The Unabomber Pt. 1

Summary

Podcast Summary: Serial Killers & Murderous Minds

Episode: The Unabomber Pt. 1

Date: March 30, 2026

Hosts: Vanessa Richardson & Dr. Tristin Engels

---

Overview

This episode launches a two-part deep dive into the life and psychology of Ted Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber. Hosts Vanessa Richardson and clinical/forensic psychologist Dr. Tristin Engels blend detailed biographical storytelling with expert psychological analysis to unpack how Kaczynski evolved from a socially isolated mathematics prodigy into America’s most infamous anti-technology domestic terrorist. The conversation explores family dynamics, early childhood trauma, formative academic experiences, and the stark impact of isolation and psychological manipulation on Kaczynski’s mind and motivations.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Early Life and Isolation

[04:24]

• Ted Kaczynski was born in 1942, raised in a stable but emotionally restrained working-class Chicago home.
• As an infant, he endured a prolonged hospital stay for illness, during which parental contact was prohibited—an experience his mother, Wanda, worried would scar his development.

“If a baby is hospitalized for weeks without parental contact...that can dysregulate their nervous system. They’re too young to understand what’s happening...they just experience the absence.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [05:15]

• Dr. Engels explains how attachment disruption during sensitive periods in infancy may not cause violence, but lays groundwork for future social withdrawal.

2. Giftedness and Social Outsiderdom

[08:53]

• Ted demonstrated remarkable intelligence, skipping grades and excelling at schoolwork—but with every advancement, his social struggles intensified.
• The family’s focus on self-reliance became magnified as Ted’s primary companionship came from his much-younger brother, David.

“Skipping a grade can amplify that feeling...socially and emotionally, it can create more social distance because now he’s with older peers and may feel out of sync developmentally and chronologically.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [10:11]

• Efforts to connect with peers via science skills backfired—most notably a small homemade explosion that gained classmates’ approval but led to suspension, reinforcing feelings of isolation and rejection.

“He received attention and approval from his peers, and maybe for the first time, that validation mattered. But it also backfired.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [15:13]

3. Harvard and the Murray Study: Trauma by Design

[16:34]

• At 16, Kaczynski entered Harvard, academically capable but deeply lonely.
• He volunteered for Dr. Henry Murray’s famous (and ethically questionable) psychological stress study, seeking validation and connection.
• The study subjected participants to humiliating, confrontational interrogations of their beliefs and identity over hundreds of hours.

“If you recruit by telling participants you’re studying exceptionally intelligent young men and stress responses, that can implicitly suggest intelligence is being challenged...If intelligence is tied to their identity, that can also feel like an evaluation in itself.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [26:04]

• Ted participated for three years, enduring repeated emotional abuse, never told the true purpose or results.

“A single traumatic event is considered acute...Prolonged stress is different. It isn’t one overwhelming moment—it’s repeated activation of the stress response over time. Three years is prolonged.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [28:08]

4. Escaping into Academia and the Wilderness

[30:30]

• After Harvard, Ted pursued advanced degrees, primarily to avoid the Vietnam draft—a decision made out of necessity rather than desire.
• Despite academic achievement, he felt increasingly alienated and fixated on anti-technology philosophy, believing technology to be inherently destructive.

5. Radicalization in Isolation

[38:48]

• Moving to a remote Montana cabin in 1971, Kaczynski finally severed ties with mainstream society, living off the grid in near-complete solitude.
• This period intensified his beliefs, as constant isolation and immersion in self-reinforcing literature further radicalized his thinking.

“Isolation can fuel rigid thinking...Beliefs don’t get changed, they intensify...That can shift someone from self-protection into moral urgency.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [42:48]

• Ted began sending long, anti-technology essays to his brother David, the only remaining close contact.

6. From Alienation to Violent Action

[45:34]

• Kaczynski turned to violence as a means of projecting his message to the world.
• He meticulously taught himself to build bombs using everyday, untraceable items; his first attack targeted Northwestern University through a misleading package.
• His initial acts injured but did not kill, and failed to generate the societal panic or debate he craved.

“If he truly believed technology was destroying humanity, then people like Professor Crist have been reduced to symbols rather than people. That shrinks empathy, and it creates moral justification.”
—Dr. Tristan Engels [48:42]

• Frustrated by the lack of public response, Ted’s ambition escalated: If he wanted to catch national attention, he realized he would need to orchestrate larger-scale violence.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Prolonged separation might not feel temporary to a nine month old baby. Prolonged stress...shapes how the brain responds to stress later on.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [05:15]

• “If the one strategy you feel capable of using to connect leads to discipline, then self reliance starts to feel safer... with that environment, withdrawing...likely felt consistent with what he'd been taught.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [15:13]

• “Being included in something prestigious like this might have reinforced the idea that he does fit among thinkers and academics...and most of all, this was voluntary.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [21:03]

• “He was once again feeling forced into academia...Both are institutions in his perspective. He was in a lose-lose conflict.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [30:30]

• “When flexibility decreases, strong beliefs can slowly shift into less of an opinion and more of a mission.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [38:02]

• “That can shift someone like Ted from self protection, which is what I think he was initially looking for, into moral urgency...he may have begun to see himself as part of the solution.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [42:48]

• “He was intellectually overconfident. There’s a difference between wanting to feel superior and believing that your analysis...is sound.”
  —Dr. Tristan Engels [49:58]

---

Important Segment Timestamps

• Ted’s Early Isolation & Attachment: 04:24–08:53
• School Experiences & Identity Formation: 08:53–16:34
• Harvard Years & Murray Study: 16:34–29:28
• Post-Harvard, Academia, and Escaping Society: 30:30–38:48
• Montana Cabin & Isolation: 38:48–45:34
• First Violent Acts and Escalation: 45:34–52:00

---

Episode’s Tone & Takeaways

The episode is empathetic, somber, and analytical. Vanessa and Dr. Engels maintain a respectful yet probing tone, weaving together personal history, societal context, and psychological underpinnings. The discussion avoids sensationalism, instead focusing on how isolation, identity, prolonged psychological stress, and a lack of supportive connections created fertile ground for the development of Kaczynski’s extremist actions. Dr. Engels’ analysis consistently stresses that early trauma and social withdrawal are not direct causes of violence, but can interact to create profound vulnerability to radicalization, especially when paired with unchallenged rigid beliefs.

