Bundy arrived for a hearing on his motions (He wanted the Utah case suppressed as evidence in the murder trial, the suppression hearing closed and the death penalty ruled unconstitutional). After a 10:30 recess, he was left alone for a few minutes. Bundy paused for a moment by a second-story window and then jumped. Walking so he wouldn’t draw attention, Bundy ambled four blocks to the Roaring Fork River. Diving under a bush, he pulled off his turtleneck sweater, changed the part in his hair and then headed back through the center of town. He reached the tree line in fifteen minutes.
For six days, deputies, dogs and helicopters searched for Ted Bundy. Spending the night in the rain, Bundy broke into an empty cabin on Conundrum Creek. He stayed there for twenty-four hours, wolfing down a can of tomato sauce and a box of brown sugar. The morning of the third day, he grabbed a .22 rifle out of the cabin and headed up the creek, hoping to cross the Continental Divide. He took a wrong turn and stumble back to the cabin with a sprained ankle the following evening, passing a civilian armed with a rifle.
“I’m looking for Ted Bundy,” the man with the rifle said.
“Good luck,” Bundy said.
Discovering that the searchers had been in the cabin, he slept in the brush. Cutting north, he crossed a golf course and found a Cadillac with the keys in the ignition.
Bundy was pulled over as he tried to slip out of the county. A Band-Aid plastered on his nose and a hat pulled low over his eyes, Bundy ducked behind the steering wheel.
“Hi, Ted,” Deputy Gene Flatt said.
“Welcome home, Ted” Sheriff Ken Keinsat said when Bundy arrived back at the jail.
“Thank you,” Bundy said. - Rolling Stone, December 14, 1978
“Iv seen myself in the media enough over the years. I know how I’ll be portrayed- It’ll be the same old thing. I’m not going to watch it. I’ve worked too hard to put all that behind me. I’m another person now. It would only make me angry, and i can’t afford to get angry.” - Ted Bundy talking about the TV show based on his life during the murders he committed, ‘The Deliberate Stranger”, that came out while he was still awaiting his execution in 1986. Above is the actor Mark Harmon, who portrayed Ted in the TV series, reenacting a similar court appearance Ted made at the Chi Omega trial in 1979.
Source- Ted Bundy: A Visual Timeline by Rob Dielenberg
During his trial, Ted Bundy was known to radiant confidence when handling the defence even though HE was the defendant. He was was also obsessed with the way he was being portrayed within the media at the time.
“What’s on television in Seattle?” he asked. “Are they covering me very much back there?” “Quite a bit. I watched you in Tallahassee when you introduced yourself to the prospective jurors there. You seemed very confident.”
He was pleased.
I have no way of knowing if Ted truly felt the confidence which he projected, but going into his Miami trial, he seemed to believe that he could and would win. After an hour’s conversation, conversation which he told me was being monitored by Dade County jailers, we hung up, promising to meet again, this time in Miami. To newspapermen, Ted declined to predict the trial outcome. “If I was a football coach, I’d say when you’re in your first game of the season, you don’t start looking for the Super Bowl.”
In November 2016, Stanford University researchers made an alarming discovery: across the US, many students can’t tell the difference between a reported news article, a persuasive opinion piece, and a corporate ad. This lack of media literacy makes young people vulnerable to getting duped by “fake news” — which can have real consequences.
Who wrote it? Real news contains the real byline of a real journalist dedicated to the truth. Fake news (including “sponsored content” and traditional corporate ads) does not. Once you find the byline, look at the writer’s bio. This can help you identify whether the item you’re reading is a reported news article (written by a journalist with the intent to inform), a persuasive opinion piece (written by an industry expert with a point of view), or something else entirely.
What claims does it make? Real news — like these Pulitzer Prize winning articles — will include multiple primary sources when discussing a controversial claim. Fake news may include fake sources, false urls, and/or “alternative facts” that can be disproven through further research. When in doubt, dig deeper. Facts can be verified.
