Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #8

Status
Not open for further replies.
PS. About the forged 3x5 card being such a lousy forgery attempt, and the thought she might have been attempting to forge the originals.

1. The was allowed to keep evidence in her cell. She had TA's journals. She might well have had copies of the 10 forged letters in her cell as well.

2. It would have been worse for her if she did NOT have copies of the forged letters to access, but let's say she even had that advantage.

3. For anyone, as in, anyone at all back then to believe the originals had magically been located, her second set of forgeries would have had to look IDENTICAL to the PDF versions Nurmi had, and that he had months earlier disclosed to JM and to the Court.

4. The fact that the handwriting on the card found did so little resemble TA's suggests another possible conclusion (along with the fact the card bore no date, salutation, or signature): that she did in fact smuggle out the contents of the letters one card at a time, and that no instructions were necessary, since the cards bore the content of what she wanted/needed in the letters, and last, that she did have an accomplice on the outside, one who did cut and paste and copy then scan the letters into PDF files.

One version of possibilities.




But can she take the journals to her cell? Where she can rip out pages or add something in or more?

(WS blinked out, lost what I was typing, blinked in and plopped part of it into a reply to this last question of yours).

Yes, she was allowed evidence in her cell, but no, she would not have dared alter evidence. She likely had copies of his journals and whatever else, not the originals, but even if the system was crazy enough to give original evidence to a lying liar on trial in a DP case, JM would have copies (or access to the originals) and would have known if she wanted in fact to beg for the DP by altering evidence.
 
Last edited:
Last splat for the night, to put it down before it slips away:

Rereading parts of JM's book I caught something I hadn't before (I think, lol).

About when she contacted Brewer about the gas cans, and therefore, when she first began to seriously consider killing Travis..

JM says she first called B "sometime" in May to ask to borrow gas cans because she was going to Mesa, etc.

When B questioned her about the request, though, JM says she became irate, and told B she would call him back LATER THAT WEEK.

But, she didn't call him back LATER THAT WEEK, according to JM, and instead, called him again "in the last week of May."

Elsewhere JM has suggested (no definite date provided) that the first called B closer to the middle of the month than in the very beginning of May.

Looking at the calendar for May 2008, it's possible to speculate what triggered the first call to B, and why she might have zigged away from killing thoughts until later, pretty specifically and unsurprisingly, after the May 26 debacle.
 
Geevee wants a signed picture of JM but I want a full day of questioning session with JM. My treat, breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
I like the new and improved format. It deserves pretty orchid for my avatar.

Lovely orchid, Pocket! I gave myself a brighter flower and a colorful wall to sit upon (while humming Floyd's 'Another Brick in (') Wall'. ;)
 
I can't wait for Hope's thesis. I know it will be comprehensive and superb.

Meanwhile, did some thinking.
Were the forgeries manufactured in jail in preparation for her upcoming testimony?
If yes, then her testimony really should match contents of the letters. I mean, why forge but not testify about it?
(Though it's possible, since the letters were precluded from evidence, that her testimony didn't need to adhere to the content.)

-Nov 2006 letter(T wants to see her in boy's underwear) - she didn't testify about this.

-March 2008 (T wants to marry her to control deviant feelings and hit her) - Her testimony is different. She said T hit her when she told him she was leaving Mesa. Not one word about marriage proposal.

-Jan 2007(confession) - I think Hope4More is correct. Wrong date was used instead of Jan 2008. So if(a BIG if) she wrote this in jail, at least her testimony would be consistent with the letter.

It says in part:
T: 'I had “toys” in the attic which is I never let you up there to clean. Even after I said I was done I didn’t get rid of them right away because I thought what if? What if I might need them again? I finally donated them....'
She testified that she saw him play with boy's toys. But the letter says a different version - He had toys in the attic that she never knew about.

Another part of letter:
T: 'Honestly you’ve helped me on several occasions without even knowing it. You’ve been an outlet frustrations via the fantasy enactments.'

It's interesting that she included the fantasy enactments in the letter.
We all know about the long *advertiser censored* fantasy texts she sent to herself. She did that just so she can write about it in the letter. She had absolutely no other reason to create those fantasy texts. One can argue that she could have written that part post-jail, too. But need to look at 'why' she created the fantasy text to herself in the first place, before looking for the 'when' she wrote that passage. I think she was thinking about pedo letter already when she created those texts.
 