---

What’s Next

The episode ends at the point where Kaczynski escalates to a campaign of terrorism, setting up part two: an exploration of how his violent acts evolved, the psychological unraveling, and the subsequent national manhunt.

---

For listeners seeking a nuanced understanding of the “how” and “why” behind the most notorious American crime sprees, this episode is a meticulous, insightful starting point.

Transcript

[Unknown Narrator/Guest]

Foreign.

[Crime House Announcer]

This is Crime House.

[Vanessa Richardson]

We all feel the need to voice our opinions, to share our ideas, our beliefs, and the way we see the world. For most people, that expression goes like you'd expect. We talk to others, write in a journal, or post on social media. But sometimes the need to be heard becomes consuming, and some might go to extreme lengths to spread their message. For Ted Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, it wasn't enough to simply share his ideas. Ted needed to force them upon the rest of the world. Even if it meant becoming the nation's most notorious domestic terrorist. The human mind is powerful. It shapes how we think, feel, love and hate. But sometimes it drives people to commit the unthinkable. This is Serial Killers and Murderous A Crime House original. I'm Vanessa Richardson.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

And I'm forensic psychologist Dr. Tristan Engels. Every Monday and Thursday, we uncover the darkest minds history analyzing what makes a

[Vanessa Richardson]

killer Crime House is made possible by you. Please rate, review and follow serial killers and murderous minds to enhance your listening experience with ad. Free early access to each two part series and bonus content. Subscribe to Crime House plus on Apple Podcasts. Before we get started, be advised this episode contains descriptions of violence and psychological abuse, so please listen with care. Today we start our deep dive on Ted Kaczynski, the math genius turned domestic terrorist who sent homemade explosives across the United States. In the process, Ted killed three people and injured many more, earning himself the infamous title, the Unabomber.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

As Vanessa goes through the story, I'll be talking about things like how a lack of autonomy as a child can lead some offenders to withdraw from society. How extreme isolation can feed someone's violent tendencies, and how some criminals rationalize large scale violence.

[Vanessa Richardson]

And as always, we'll be asking the question, what makes a killer? Spring is here. Which means it's time to refresh your wardrobe for warmer days, spring break plans, and all the busy life in between. But let's be honest. Finding clothes that fit your style and schedule, that's easier said than done. That's why Daily look is perfect for busy women like us. Daily look is the number one highest rated premium personal styling service for women. You get a dedicated personal stylist who curates a box of clothes based on your body shape, style preferences and lifestyle, delivered straight to your door. Real stylists, not an algorithm. And you get the same stylist every time, so your wardrobe always feels personal. Each box can have up to 12 premium pieces. Try everything on at home. Keep what you love, return the rest. Shipping is free. Both ways with flexible delivery every 30, 60, or 90 days. Refreshing your spring wardrobe has never been easier. It's effortless style, saving you time and energy so you can focus on everything else. This season, elevate your style by signing [e-mail] today. Take your style [e-mail] and get 50% off your first styling fee with the code CEREAL. That's dailylook.com code S E R I

[Daily Look Advertiser]

A L if you're the proud parent of a puppy or kitten, you know you can't pet proof your entire life. There simply isn't a sock drawer high enough or a couch cover thick enough. But you can pet proof your wallet with Lemonade Pet Insurance. Whether it's an unexpected accident or a routine checkup, Lemonade can cover up to 90% of the bill. Plus they can handle claims in as little as two seconds. So before you turn into a complete helicopter pet parent, get a [e-mail] Pet

[Vanessa Richardson]

from the day he was born, Ted Kaczynski seemed destined for solitude. He was born in 1942 and raised in a working class neighborhood outside Chicago. Growing up in the environment of World War II, many people valued family stability and social conformity as virtues. The Kaczynskis were no exception. Ted's parents, Wanda and Theodore, structured their daily lives around routine, discipline and the belief that hard work would bring reward. They valued restraint and practicality, which was reflected in their quiet, carefully kept home. Unfortunately, their fastidious lifestyles couldn't save them from everything. When Ted was just nine months old, he came down with a bad case of hives. He was hospitalized for weeks, and his parents weren't allowed to stay with him.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

In child development, we talk about critical periods and sensitive periods. A critical period is a narrow window when something has to happen for typical development to occur. Visual development is one of the most commonly cited examples of this. Because the brain needs clear visual input early in order to build the neural pathways responsible for processing sight, that period is critical. Without adequate stimulation, those pathways may not fully develop, and that affects visual functioning long term. Now a sensitive period is different. That's the time when the brain is especially open to influence, and if something disruptive happens, it can have an impact, but there may be still room for repair. That's how it differs from a critical period. Examples are language acquisition or attachment. This is a sensitive period for tet. At nine months old, a baby doesn't have language yet, but they absolutely have attachment. Around that age, infants are forming bonds with their caregivers or their parents, and that can become distressed when separated. If a baby is hospitalized for weeks without parental contact, which was common at that time, actually that can dysregulate their nervous system. They're too young to understand what's happening, why they're there, or why their parents aren't with them. They just experience the absence. Also, object permanence is still developing in the first year of life. A child that age has limited ability to understand that a person still exists when they're not physically present. So prolonged separation might not feel temporary to a nine month old baby. Now, when stress responses are activated repeatedly during early development, Especially during an illness like this, it can shape how the brain responds to stress later on. Research has shown that prolonged elevations in stress hormones like cortisol can influence how someone reacts to threat and how they form attachments later on. So some children may become more anxious, some may become more withdrawn, and some learn to rely heavily on themselves. That said, many infants experienced medical separation in that era era and they did not grow up to become violent offenders. It's not causation, but it's definitely a disruption During a very sensitive attachment window.

