Spent more time thinking about the May 10 call. Not so much on when she actually made it, but what purpose it was to serve, especially as that answer can help determine how early on she decided to kill him.
What leapt out is two things.
1. She didn't have to go through the effort of splicing tapes etc. to threaten TA with it. All she had to do is tell him she recorded their phone sex. Why do all that extra work, then?
2. More importantly. Sex and travel is what we focus on, but there was another very significant topic she made sure was covered, and that was to get him on tape bad mouthing some high level PPL colleagues, this at a time of a major PPL reorg which threatened his job security.
Maybe she had more than one goal in mind for recording. That one goal in the conversation seemed to be to harm him in the PPL community suggests she hadn't decided for sure to murder him before May 13 or 16th or whenever it was she said the phone was stolen.
Couldn't hurt him with PPL/ruin him financially if he's dead.
What leapt out is two things.
1. She didn't have to go through the effort of splicing tapes etc. to threaten TA with it. All she had to do is tell him she recorded their phone sex. Why do all that extra work, then?
2. More importantly. Sex and travel is what we focus on, but there was another very significant topic she made sure was covered, and that was to get him on tape bad mouthing some high level PPL colleagues, this at a time of a major PPL reorg which threatened his job security.
Maybe she had more than one goal in mind for recording. That one goal in the conversation seemed to be to harm him in the PPL community suggests she hadn't decided for sure to murder him before May 13 or 16th or whenever it was she said the phone was stolen.
Couldn't hurt him with PPL/ruin him financially if he's dead.