WARNING------LONG!!! AND ONLY PART ONE OF ONE PART OF MY THANG.


What reason other than laying the foundation for the pedo lie could the have had for manufacturing IM’s about that “Little Red Riding Hood” fantasy?



Here is another possibility. First, SHE is the one who slapped on that label for it, after the fact, in her journal, in one of the entries almost certainly written post-murder, after the June 10 call with Flores, and pre-arrest.



If someone with no knowledge about this case read the sex scenario outlined in the IM’s, IMO there is little to no possibility they would think the “fantasy” had anything in the world to do with pedophilia.



Here’s what we know about those IM’s: the wrote them, she sent them to herself, and she sent them to herself on May 2, 2008. It is most likely that she hacked into TA’s computer (used his passwords) in order to send them.



We don’t know for a fact that the and not TA first came up with the idea for this round of role-playing sex-scapades, but April’s texts strongly suggest that it was the ’s idea, and that she came up with it and proposed it to TA in late April.



And, here in both chronology and subject is a handy place to incorporate my thinking/reasoning about why it is unlikely she wrote the letters pre-murder.



To backtrack for a moment and reiterate what seems to be the consensus opinion here, one I agree with: the was not plotting murder when she left Mesa. She had been raging and destructive for days, yes, but, again the consensus I agree with: she likely thought returning to Yreka was a temporary separation, and that by whatever means, she’d have Travis in the end.



Enter DeMarte’s testimony about the ’s BPD and how specific traits of that disorder affected ’s behavior. Necessary disclaimer: please do not misinterpret what I’m writing as sympathy for the . Viewing events (up to May 26) from a BPD explanatory prism, I can muster up some degree of empathy, believe it or not, but given the deliberate and horrific choices she made, not a jot of sympathy.



(Relevant DeMarte testimony is from PP2, Day 30, beginning about an hour in. I have also read up more on BPD, and watched a few (hair-raising) videos on YouTube of actual folks with BPD having rage/freakout episodes. The wee bit of knowledge about BPD I’ve acquired sure doesn’t make me an expert. Reviewing DeMarte’s testimony though, convinced me that it is impossible to make even educated guesses about the ’s state of mind and intent (at any point in time) without taking into account her BPD.



(I keep going sideways, don’t I? Sorry about that, but please bear with me J).



Taking her BPD into account then, and considering what unfolded throughout April, here is one interpretation, leading up to May 1, when IMO an ultimately irreversible cycle began to play out.



The number one and driving fear of BPD’s is the fear of abandonment. As DeMarte explained, that fear is so intense it is TYPICAL for those with BPD, in their attempts to forestall abandonment, to ROUTINELY engage in behaviors that the rest of us consider obviously counterproductive, and in DeMarte’s words, “counter-intuitive.”



DeMarte provided a number of specific examples of such behavior by the , all under the rubric of “intrusiveness.” To condense and paraphrase (and to extrapolate somewhat for post-Mesa) the continually hacked into TA’s SM accounts, followed him on dates, snuck into his house at night, called or texted him for the most trivial of reasons, etc. etc., because she couldn’t bear to be separated from him or out of contact for any length of time.



She couldn’t bear it not because she was “obsessed” with him, but because she had glommed onto him from day one; “merged” with him, to use BPD terminology. Merging meant being that chameleon others, even including Brewer, observed her to be. TA was a Mormon, so too she would be; TA was a believer & proponent of self-help books and gurus, so she too was a believer; TA bought and thought Green, so she did too, etc. etc..



BPD merging explains that her emulations of all things Travis weren’t simply attempts to attract and to flatter Travis, but a mechanism to eradicate the boundaries between her Self and Travis. After all, how could he abandon himself?



To return to earth and the narrative. :D



The left Mesa in early April. Her explosions on the way out of town, and on and off over the several weeks prior, were evidence of a BPD being “triggered.” Her worst fear had come to be: Travis wanted her OUT and GONE and would not relent, even after she postponed her departure scheduled for April 1 and “fessed up” that day to many an intrusion, hoping, IMO, that TA would be guilted into understand the error of his ways and would ask her to stay.