[Vanessa Richardson]

So interesting. This reminds me of when people had kids in covet during the time of COVID It's a little different because you could be with your little family bubble. This is, you know, he was obviously totally isolated. But in the event that an infant has to be isolated like this, what measures can be taken to ensure they develop in a normal, healthy way?

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

The most protective factor in early development is responsive caregiving. And by that I mean, if a caregiver can't physically be present for whatever the reason is, then consistent sensory connection is the goal. So things like recorded voices, Familiar objects with a caregiver's scent, Visual contact whenever feasible, and as much skin to skin contact as hospital policy allows, which they do now in most cases. We've come a long way since then, and once there's reunification, that can consistency needs to continue. So holding them, making eye contact, soothing touch. Infants need enough repeated experiences of comfort to re establish safety. From there, it's important to monitor milestones and intervene if there are any signs of withdrawal, Excessive irritability, or difficulty bonding. The good news is an infant's brain is highly plastic, Meaning it's highly adaptable and it can be shaped by corrected experiences.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Well, Wanda was concerned about how all the isolation would affect Ted as he grew older. And she was right to be worried. Ted recovered from his illness, but as he got older, it was clear that he struggled with Socialization, he often kept to himself instead of playing outside with other kids in the neighborhood. And even though Wanda and Theodore had always emphasized self control and self sufficiency, Ted's isolation took things to a new level. As a child, Ted's only real friend was his younger brother, David, who was seven years younger than him. The two became extremely close as David got older. One of their favorite hobbies was going hiking with their dad on the weekends. Ted loved being surrounded by the vast wilderness with no one but his father and little brother by his side. But as David got older and developed a more typical social life, Ted once again found himself on the fringes. He found consolation in one thing though. His extreme intelligence. From an early age, Ted was a star student. He finished school assignments with ease and passed all his tests with flying colors. His elementary school teachers were so impressed, they had him skip a grade. And when Ted took an IQ test, the results indicated that he was a genius.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

So we're starting to paint a bigger picture of Ted. If he's socially isolating, even if it appears to be by choice at this point, that and it's possible he may have felt rejected or even overlooked by same aged peers. And his intelligence may have played a role in that. Many gifted children have expressed feeling like they had little in common with their peers. So he may have already felt different and now he's being formally labeled as different. Skipping a grade can amplify that feeling too. Academically, it makes sense to move him up because it aligns with his cognitive ability. But socially and emotionally, it can create more social distance because now he's with older peers and he may feel out of sync developmentally and chronologically. I mean, there is a reason why he's only connecting with David, who's seven years younger than him. That can be difficult for children to navigate. Maturity differences between grades are very real, and they become even more pronounced when they're approaching adolescence. Also, a label like gifted can become part of their identity. A child may come to believe that their value lies in their intelligence or achievement is their primary source of validation. It can shape how a child sees themselves and how they think others see them. And in Ted's case, if intelligence became the safest and most reliable part of his identity, that may have strengthened over time, especially as other forms of belonging, like with his peers, for example, began to feel less stable.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Once Ted was put on the fast track, he couldn't get off of it. That's because in the post war era, the US Invested heavily in science and engineering. The government Provided funding to schools to identify, quote, unquote, gifted students, all with the goal of beating competitors like the Soviet Union. This meant that young, brilliant minds like Ted's were treated as a resource, Especially when it came to national defense. So when Ted made it to high school and continued to show promise, he skipped a grade again. His parents weren't so sure about it, since he was already having trouble fitting in. They wanted their sons to lead normal, pleasant lives. But ultimately, the school convinced them that if Ted prioritized academics over everything else, he'd be better off in the long run. Ted's parents were persuaded. From there, his school administrators enrolled him in more STEM classes. But even though he kept doing well academically, he only fell more behind socially. Ted was two years younger than his classmates and couldn't figure out how to fit in with them. While others played sports and hung out on the weekends, he stayed home. His parents tried to convince him to go out and make some friends, but he preferred to shut himself in his room and read a book. Eventually, though, Ted managed to bond with his peers. The other kids in his science class had always been intrigued by his sense of curiosity and knack for experimentation. So Ted used those traits to try and make friends. He'd learned how to combine simple materials like batteries, wires, and potassium nitrate to create small explosions. One day, he showed the other kids how to do it. The makeshift bomb went off, and Ted's classmates ate it up. Unfortunately, the school administrators weren't as impressed. No one got hurt, but Ted was suspended for his stunt anyway.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

This is an extension of what we talked about earlier with regard to the risks of believing that value lies in their intelligence and achievement being their primary source of validation. Ted was encouraged to lean into science. He was identified as exceptional, Placed into accelerated stem path, and told that experimentation and intellectual curiosity were strengths that becomes part of how he understands himself and his identity. And at this point, he's believing that this is what he's good at and this is where he belongs, because that's what he's being told. And until now, he struggled to fit in. But when he finally starts to find his footing and he applies what he is taught, he gets approval from classmates, but punishment from authority figures. And that's confusing for someone like Ted. Without any clear explanation regarding what about that was wrong and why, like maybe how it's a safety risk for students, perhaps, then that experience likely feels like rejection. And this time it's from the people who've been telling him he's exceptional for years and for doing the Very thing he's been told he's exceptional at. That's inconsistent messaging. And psychologically, that can create resentment, mistrust, feeling misunderstood or unsure, and especially without clear communication.

[Vanessa Richardson]

How do you think this experience might have affected Ted in terms of his ability to make friends? Is it possible he would have felt like he'd tried the one thing he knew how to do, and it just totally backfired?

