the way across the bridge if he was hanging around and waiting for a suitable victim. He couldn't control: whether or not other people crossed the bridge, whether people were under the bridge (we know there's an active area under that bridge for people to play a certain game), people entering the area from the private drives/road below the bridge, etc. If he was trolling, wouldn't it make more sense for him to grab them closer to the trail head/parking area or force them down the path at the NW end of the bridge or into a waiting car than to walk across it?
He had to have known that even if the girls did try to flee towards the home on the SE end that they would be unsuccessful in obtaining help due to the occupants being snowbirds.
It makes no sense to me that he'd follow them ALL the way across the bridge if he was hanging around and waiting for a suitable victim. He couldn't control: whether or not other people crossed the bridge, whether people were under the bridge (we know there's an active area under that bridge for people to play a certain game), people entering the area from the private drives/road below the bridge, etc. If he was trolling, wouldn't it make more sense for him to grab them closer to the trail head/parking area or force them down the path at the NW end of the bridge or into a waiting car than to walk across it?
He had to have known that even if the girls did try to flee towards the home on the SE end that they would be unsuccessful in obtaining help due to the occupants being snowbirds.
SL: Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Uhhmm that was the same obvious concept or thought process we had as well because um, you know, as I've (stumbles on words and says Excuse me) shared with other outlets, that we've had our share of, even double homicides, but they were elderly folks back in the 90s and it turned out to be, um, unfortunately, grandchildren involved in their deaths, and uh, so yeah, we were able to catch those pretty quick, but uh, umm, this one's just, it's, it's got a whole new, it's got a whole twist to it that, even I, as a 30 year veteran, have never seen.
"We have other information that we're not sharing, keep in mind that there's a likeliness and possibility of more than one person, we're not saying that the voice that you heard is the same as this person here (points at photo of BG) This is all very complicated, very involved and as much as we would like to tell you everything, more importantly we want to solve the crime."
He could have simply came from the end of the bridge they went down they passed him. He continued to see if others were on the bridge too then turns around to go for our girls. They become suspicious and the rest is history. The thing is we are dealing with a killer it doesn't have to make sense to us, if you know what I mean. You're a normal person. His mind is warped and degraded. I am interested in learning what is going on with his motivation this day after he gets caught.It makes no sense to me that he'd follow them ALL the way across the bridge if he was hanging around and waiting for a suitable victim. He couldn't control: whether or not other people crossed the bridge, whether people were under the bridge (we know there's an active area under that bridge for people to play a certain game), people entering the area from the private drives/road below the bridge, etc. If he was trolling, wouldn't it make more sense for him to grab them closer to the trail head/parking area or force them down the path at the NW end of the bridge or into a waiting car than to walk across it?
He had to have known that even if the girls did try to flee towards the home on the SE end that they would be unsuccessful in obtaining help due to the occupants being snowbirds.
nah. it's obviously something more. They said it's very complex and involved.
You're not factoring in human male sexual urges. It's not always on. He is likely there strictly to find a victim. The urge is strong so he hunts.LE said there was a twist. The girls seeing something and killed for it doesn't seem to fit into that context. IMO the most logical scenario is the right one; always-hunting predator lucks up and finds victims. The crime was a very high risk one. To take two adult-sized teens in broad daylight in public indicates to me he's very bold, willing to engage in extremely risky behavior, and very experienced. IMO he's alway hunting, always watching for victims, always thinking about his "hobby" and carries a kit so he's prepared to take advantage of anyone at any time.
Humans are like most mammals. Spring time is mating time, so sexual urges increase.I very much agree with your assessment. To add: it's not uncommon for serial offenders/killers to attack around similar dates. For example, in Michigan, Jeffrey Willis has been charged for separate crimes which occurred in April 2013 (Jessica Heeringa case), June 2014, and April 2016. For whatever reason, he seemed to be most active around the Spring season. Perhaps LE can look into other SA/murder cases which occurred in February/late Winter in previous years.