He didn’t, off she slunk back to Yreka. Viewing what unfolded from her return through the end of April through a BPD prism, several dynamics stand out. TA seemed not just glad she was gone, but downright relieved, and most significantly, freer to express anger at her for her intrusions and “childish games,” to use his words.



Because they were now separated physically for the first time since she uprooted to Mesa against his will after their 2007 “breakup,” the , on the other hand, was fairly constantly in high anxiety mode, more desperate to know where Travis was, what he was doing, and who he was with; and, unfortunately, even more readily triggered.



One constant theme of the ’s communications with TA in April was Mormonism. As in, what a good Mormon she was trying to be (please don’t abandon me), and could he please give her advice on this or that aspect of Mormonism (I know you’ll be willing to talk with me about this, even if nothing else, I must be in touch with you, please don’t abandon me). Like that. TA’s letter to her in April (sent at her demand) is just one piece of evidence reflecting the story line IMO she spun and clung to in April (later twisted & exploited at trial), one that incorporated Travis believing and wanting the same outcome, all evidence to the contrary, of re-uniting after her self-chosen exile in Yreka, after she regained her spiritual purity (including the spiritual strength to just say no to temptations of the flesh).



(Relevant line in his letter, paraphrased- that he hopes she will use “this interregnum between who you have been and who you really are” to find her path, etc.)



Achieving or even just pretending to be in pursuit of spiritual purity, however, wasn’t the ’s strong suit, and in any case, Travis wasn’t even bothering to acknowledge the supreme sacrifice she was making for THEM. Instead, he was getting upset with her about the slightest little thing (he’s going to abandon me, isn’t he), and calling/texting her less and less.



AND, most alarming, Travis was still pursuing Mimi (thought she’d rejected him by now, and knowing that, I believed it was safe to leave Mesa for a little while).



What couldn’t and wouldn’t Mimi give Travis that the could, and knew that he wanted? Right.
 
PART TWO.



And, returning eons and pages later to that May 2 Tied-To-A-Tree “rape” fantasy later so misleadingly labeled. :D



Here’s my take: in late April, the reverted to sexual enticement and by text, suggested the fantasy to TA. He replied via text to her, and then by email (we don’t have) that he was “intrigued.” Success.



Success that was quickly followed by disaster on April 29 -April 30. Travis broadcast far and wide (she couldn’t miss it, didn’t even have to hack hard) his overwhelming joy that Mimi had agreed to go with him to Cancun! Woot!!



For the : abject failure, the fear of abandonment fully realized, which triggered a full out BPD episode that quickly escalated into rage. Her first salvos were hacks of his MySpace on April 29 and on May 1st, with her postings (as TA) about how beautiful the was, blah blah (please don’t abandon me, I won’t let you abandon me. I drove off Lisa, I can do the same with Mimi).



The may or may not have known about what happened on May 1st, (if I recall that date correctly), which was when TA had an intimate encounter at his house with someone the considered a friend-- CL.



If she did know (by whatever means), how much greater would her rage and sense of rejection and abandonment been. Even if she didn’t know (and I think it likely she DID, as she was at this point obsessively & constantly hacking into TA’s SM accounts), in the first few days of May I think it likely that the began, to use BPD terminology and a descriptor of one of 9 core BPD behaviors, actively DEVALUING Travis.



That she sent herself the sex fantasy in TA’s name on May 2 IMO straddles two possibilities:



1. That she manufactured evidence that TA was still sexually interested/ involved with her in the anticipation she would/could use it to destroy TA’s chances with Mimi (so, not driven by rage or as of yet, a devaluation of Travis).



2. That she manufactured that evidence feeling utter contempt for TA (devaluation), and as a first step (sex tape was next) to use against him, directly, in (fill in the blank) manner and at a (fill in the blank) time of her choosing.



Does it matter (I think it does) that she didn’t call Brewer about gas cans that week? DeMarte (and others) describe BPD rages as occurring episodically. Trigger, rage, spent, all done until the next trigger. BPD rage doesn’t persist for days. The inability of BPD’s to sustain an even keel or any one emotion for any length of time is in fact a defining characteristic of BPD.