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

I think this may have been a pivotal moment for him, and here's why. I mean, firstly, it makes sense that he used science as a way to connect. Like you said, that was an area where he felt competent and confident. If you're struggling socially, you tend to lead with what you know you can rely on, but also what you can connect, connect with. This would have been that thing. And in that moment, it worked. He received attention and approval from his peers, and maybe for the first time, that validation mattered. It's something he's been looking for, but it also backfired. He was suspended. And he may have linked the two experiences. The very thing that helped him connect also led to punishment. That might have felt very personal to him, especially if being intelligent was his identity. That can push someone further into isolation. If the one strategy you feel capable of using to connect leads to discipline, then self reliance starts to feel safer. And it's worth noting that his parents, like you mentioned earlier, Vanessa, they emphasized self control and self reliance or self sufficiency to him very early on in that environment, withdrawing rather than reattempting connection not only may have felt safer, but it also likely felt consistent with what he'd been taught since he was very young.

[Vanessa Richardson]

While Ted grappled with ideas about power, he didn't really have anyone to talk about it with. And it wouldn't be until after high school that he'd find a way to express himself. When ted graduated in 1958, his future was clear. At just 16 years old, he was headed to Harvard University, where he planned to study mathematics. He quickly adapted to the academic level, but his age gap and poor social skills meant he was still pretty isolated. Among the thousands of other students at Harvard, Ted still felt utterly alone. Most days, he just went to class and returned quietly to his dorm room. He'd managed to form a few friendly acquaintances, people he shared meals with, but he usually listened more than he talked. This gave him a lot of time to observe his peers. And there was one one thing he couldn't help but notice. Just like him, a lot of Ted's classmates had been forced onto the path toward high Tech, innovation. And because of that, their whole lives were laid out ahead of them. But they'd never asked for any of it. At times, Ted felt like he wanted to scream. So much of his life had been decided by others. He didn't even care about technological advancements. In fact, he believed technology was the scourge the of Earth, that it was killing the planet and killing people's mental health. He fantasized about running off into the wilderness alone and leaving it all behind. Then one day in the fall of 1959, Ted found something that would change his life forever. The psychology department was running a study on how gifted young men responded to stress. They were asking male students to sign up. Ted didn't know the details of what the study would involve, but he knew it was being run by Senior Harvard psychologist Dr. Henry Murray, who was well known and respected. Plus, it only required a few hours of his time each week and it was paid. Ted thought the study could be beneficial for him. Maybe he'd meet like minded peers if he got more involved with the psychology department. Maybe he'd even form a connection with a renowned researcher. One who wasn't focused solely on technological advancement. So Ted signed up and pretty soon he was accepted. He was eager to see what doors the study might open for him. However, Ted had no idea that the goal of the study wasn't just to assess his mind, but to push it to its limits.

[Omaha Steaks Advertiser]

It's 6pm on a Tuesday. I'm driving home, the kids are asking what's for dinner for the 10th time. And that familiar wave of fridge panic is hitting me hard. But then I remembered I have those Omaha Steak Smash burgers in the freezer. I'm telling you, the mood in the house shifted the second they hit the pan. That specific sizzle and the smell of those crispy caramelized edges. What started as a disaster evening turned into everyone's favorite night of the week in under 15 minutes. That's why Omaha Steaks has become my ultimate weeknight win. It's not just for birthdays or holidays anymore. It's having high quality protein ready when life gets busy. Their beef is grass fed and grain finished, which gives it that incredible marbling and legendary flavor you just don't find at the local grocery store. Omaha Steaks is your weeknight win. And right now you can get the world's best everyday protein during their spring savings event. Go to OmahaSteaks.com for an extra $35 off when you use promo code T bone at checkout. That's Omaha Steaks.com terms apply C site for details.

[Red Bull Advertiser]

It's crunch time at work and you need to bring wings to your workday. Visit redbull.com gettingitdone and answer a couple questions about your work style to get a Spotify customized playlist tuned to your productivity. Plus, score a can of Red Bull on us while you go from to do to done. And remember, Red Bull gives you wings. Supplies are limited. Terms Apply. Visit the website for more information.

[Vanessa Richardson]

In 1959, 17 year old Ted Kaczynski enrolled in a psychological study at Harvard University. The goal was to assess how extremely intelligent young men like those at Harvard responded to stress. It was run by a top psychology researcher and professor, Dr. Henry Murray. Ted wasn't just flattered at the thought of being considered exceptional. He also hoped to bond with his peers along the way.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

This was likely very significant for Ted because he's been searching for belonging and connection and in some ways a new identity outside of just being a genius. Being invited into a psychological study at Harvard may have felt like formal recognition of that. Not just that he was intelligent, but that he was worthy of being studied or included and taken seriously at that age, especially after skipping grades and feeling chronologically out of sync with his peers, Being included in something prestigious like this might have reinforced the idea that he does fit among thinkers and academics and people who value intellect. And most of all, this was voluntary. It wasn't something he was forced into. It wasn't something that someone decided for him. It was something that he sought out and he chose for himself. He was exercising agency over his life, perhaps for the very first time.

[Vanessa Richardson]

So knowing that the study focused on the young men's stress responses, what sort of red flags or concerns come to mind for you, Dr. Engels?