Where was it published? Real news is published by trustworthy media outlets with a strong fact-checking record, such as the BBC, NPR, ProPublica, Mother Jones, and Wired. (To learn more about any media outlet, look at their About page and examine their published body of work.) If you get your news primarily via social media, try to verify that the information is accurate before you share it. (On Twitter, for example, you might look for the blue “verified” checkmark next to a media outlet name to double-check a publication source before sharing a link.)
How does it make you feel?Fake news, like all propaganda, is designed to make you feel strong emotions. So if you read a news item that makes you feel super angry, pause and take a deep breath. Then, double-check the item’s claims by comparing it to the news on any three of the media outlets listed above — and decide for yourself if the item is real news or fake news. Bottom line: Don’t believe everything you read. There is no substitute for critical thinking.
If you get in the habit of asking all 5 of these questions whenever you read a news article, then your basic news literacy skills will start to grow stronger. However, these are just the basics! To dive deeper into news and media literacy, watch the TED-Ed Lesson: How to choose your news. To find out more about what students need, read the Stanford University report, published here.
Aphasia: The disorder that makes you lose your words
It’s hard to imagine being unable to turn thoughts into words. But, if the delicate web of language networks in your brain became disrupted by stroke, illness or trauma, you could find yourself truly at a loss for words. This disorder, called “aphasia,” can impair all aspects of communication. Approximately 1 million people in the U.S. alone suffer from aphasia, with an estimated 80,000 new cases per year. About one-third of stroke survivors suffer from aphasia, making it more prevalent than Parkinson’s disease or multiple sclerosis, yet less widely known.
There are several types of aphasia, grouped into two categories: fluent (or “receptive”) aphasia and non-fluent (or “expressive”) aphasia.
People with fluent aphasia may have normal vocal inflection, but use words that lack meaning. They have difficulty comprehending the speech of others and are frequently unable to recognize their own speech errors.
People with non-fluent aphasia, on the other hand, may have good comprehension, but will experience long hesitations between words and make grammatical errors. We all have that “tip-of-the-tongue” feeling from time to time when we can’t think of a word. But having aphasia can make it hard to name simple everyday objects. Even reading and writing can be difficult and frustrating.
It’s important to remember that aphasia does not signify a loss in intelligence. People who have aphasia know what they want to say, but can’t always get their words to come out correctly. They may unintentionally use substitutions, called “paraphasias” – switching related words, like saying dog for cat, or words that sound similar, such as house for horse. Sometimes their words may even be unrecognizable.
So, how does this language-loss happen? The human brain has two hemispheres. In most people, the left hemisphere governs language. We know this because in 1861, the physician Paul Broca studied a patient who lost the ability to use all but a single word: “tan.” During a postmortem study of that patient’s brain, Broca discovered a large lesion in the left hemisphere, now known as “Broca’s area.” Scientists today believe that Broca’s area is responsible in part for naming objects and coordinating the muscles involved in speech. Behind Broca’s area is Wernicke’s area, near the auditory cortex. That’s where the brain attaches meaning to speech sounds. Damage to Wernicke’s area impairs the brain’s ability to comprehend language. Aphasia is caused by injury to one or both of these specialized language areas.
Fortunately, there are other areas of the brain which support these language centers and can assist with communication. Even brain areas that control movement are connected to language. Our other hemisphere contributes to language too, enhancing the rhythm and intonation of our speech. These non-language areas sometimes assist people with aphasia when communication is difficult.
However, when aphasia is acquired from a stroke or brain trauma, language improvement may be achieved through speech therapy. Our brain’s ability to repair itself, known as “brain plasticity,” permits areas surrounding a brain lesion to take over some functions during the recovery process. Scientists have been conducting experiments using new forms of technology, which they believe may encourage brain plasticity in people with aphasia.
Meanwhile, many people with aphasia remain isolated, afraid that others won’t understand them or give them extra time to speak. By offering them the time and flexibility to communicate in whatever way they can, you can help open the door to language again, moving beyond the limitations of aphasia.