It is easy to assume continuity of the ’s emotions and/or intent in trying to piece together a timeline and specific events. I know most of my analyses have done just that. That assumption is jettisoned in this whirl of the kaleidoscope, and as with all turns of the kaleidoscope, seems rightfully so. ;)



Does it matter what she focused on to devalue Travis to herself? On that I’m certain, and in context, it makes perfect sense. As she saw it, Travis rejected her (abandoned her) because he didn’t believe she was good Mormon wife material. How DARE he throw her away on THAT basis?!



Leaving aside the 10 forged letters for the moment, every single narrative she told, beginning on the night TA’s body was found, centered quite precisely on that specific core insult to her, and TA’s hypocrisy (especially spiritually) for rejecting her for conduct he engaged in not only with her but with other women.



That specific and consistent and entirely unsubtle focus by the is high on my list of subjective reasons (objective reasons to follow….eek, right?!) for believing the letters were forged after she murdered him. Pedo accusations pre-murder, IMO, weren’t necessary for what she before and maybe even ON May 26 was trying to accomplish, and were inconsistent with the specific grievance she had and how justified she felt in using TA’s actual “transgressions” against HIM. Directly.



((Sweet, sweet revenge, how she (perhaps) tormented TA with the sex tape on May 25-26. From the PP2 jury: we thought maybe what triggered TA’s anger on May 26 was THE EMAIL WS’ers HAVEN’T SEEN, the one sent to TA on May 24 or early May 25 ) (“your dire communication,” per TA), telling him that she had to go to her Bishop “STAT” and confess to their transgressions. (Later rolled out at trial as the “Rachel” story?)



On what possible basis could he, the devout Mormon and the one responsible for bringing her into the church, possibly object to her unburdening herself to her bishop, even though her bishop would necessarily inform HIS bishop of everything she’d confessed to (and no doubt lied about, as I imagine Travis in this scenario must also have assumed).
 
I can't wait for Hope's thesis. I know it will be comprehensive and superb.

Thank you. Given the sheer length of the many-parted thing, though, you may regret that anticipation. ;)


Meanwhile, did some thinking.
Were the forgeries manufactured in jail in preparation for her upcoming testimony?
If yes, then her testimony really should match contents of the letters. I mean, why forge but not testify about it?
(Though it's possible, since the letters were precluded from evidence, that her testimony didn't need to adhere to the content.)

1. The letters materialized in April 2010. Trial didn't begin until January 2013. A LOT happened in between those two events, including more evaluations by psych experts AND dozens of hours spent with the not-so-expert LaViolette, and JM turning over more and more electronic evidence. More texts, more emails, more dates attached to conflicting evidence to have to account for at trial--just for starters, and yes, the very relevant fact that the letters were excluded and so couldn't be used to point out even more inconsistencies in facts and dates.

2. IMO, what the has all along exposed herself to be is a REACTIVE lying liar, not a strategic liar. Every which way you look and read, what becomes clear is that she tells lies to conceal other lies she's told, and feels confident in telling those lies, because if caught in the second set of lies, she'll simply trot out version 3 lies.




-Nov 2006 letter(T wants to see her in boy's underwear) - she didn't testify about this.

No, she didn't. But she made sure to work in boy's underwear at trial, by having them delivered to her on Valentine's Day. Even though, as with so many of her other lies, including the ones we know about in the forged letters, dates and lies simply don't line up.

-March 2008 (T wants to marry her to control deviant feelings and hit her) - Her testimony is different. She said T hit her when she told him she was leaving Mesa. Not one word about marriage proposal.

Remember, this is a killer who absolutely believed she could convince a jury that the ninjas did it, DESPITE THE TIMESTAMPED PHOTOS proving she was there, and that the ninjas would have had less than 45 seconds to burst into the bathroom, shoot Travis, chase her down the hall, go through her wallet, threaten her, stab Travis dozens of times, and change into the 's pants to be photographed dragging his bleeding body back into the shower.

Her attempts to insert the pedo lie into a narrative that didn't accommodate it factually were just as absurd, and just as ad hoc, even while on the stand. Not one juror in either trial believed the pedo lie, and for good reason.

PS reminder about her many changes in the DV lies. To Samuels-not one hit. Ninjas. To Karp-,first try: far too many incidents of DV to count (per DeMarte). To Karp, 2nd try-say hello, pedo, to the DV lies. To deMarte, BEFORE the letters materialized. Voila. The number of DV incidents we heard about at trial.