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

Okay, so. Well, you know, first off, it's the 1950s and there are a few concerns that come to mind given that era. The ethical standards back then were so different than they are today. Informed consent, transparency about procedures, and protection from psychological harm were not regulated the way that they are today. I mean, like you said, Ted doesn't really even understand what he's signing up for. Does he know the risks? The other thing that stands out to me is the framing of this study. They're recruiting people who are exceptional. They are establishing a baseline there to which they are testing against. I don't yet know the parameters of the study, but if they are systematically placing undue stress directly on the part of the self that participants like Ted feel is most stable, or that they're most Confident about themselves, they then that's a red flag, because that could cause harm. There's also the matter of his age. He's 17, and yes, he's in Harvard. He's still an adolescent and technically a legal minor. Is he even legally able to sign up without a parent back then? Also, even if he's cognitively advanced, which he is, and we know this, it's documented, his emotional regulation skills are still forming. His stress response is not going to be the same as someone over the age of 25, regardless of his intellect. So those are some of the red flags and the concerns that initially popped out at me. But I guarantee that there would be more if I actually saw the methods and the actual intention of the study.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Well, it may have seemed exciting, but Ted, he had no idea what was in store for him. He entered a classroom where he sat down with about 20 other male students. A research assistant told them their first assignment was to write a brief essay about how they viewed the world and about their own personal philosophies. The essay prompt was pretty broad, and Ted let his ideas flow, expressing his resentment towards science, technology, and industrial society. After everyone finished their essays, they were called into a separate room. One by one, Ted waited patiently, and once his name was called, he entered a stark, brightly lit room. Dr. Murray sat on one side of the room. A man in a black suit and tie who Ted didn't recognize, stood next to him. Ted took a seat across from the two men. Then research assistants started attaching electrodes to him so they could monitor his heart rate. Ted fixed his gaze on Dr. Murray and the other man, who seemed to be the only one who didn't mind the harsh lighting. When the assistants finished with the electrodes, Ted noticed a video camera set up in the corner of the room. Before he could say anything, Dr. Murray cut him off. He said he'd read Ted's essay and thought it was good, but the team had some questions. Suddenly, the other man took over. He walked over to Ted and loomed over him before launching into a series of harsh criticisms on his essay. He demanded that Ted defend his ideas. But when Ted tried to respond, the man mocked him. He made fun of the way Ted spoke and even his appearance. He called him naive and childish. Ted kept trying to defend himself, but he couldn't find the words. So the man continued his insults bec more cruel, until Ted felt himself shrinking. For someone already unsure of his place in the world, the experience cut deep. He reminded himself this was part of the study. So even though he left the Session shaken up, he came back the next week and the week after that. Over the next three years, he spent nearly 200 hours in the study. He wrote essays and endured repeated interrogations, but no one ever told him any of the results or even the study's true purpose.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

Nowadays, research requires informed consent, like I mentioned, but also debriefing. Participants are told what the study involves, and they're given context afterward. Back then, that wasn't the standard. And as a result, there was real psychological harm occurring here. Especially when you consider how ted likely viewed Dr. Murray. Dr. Murray was a prestigious authority figure. And not only was Ted receiving harsh criticism and humiliation framed as methodology in a study, but because of who Dr. Murray was and what he represented to Ted, he likely trusted him, and therefore compliance felt necessary or questioning it might have felt inappropriate. Dr. Murray is the trusted adult and the expert. Ted repeatedly encountered environments where his intelligence was tested, challenged, or tied somehow to evaluation. First with school and the STEM track, and now here. That can reinforce that his value is something that he has to demonstrate under pressure. And again, I want to highlight the framing of the study. If you recruit participants by telling them that you're studying exceptionally intelligent young men and their stress responses, that can implicitly suggest that intelligence is being challenged. And for someone like Ted, that's tied to their identity, that can also feel like an evaluation in itself. Like they want to see how exceptional you really are under pressure that creates performance pressure before the study even begins, and that he now has to prove his value by enduring what the study does to him. So the harm isn't just in the criticism or the humiliation, because it certainly is, but it's also the setup. And the idea that your status as exceptional is something you now have to Somehow defend nearly 200 hours in over

[Vanessa Richardson]

3 years is a long time. How does prolonged stress differ from, say, a single traumatic event?

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

Great question. A single traumatic event is considered acute. In acute traumatic events, the body has a stress response, and afterward, the brain might replay that event, avoid reminders or remain hypervigilant. But often the distress is tied to something specific. Prolonged stress is different. It isn't one overwhelming moment. It's repeated activation of the stress response over time. Three years is prolonged. The body stays in a sustained state of tension or anticipation. And when that happens, stress hormones like cortisol remain elevated longer than they should. And the sympathetic nervous system is activated more frequently when it's prolonged. That contributes to increased reactivity and mistrust and a tendency to interpret neutral stimuli as threatening. So essentially, prolonged stress can shift someone's baseline, Meaning instead of the threat response activating only when danger is actually present, their system becomes more easily triggered by things that might not even be dangerous, but they're misinterpreting. As such, their brain is adapting to a world it has learned to experience as constantly and consistently stressful.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Well, over the years. The study wore Ted down. However, he didn't tell anyone about the toll it had taken on him. No one knew he'd been subjected to prolonged abuse and that it fed something dark within him. Since he didn't tell his family what he'd endured, they kept encouraging him on his current path. By early 1962, he'd passed all his final exams and was preparing to graduate at just 20 years old. But Ted despised the thought of being confined to academia more than ever. All he wanted was to start a new life. To live off the land, rely solely on himself, and be under no one's control. But he had to put that dream on hold because the government was drafting young men into the Vietnam war, which Ted staunchly opposed. And the only way for him to avoid it was to pursue another degree. So after getting his master's at the University of Michigan, he stayed on to get a PhD in math.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

A couple of things I want to touch on here, Starting with why Ted kept what was happening to him in this study to himself. Aside from what we've already covered with regard to his views about this study and the possibility he felt the need to be compliant for identity and validation, he might have been afraid to say anything. He volunteered to be there. If he told his parents what he was enduring while in that study, they likely would have had him removed, and that would have taken away his agency. If he wanted to leave, he would. At the same time, he might not have fully understood what was happening to him was, in fact, harmful to him. It's not uncommon for people experiencing abuse to be unaware of it in the moment, but he was destabilized from it. Like you said, it took a toll on him. And I think that was also impacted by how isolated he was. He had no one else reminding him of his value. After spending years being cut down and humiliated, that's extremely disempowering. But he trusted the process because of who ran it and where, and he chose the study for himself. Which brings us to the next issue. He's once again feeling forced into academia to avoid being drafted into Vietnam to and after just setting a goal to live a life for himself away from others, Living off the land under no One's control. Now he's faced with two choices, be controlled by the US military or controlled by academia. Both are institutions in his perspective. He was in a lose lose conflict. Psychologically repeated experiences of constrained choice can heighten sensitivity to autonomy. And we know he's had had repeated experiences like this. So some individuals respond by adapting. Others begin organizing their identity around resisting control altogether.

