TA- and I am touched and beyond that by every last thing you just wrote.
I'm going to exercise unusual restraint and not spit out what are a number of very personal reasons for my interest in this case that for me has always been about Travis, not the .
My interest in discusion of the factual & subjective aspects of the case has actually been quenched 99% of the time by the wonderful & thoughtful & insightful debates and conversations we've had here for all these years. I've typically called on DH to listen and weigh in only when I've doubted the validity of my own analysis of this or that. Which, true enough, for my DH has been an insufferably huge number of occasions, lol.
There are also personal reasons entirely unrelated to anything about the case that have kept me engaged, on and off, over the past year or so, but for the most part, my interest has been almost entirely focused on her appeals, because I've never dissected the appellate process in any case I've ever followed. It's been and continues to be a great learning experience about the legal process, one of my chief intellectual interests.
As for writing a book. I'm honored that you think I could do that. I've joked to my DH -but it's also accurate- that I have put as much time & effort over the years on this as I would have in writing a PhD dissertation. And I agree that while other books have been written about the , Travis, and/or the trial, none have been as comprehensive as the collective product of our discussions & conclusions here on WS.
Even if I were capable of writing a book and seeing that project through to completion (not sure I could), and even if I was willing to capitalize on the work here we have ALL done (not sure I'm ok with that), I guess I have my doubts about whether or not there really would be an audience for such a book.
Based in part by the huge drop-off in trialwatchers between trial one & PP2, I'm thinking that many or even most of the folks who first tuned in later tuned out when the live salacious spectacle was turned off. Somehow I doubt they would tune back in for yet one more book, especially one as nerdy as the only kind of book I can imagine myself writing.
I think JM wrote the book hard core trial watchers wanted to read. Though.....I know I wished he had (though I knew he wouldn't) included a deep dive into her manipulations & torment of Travis.
And....what remains as true now as it was when we first began our own deep-dive is that we simply don't have access to all the evidence. I well remember how much my certainties and perspectives kept changing when just one batch of evidence- the texts- were released, one month at a time.
Imagine, for example, what is contained in the full email record of TA- exchanges (have seen but a few), much less of the full record of emails between TAs and friends that contain discussions about the (drooling
).
And, BTW, about our disagreeing on whatever points along the way. I'm pretty certain that I've never held a consistent view/opinion on any significant aspect of any part of this case, lol. If you look hard & long enough, you'll no doubt find posts of mine in which I agree with you on every point.
,