BUT....the DV incidents still not lined up with the narrative she told at trial, especially as relates to pedo. more on that in a mercifully short post below. :)


-Jan 2007(confession) - I think Hope4More is correct. Wrong date was used instead of Jan 2008. So if(a BIG if) she wrote this in jail, at least her testimony would be consistent with the letter.



It says in part:
T: 'I had “toys” in the attic which is I never let you up there to clean. Even after I said I was done I didn’t get rid of them right away because I thought what if? What if I might need them again? I finally donated them....'
She testified that she saw him play with boy's toys. But the letter says a different version - He had toys in the attic that she never knew about.

Another part of letter:
T: 'Honestly you’ve helped me on several occasions without even knowing it. You’ve been an outlet frustrations via the fantasy enactments.'

It's interesting that she included the fantasy enactments in the letter.
We all know about the long *advertiser censored* fantasy texts she sent to herself. She did that just so she can write about it in the letter. She had absolutely no other reason to create those fantasy texts. One can argue that she could have written that part post-jail, too. But need to look at 'why' she created the fantasy text to herself in the first place, before looking for the 'when' she wrote that passage. I think she was thinking about pedo letter already when she created those texts.

Replies in italics.
 
PART TWO.



And, returning eons and pages later to that May 2 Tied-To-A-Tree “rape” fantasy later so misleadingly labeled. :D



Here’s my take: in late April, the reverted to sexual enticement and by text, suggested the fantasy to TA. He replied via text to her, and then by email (we don’t have) that he was “intrigued.” Success.



Success that was quickly followed by disaster on April 29 -April 30. Travis broadcast far and wide (she couldn’t miss it, didn’t even have to hack hard) his overwhelming joy that Mimi had agreed to go with him to Cancun! Woot!!



For the : abject failure, the fear of abandonment fully realized, which triggered a full out BPD episode that quickly escalated into rage. Her first salvos were hacks of his MySpace on April 29 and on May 1st, with her postings (as TA) about how beautiful the was, blah blah (please don’t abandon me, I won’t let you abandon me. I drove off Lisa, I can do the same with Mimi).



The may or may not have known about what happened on May 1st, (if I recall that date correctly), which was when TA had an intimate encounter at his house with someone the considered a friend-- CL.



If she did know (by whatever means), how much greater would her rage and sense of rejection and abandonment been. Even if she didn’t know (and I think it likely she DID, as she was at this point obsessively & constantly hacking into TA’s SM accounts), in the first few days of May I think it likely that the began, to use BPD terminology and a descriptor of one of 9 core BPD behaviors, actively DEVALUING Travis.



That she sent herself the sex fantasy in TA’s name on May 2 IMO straddles two possibilities:



1. That she manufactured evidence that TA was still sexually interested/ involved with her in the anticipation she would/could use it to destroy TA’s chances with Mimi (so, not driven by rage or as of yet, a devaluation of Travis).



2. That she manufactured that evidence feeling utter contempt for TA (devaluation), and as a first step (sex tape was next) to use against him, directly, in (fill in the blank) manner and at a (fill in the blank) time of her choosing.



Does it matter (I think it does) that she didn’t call Brewer about gas cans that week? DeMarte (and others) describe BPD rages as occurring episodically. Trigger, rage, spent, all done until the next trigger. BPD rage doesn’t persist for days. The inability of BPD’s to sustain an even keel or any one emotion for any length of time is in fact a defining characteristic of BPD.



It is easy to assume continuity of the ’s emotions and/or intent in trying to piece together a timeline and specific events. I know most of my analyses have done just that. That assumption is jettisoned in this whirl of the kaleidoscope, and as with all turns of the kaleidoscope, seems rightfully so. ;)



Does it matter what she focused on to devalue Travis to herself? On that I’m certain, and in context, it makes perfect sense. As she saw it, Travis rejected her (abandoned her) because he didn’t believe she was good Mormon wife material. How DARE he throw her away on THAT basis?!



Leaving aside the 10 forged letters for the moment, every single narrative she told, beginning on the night TA’s body was found, centered quite precisely on that specific core insult to her, and TA’s hypocrisy (especially spiritually) for rejecting her for conduct he engaged in not only with her but with other women.