[Vanessa Richardson]

In general, what mental and emotional risks are associated with someone making a life decision that's the, you know, the lesser of two evils. Instead of seeking help and just exploring other options.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

I think for starters, it's important to highlight that Ted is clearly making this choice under pressure and in normal circumstances that's stressful. And stress narrows thinking. It activates threat based processing which can reduce just the flexibility of your thoughts and how you think. Instead of exploring other options, he's focusing on escaping the worst option that can lead to reactive decisions rather than intentional ones. And when we consider how much stress he had been under for the last three years in the study, how his stress responses had been tested in harmful ways, and how he's been enduring this alone, not telling anybody this entire time, it's no wonder that he didn't consider alternative options or even attempt to brainstorm with others before choosing a choice that also doesn't feel right to him. Ted hasn't sought help or outside perspective ever, if you really think about it, at least that we know of. He hasn't had a strong support system outside from his younger brother. He's largely isolated himself and often defaulted to the decisions of others. He's already developing a view that the world is hostile, coercive or controlling, and has been desiring to detach from it entirely. So at this point, because of this sort of forced choice, he's feeling he's at a greater risk now of growing deeper resentment and rigid self reliance.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Ted hated the path he was on, but he didn't make a huge effort to get off of it either. So his secret belief beliefs kept simmering and all the while the interrogator's voice lived on in his head, berating, demeaning and taunting him. When ted started his PhD program, he battled with the two competing sides of himself. One that excelled academically and one that rebelled against the very institutions that fostered his academic success. But eventually Ted learned that the system didn't have to hold him back from living his true value. In fact, it could help him make his dreams a reality. And for Ted, an ideal reality would mean total destruction.

[Crime House Announcer]

Planning a wedding shouldn't feel overwhelming. The Knot brings everything together in one place. Vendors who get your vibe, a custom planning checklist, guest list tools, and a free wedding website that syncs with it all. So instead of juggling a dozen apps and spreadsheets, you can actually enjoy getting married. Get [e-mail] audio the knot let's plan your wedding together.

[Venmo Advertiser]

Score more with the college branded Venmo Debit card and earn up to 5% cash back with Venmo Stash Got paid back with the Venmo Debit card you can instantly access your balance and spend on what you want like game day, snacks, gear, tickets and more. The more you do, the more cash back you can earn. Plus, there's no monthly fee or minimum balance. Sign up [e-mail] collegecard the Venmo MasterCard is issued by the Bancorp Bank N.A. select schools available. Venmo Stash terms and exclusions apply at Venmo me stash terms max $100 cash

[Vanessa Richardson]

back per month There was evidence in the house and they would not listen

[Proof Podcast Announcer]

to me the Proof podcast is back with a new case and a new season, and this time the stakes are higher than ever before.

[Unknown Narrator/Guest]

The letter from the doctor said I have six months or less to live. I'm scared shitless right now.

[Proof Podcast Announcer]

A dying man is serving a life sentence for a murder he says he didn't commit.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

Did you ever question if they got the right person?

[Vanessa Richardson]

I don't think I believed it at the time. I don't think I believe it now.

[Venmo Advertiser]

I'm scared to be sitting here in

[Vanessa Richardson]

this dark damn chair talking about this.

[Unknown Narrator/Guest]

How many other cold cases were going to come forward and go, hey man, we need to look at my because I didn't do it. How many more do we have?

[Proof Podcast Announcer]

You can listen now to season three of Proof wherever you get your podcasts and follow along with us as we reinvestigate the murder at the bike shop.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Everything I tell you is the truth. I'm not bullshitting one way or the other. I hope I don't bring a ton of shit down on me. I really do. In 1962, 20 year old Ted Kaczynski graduated from Harvard and enrolled at the University of Michigan. He was weighed down by the abuse he endured during the study at Harvard, but he never told anyone about the distress and anger it had sparked in him. Instead, Ted dutifully went to class and kept making his parents proud. But even though he was studying math, Ted was more interested in other fields. In his spare time, he read about history and evolutionary theory. He wanted to better understand the world he was a part of. And his readings strengthened the ideas he'd been forming for years. That technology was the bane of human existence and elite institutions used it to control the masses with no regard for its negative impact on people's mental health or the planet. Ted was seeing things more clearly than ever. He refused to be a cog in the machine. Once he saved up enough money, he wanted to go off the grid completely. He didn't try to get to know his colleagues. They thought he was brilliant, but he didn't care. Just like when he was a kid, Ted would march straight home after class and crack open a book.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

And this is where the rigidity in his thinking starts to come in. If Ted was spending most of his time alone, reading and not really talking through his ideas with other people, then no one was challenging his thinking. And when you're alone with a belief for long enough, it can start to feel flawless to you, it makes sense to you, it feels logical or justified. And the problem is, without other perspectives, your thinking can get less flexible. And when flexibility decreases, strong beliefs can slowly shift into less of an opinion and more of a mission. And now isolation by itself doesn't create extremism, but it can remove the reality testing of other people that helps keep ideas like this grounded.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Do you think Ted's worsening isolation and the fact that he is doubling down on his ideologies might be a post traumatic stress response to his experience with the psychological study at Harvard?