That specific and consistent and entirely unsubtle focus by the is high on my list of subjective reasons (objective reasons to follow….eek, right?!) for believing the letters were forged after she murdered him. Pedo accusations pre-murder, IMO, weren’t necessary for what she before and maybe even ON May 26 was trying to accomplish, and were inconsistent with the specific grievance she had and how justified she felt in using TA’s actual “transgressions” against HIM. Directly.



((Sweet, sweet revenge, how she (perhaps) tormented TA with the sex tape on May 25-26. From the PP2 jury: we thought maybe what triggered TA’s anger on May 26 was THE EMAIL WS’ers HAVEN’T SEEN, the one sent to TA on May 24 or early May 25 ) (“your dire communication,” per TA), telling him that she had to go to her Bishop “STAT” and confess to their transgressions. (Later rolled out at trial as the “Rachel” story?)



On what possible basis could he, the devout Mormon and the one responsible for bringing her into the church, possibly object to her unburdening herself to her bishop, even though her bishop would necessarily inform HIS bishop of everything she’d confessed to (and no doubt lied about, as I imagine Travis in this scenario must also have assumed).
Long post warning not necessary!! Love them!!
I knew your analysis would be superb and you didn't disappoint. Incorporating BPD into your work made it even more exceptionally excellent. I appreciate so much.

Your analysis makes good sense and I concur on many points even though I'm far from abandoning the pre-murder pedo letter theory.

What I'm pretty sure of is that the fantasy thing she created had an ulterior motive attached to it. Yes, now I can see, thanks to your work, her action was part of symptoms of BPD (Don't abandon me turned into devaluation, rage), but my opinion is that her plan (the ulterior motive) included forging up the letters. The result is actually seen in the pedo letter. And maybe on par with where I bolded- possibility #2.

I'm looking forward to more of your thangs! Believe me, they are most excellent.
 
Last splat for the night, to put it down before it slips away:

Rereading parts of JM's book I caught something I hadn't before (I think, lol).

About when she contacted Brewer about the gas cans, and therefore, when she first began to seriously consider killing Travis..

JM says she first called B "sometime" in May to ask to borrow gas cans because she was going to Mesa, etc.

When B questioned her about the request, though, JM says she became irate, and told B she would call him back LATER THAT WEEK.

But, she didn't call him back LATER THAT WEEK, according to JM, and instead, called him again "in the last week of May."

Elsewhere JM has suggested (no definite date provided) that the first called B closer to the middle of the month than in the very beginning of May.

Looking at the calendar for May 2008, it's possible to speculate what triggered the first call to B, and why she might have zigged away from killing thoughts until later, pretty specifically and unsurprisingly, after the May 26 debacle.
See attached file.
Something went terribly wrong between 14th - 22nd?
 

Attachments

  • may 2008 1.jpg
    may 2008 1.jpg
    71 KB · Views: 38
Last splat for the night, to put it down before it slips away:

Rereading parts of JM's book I caught something I hadn't before (I think, lol).

About when she contacted Brewer about the gas cans, and therefore, when she first began to seriously consider killing Travis..

JM says she first called B "sometime" in May to ask to borrow gas cans because she was going to Mesa, etc.

When B questioned her about the request, though, JM says she became irate, and told B she would call him back LATER THAT WEEK.

But, she didn't call him back LATER THAT WEEK, according to JM, and instead, called him again "in the last week of May."

Elsewhere JM has suggested (no definite date provided) that the first called B closer to the middle of the month than in the very beginning of May.

Looking at the calendar for May 2008, it's possible to speculate what triggered the first call to B, and why she might have zigged away from killing thoughts until later, pretty specifically and unsurprisingly, after the May 26 debacle.
I thought of this while grocery shopping. lol

The first time she called Brewer 'sometime' in May, she told him she was going to Mesa. On purpose. Maybe she was setting up an alibi. She was actually going to Utah. Maria M was luring Travis to Utah at this time.
Some bad things happen. (we don't know what exactly)

We know Travis didn't go to Utah. The doesn't call Brewer back 'later that week.'
 
Pocket:

Real love is when one's husband listens carefully and responds thoughtfully about a subject he was never interested in, but who has accommodated his wife's interest, for years, by listening to endless analysis of the most minute details about the thing, until finally unable to hear one more word about it, stops even with the eyeball rolling and simply pleads-PLEASE...NO MORE. PLEASE.