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

So I want to highlight what post traumatic stress disorder is because it has specific criteria. In the Diagnostic and statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, it's defined as, as exposure to a traumatic event, intrusive memories, flashbacks like they're reliving the event, avoidance tied to that event, hyperarousal and functional impairment linked to the trauma. And when we're talking about a traumatic event, it's usually a life threatening event of some kind. In what we know publicly, there isn't any clear evidence that TED demonstrated classic trauma symptoms in that structured way according to how we classify it. We know that the study was psychologically harmful to ted. But for it to qualify for ptsd, at least diagnostically, it requires exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury or sexual violence, humiliation and psychological stress, even prolonged, doesn't automatically meet the clinical threshold for trauma as defined in the diagnostic criteria. And I want to make it very, very clear, I'm not undermining the harm that causes someone, nor am I saying it can't lead to ptsd. I'm speaking about Ted specifically, and in that regard, I think a better way of framing this is that Ted had cumulative experiences beginning in adolescence that were adversarial or stressful, and that likely caused mistrusted authority and sensitivity to control. The isolation is exacerbating this. And doubling down on his ideologies was perhaps a way for him to find autonomy or control on his own terms. Without evaluating him personally, I can't say for sure that this is ptsd.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Since Ted kept his beliefs to himself, no one realized he was forming a sinister plan. The more he read, the more he believed Elite high tech institutions had to be destroyed and he should be the one to do it. For now, though, he had to keep saving money. So after he graduated from the University of Michigan in the late 1960s, Ted accepted a tenure track role as a professor of mathematics at UC Berkeley. There his beliefs continued to solidify, and after just two years, he resigned with no explanation. The reality was that he'd finally saved up enough to sever himself from the path he'd been forced onto his entire life. In June of 1971, Ted moved to Lincoln, Montana, where he built a small cabin in a remote wooded area. His brother David helped him buy the plot of land where the cabin was located. Ted's home had no electricity, running water or phone. And that was exactly how he liked it. This was not a temporary escape. Ted believed that withdrawing from modern society was the only way to avoid being controlled. He spent his time gardening, hunting and reading. And he savored every minute of his newfound freedom. Ted's life went on like this for a few years. But by the mid-1970s, his own freedom wasn't enough. He'd been immersing himself into anti tech philosophy. And the peace he'd found since going off the grid started to fade as he realized even though his life had changed, the rest of the world was still the same. Megacorporations were still destroying the planet and world. Superpowers bombed innocent communities. Ted wouldn't stand for it any longer. So he started writing. He filled notebooks with long critiques of industrial society. A lot like the essays he'd written for the Harvard study. Except this time he wanted people to take him seriously.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

Well, Ted had what he thought he wanted, which was a fully self reliant life. But for him, that level of isolation may have actually made things worse. Like we were just discussing. Isolation can fuel rigid thinking without ongoing dialogue. Beliefs don't get changed, challenge, they intensify. If he was reading material that reinforced his Beliefs not engaging with alternative perspectives and living in near total isolation, it makes sense that his framework would grow more rigid and more extreme. That can shift someone like Ted from self protection, which is what I think he was initially looking for, into moral urgency, especially if intelligence is central to his identity. If Ted saw himself as uniquely capable or uniquely perceptive, he may have begun to see himself as part of the solution to this perceived crisis. And we know how strongly he reacted to perceived control as well. In that moment, he may have started to realize that avoidance wasn't enough and that now the only way to truly be free from control was to confront it.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Speaking of him possibly feeling he was uniquely capable, do you think Ted felt a lack of fulfillment now that he had less of an audience? He didn't have that study pounding on him. He had no one really reading his work.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

I think that's very possible. I always look for patterns. That's what I do. And when you look back, there's a recurring theme of Ted positioning his intelligence where it can be recognized or utilized. When he finished with Stem, he volunteered for the psychological study that we know specifically targeted exceptionally intelligent young men. To me, that suggests he was drawn to environments where his intellect was relevant, but also it was conducted in an environment that intellect was highly associated. It was Harvard. Later, when faced with the draft, he returned to academia. Rather than exploring alternative paths or even seeking guidance elsewhere, Again, he chose the domain where his intelligence gave him leverage, even though he hated it. Then he withdrew entirely, and he lived off the grid. But even there, he immersed himself in philosophy and theory. And now he's once again re engaging intellectually through manifestos and ideological ideas. That raises the question of whether being intellectually exceptional wasn't just something he was, but something he needed to be, or needed to at least be doing, which again, strengthens the theory that this was part of his identity. And if recognition had been part of that pattern earlier in life, the absence of it and this level of isolation may have actually brought a different kind of dissatisfaction to his life.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Now Ted needed someone to understand how he felt. So he started sending his writing to his brother David, who was one of the few people he was still in touch with. David even sent Ted money sometimes so he could survive on his own in the cabin. And while he found Ted's essays somewhat alarming, he thought his brother was just expressing himself. David had no idea just how dangerous Ted's ideas were. When he wasn't writing, Ted searched for ways to prove his points to the rest of the world, Even though He hoped to publish his writing. Eventually. He knew that wouldn't be enough. He had to do something. And pretty soon, he realized the only way to gain the world's attention was to stoke fear. Ted taught himself to build explosives, but not like the ones he used to make as a kid in school. He wanted to inflict real harm, and he wanted to use technology to do it. Only then would people start to see it as the enemy, just like he did. He went to the library to do research and check out how to manuals. Then he collected basic tools and materials like wood, fishing line, nails, tape, batteries, and wire. He made sure to only use scavenged or scrap material and everyday items. That way, the devices would be harder to track. Through trial and error, Ted taught himself what worked best. And by 1978, when Ted was 36 years old, he believed he finally created a potentially lethal bomb. Now he just had to select a target. He set his sights on the most symbolic marks, like universities, scientific institutions, and scientists themselves. He gathered personal information on people and learned about their whereabouts and routines. And in May of that year, Ted Kaczynski committed his first act of terrorism. He wrapped a bomb in a brown paper bag and brought it with him as he traveled to the Midwest. His destination was the University of Illinois, Chicago. But that's not where he wanted the bomb to ultimately end up. On the packaging, he'd written the name and return address for a man named Buckley Crist, who was an engineering professor at Northwestern University just outside Chicago. Northwestern has always been known for its science and tech programs, and in Ted's opinion, Professor Crist was at the forefront of that. That oppressive movement. Once he arrived at the University of Illinois, Ted left the bomb somewhere on campus. When employees there found it, they sent it to Professor Christ, just like he'd planned. However, when the package arrived at Christ's office, he was suspicious. So instead of opening it, he called the campus police. Officer Terry Marker responded and opened the package. And when he did, the device exploded. Fortunately, Marker survived, although he was badly burned and shrapnel tore into his skin.

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

It's such a stark contrast, often for people to comprehend when they hear someone who's never harmed anybody suddenly shifts to sending a lethal bomb on a university campus that could have potentially killed or harmed more than one person. But the reality is these shifts are rarely such. They're typically gradual. And when we zoom out and we look. Ted has gradually become more extreme in his beliefs throughout the years and during his isolation. And in those beliefs is dehumanization. If he truly believed technology was destroying humanity. Then people like Professor Crist have been reduced to symbols rather than people. That shrinks empathy, and it creates moral justification. If he believes that he was confronting a threat to mankind, then he can justify violence as intervention instead of it being what it really is. It's harm or aggression. We can really see how everything has led to this point and how his isolation and his lack of reality testing with others was likely the tipping point.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Ted seemed to think the symbolism driving this act would be immediately obvious to others. Why? Why do you think that is? Do you think his high intelligence affected his ego at all?

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

I think honestly, it's because he'd been so isolated, not just physically, but emotionally, socially and cognitively, that his beliefs likely started to feel universal to him. That's similar to what we call the false consensus effect, which is assuming that others see the world the same way that you do. And as for intelligence and ego. Ego. High intelligence doesn't automatically produce, like, traits of grandiosity and that kind of ego sense. But if intelligence has long been central to someone's identity, which I think in Ted's case, we can safely say was the case, and it's reinforced as their primary source of value, it can certainly shape how they perceive themselves. And from what we've discussed and what we know, I don't really see that Ted is vain or seeking admiration. What I see is someone who. Who's deeply trusted his own reasoning. If he believed he was uniquely capable of diagnosing this problem in society, that doesn't necessarily mean that he was arrogant. I think it means more so that he was intellectually overconfident. There's a difference between wanting to feel superior and believing that your analysis of what's going on is sound. And that can at times be hard to differentiate between the two to.

[Vanessa Richardson]

Ted wanted the world to know this was anarchy and for people to see how everyday technology could suddenly become a threat. However, his actions didn't have the intended effect. Authorities investigated the bombing, and the story made national news. Ted kept tabs on the coverage, and he grew frustrated when he realized no one viewed the act as symbolic. Instead, people seem to think it was completely random. There was no national panic, no debate about industrial society. Soon the story faded from the headlines. Ted retreated back into himself, and eventually his brother David could tell something was wrong. David had no idea what Ted had done, but in his letters he seemed even more dejected and withdrawn than usual. David thought Ted could use more time in regular society. So in 1978, he invited him to return home to Illinois and offered him a job at a factory. He managed. Surprisingly, Ted accepted, but the gig didn't last long. A female employee quickly caught Ted's eye. They briefly dated, but Ted didn't talk to her or try to get to know her. And when they broke up, Ted wrote crude and offensive limericks about her and taped them to the wall for everyone to see. When David was notified, he told Ted he had to let him go. After that, Ted went back to Montana. He and David stayed in touch through letters, but now there was tension between them. To Ted, this was proof that industrial society warped people's minds. So he went back to living in his cabin and continued studying how to build a lethal bomb. Ted wouldn't give up. He had to make sure that next time he got his message across and he wouldn't be ignored. One year later, he was ready to try again. He set his sights back on Northwestern so that people would understand the first attack wasn't random. This time he used gift wrapping to conceal a pipe bomb and left it on campus himself. Ted chose a random spot spot, then quickly left the scene. Soon a graduate student walked by and noticed what looked like a present someone had dropped accidentally. The grad student picked it up and the bomb went off. The student was injured, but they survived, just like before. The incident briefly made headlines, but it failed to stoke the level of fear Ted had wanted. He was growing more agitated and soon Ted realized in his mind that in order to sow real panic, he couldn't just hurt one person at a time. He needed to cause large scale casualties. Thanks so much for listening Listening. We'll be back next time as we discuss how Ted Kaczynski grew into a full on domestic terrorist Serial Killers and

[Dr. Tristan Engels]

Murderous Minds is a Crime House original. Powered by Pave Studios. Here at Crime House, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on all social media rimehouse and don't forget to rate, review and follow Serial Killers and Murderous Minds wherever you get your podcasts. Your feedback truly makes a difference and

[Vanessa Richardson]

to enhance your listening experience, subscribe to Crime House plus on Apple Podcasts. You'll get every episode of Serial Killers and Murderous Minds ad free along with early access to each thrilling two part series and exciting bonus content. Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is hosted by me, Vanessa Richardson and forensic psychologist Dr. Tristan Engels and is a Crime House original. Powered by Pave Studios. This episode was brought to life by the Serial Killers and Murderous Minds team Max Cutler, Ron Shapiro, Alex Benidon, Lori Marinelli, Natalie Pertovsky, Sarah Camp, Sarah Batchelor, Ines Renick, Sarah Tardif, and Kerry Murphy. Thank you for listening. Thanks for listening to today's episode. Not sure what to listen to next? Check out America's Most Infamous Crimes, hosted by Katie Ring. From serial killers to unsolved mysteries and game changing investigations, each week Katie takes on a notorious criminal case in American history. Listen to and follow America's Most Infamous Crimes now. Wherever you listen to podcasts.