And that was a over a year ago my poor husband made those pleas, and yet, there he sat tonight for over an hour while I ran the pre-murder or pre-arrest or from jail were those letters forged thing past him.

These years on, he is well versed in all things ; he came to the conversation with knowledge and context aplenty. Not very far into the conversation he reached a conclusion, and nothing I said afterwards changed that overall conclusion: he believes, absolutely, that the letters were forged BEFORE she murdered Travis.

His conclusion and certainty first surprised me, and then I felt a big 'ole LOL for awhile at having to convince my own DH, who clearly needed to hear just one more piece he didn't know about, or one more fact he hadn't considered or put into context. ;)

Right now, a short while after that conversation, all I can feel or think is -OH MY GOD. IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT SHE REALLY IS WAY MORE EVIL THAN LITERALLY I COULD EVER HAVE IMAGINED.
 
A forged before murder scenario, part of which I suggested before as a possibility but hadn't thought it all the way through, at all. Having a spoken conversation rather than babbling on and on in writing makes a huge difference.

I'm going to force myself to keep this succinct and straight to the point.

1. She decided to kill Travis BEFORE she left Mesa. She may even have left Mesa when she did BECAUSE she had already decided to kill him, and her being 1,000 miles away would be crucial to how her kill- scenario needed to play out.

2. Her many assertions about needing to leave/relief that she had left/that a fog had lifted after she left/that she felt increasingly spiritual after she left, had NOTHING to do with trying to win Travis. And her many texts and calls to him asking about how to be a better Mormon, and telling him she realized anew how much her Mormon faith meant to her had NOTHING to do with trying to win Travis, but EVERYTHING to do with convincing him she was, despite the weakness she'd demonstrated in Mesa, entirely devoted to the Gospel, and that she was so, so grateful to him for being her spiritual mentor.

3. The probably WAS triggered in early May , and probably did have real episodes of BPD rage, which manifested in her temporarily uncontrollable hatred leaking out in texts to him. She didn't act on that rage, or make plans based on that rage. She needed to control herself as much as she could DESPITE the rage,because expressing that rage to TA directly would have destroyed every last bit of her planning.

4. From the end of April through May 26,,the baited Travis on multiple fronts, all deliberate, and all towards the same goal.


(CONT)
 
A pause to insert an example of her baiting him into anger that she needed to have captured in a text record, to document that she had moved on, and that it was Travis who was still interested in her, jealous, but oddly conflicted and irrational (cut and pasting this bit from something I posted 2 years ago, about the NA55 call).


It is while he is in Riverside, late on May 8th, that he finds out CL never received the texts he sent, and that he had not received hers either. He definitely thinks the is responsible (thus the “You are dead to me” he texts her while still texting with CL).

And, he is still in Riverside a few hours later, the night of Friday, May 9th, when she sends the “accidental” text to him supposedly meant for Steve Carr, saying that her ex-BF had her Google password, unfortunately, and let’s work on the website away from where he can read/access it).

This accusation Travis found so outrageous that he became extremely angry, text-fought with her for a long while, accusing her throughout of being a liar (“a liar to the core”, words very similar to those he would use on May 26).

He also told her “you are paranoid because you have no respect for people’s privacy, and you dare insult me of all people. (Your actions prove) “you hate more than love by denying me the human right of privacy countless times. You have a lot of freaking nerve. We are not all like you in that respect.” (Again, words very similar in tone and content to those of May 26).



She says—let’s agree to a policy of don’t ask don’t tell, he says,” let’s go one step further and forget each other exists. “ About 1 ½ hours later she sends him yet another “accidental” text, he reengages, including: “I wonder what crap you send that I don’t get,” and “ thanks for keeping your end of the contract you made by paying me for the car you destroyed.”

She says-please stop (then lies, lies, lies).

Travis replies---"Please stop? I haven’t even begun. You are going to start being held accountable for your shizz. You have pissed me off in a way you never should have, and until now I have shown you a lot of mercy. But you have pissed that all away and times are fixing to get tough for you. “

TA returns to Mesa from Riverside on Saturday May 10, has his prearranged date with Mimi that night, is still holding out hope Mimi can be the one.

The NA55 texting happens 3 days later, Tuesday May 13.
--------------------------------------------
 
See attached file.
Something went terribly wrong between 14th - 22nd?


In scenario I'm playing out, TA's "threat" to her on May 9 may have made her worry she had pushed him too far and that she needed to act earlier than she'd planned, and so she called Brewer, but then reined herself in and kept on going. She may even have doubled down on one aspect of her plan. When was it she rolled out the Maria M set up?
 
Pocket:

Real love is when one's husband listens carefully and responds thoughtfully about a subject he was never interested in, but who has accommodated his wife's interest, for years, by listening to endless analysis of the most minute details about the thing, until finally unable to hear one more word about it, stops even with the eyeball rolling and simply pleads-PLEASE...NO MORE. PLEASE.

And that was a over a year ago my poor husband made those pleas, and yet, there he sat tonight for over an hour while I ran the pre-murder or pre-arrest or from jail were those letters forged thing past him.

These years on, he is well versed in all things ; he came to the conversation with knowledge and context aplenty. Not very far into the conversation he reached a conclusion, and nothing I said afterwards changed that overall conclusion: he believes, absolutely, that the letters were forged BEFORE she murdered Travis.

His conclusion and certainty first surprised me, and then I felt a big 'ole LOL for awhile at having to convince my own DH, who clearly needed to hear just one more piece he didn't know about, or one more fact he hadn't considered or put into context. ;)

Right now, a short while after that conversation, all I can feel or think is -OH MY GOD. IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT SHE REALLY IS WAY MORE EVIL THAN LITERALLY I COULD EVER HAVE IMAGINED.
As I began to read the first paragraph, I started to feel the fear of abandonment. lol. I thought you were going to say in the next paragraph that you are done with all things and need to go back to the love of your life.

Whew, silly me, and what a surprise!

How you felt after talking to your hubby is exactly what I felt some weeks ago. She really really is a pure evil being, and a master manipulator and sure is a reactive liar as you mentioned, an excellent one, the fact JM was very aware of and gave a lot of 'respect.'

I don't know if you are set on the pre-murder pedo lies yet but I'm so happy at least you see that as a real possibility.
 
CONT.

5. The baited him with a sex scenario in which he expressed a passing interest, then wrote the May 2 IMs to "document" a level of interest he didn't possess but that she needed to have on the record.

6. The "sex tape" was absolutely integral to her plans. She HAD to get him on tape, to have him on tape confessing not just to sex past, but sex in the future, and perhaps most importantly, to being explicitly unrepentant about having sex, of many varieties, some of which would seem absolutely beyond comprehension and deviant to the conservative Mormon bishops to whom Travis had previously confessed (even if excluding any suggestion of pedo).

But it wasn't just the sex confessions she wanted on tape. She prompted him quite specifically into trashing fellow PPL'ers, by name. PPL and all that came attached to the org (money, acceptance, respect, etc) of course was the second pillar of his identity and life.

7. So, at last, to her plan, and why she needed the tape and why she made the effort to actually report her phone as stolen, when after all, she could have just LIED about it being stolen. To Travis.

She needed Travis to believe that the phone had been stolen, and he needed to be told what was on it. The primary point of that wasn't to have Travis freak out about the danger to HIM of the tape being discovered.

The point of the phone being stolen was that the could tell Travis that SHE had to go to her bishop and confess everything, stat, because she feared SHE would be exposed if the thief played the tape in her tiny town of Yreka and recognized her voice.

The phone being stolen, though, (I can imagine her telling Travis), was really a gift from God, because it made her realize once and for all how wrong her transgressions were, a realization that came more readily because after all, she had been becoming "stronger in the Church" since her return to Yreka.

All that foundation she laid in April was about this moment, so when she sprung her trap, Travis would believe she really intended to go and confess to her bishop. The sex tape was never supposed to be "found" or listened to by anyone. She knew it would, just as it did at trial, expose HER for who she really was.

She insisted on telling him by phone about the stolen phone. What she needed from Travis is exactly what she got, after careful manipulation, in the text record: a man saying he was ruined, and that he didn't care any more about being destroyed.

8. The needed to kill Travis in a manner that precluded her from ever being considered a suspect. If she believed that a 1,000 mile distance would suffice as alibi, she wouldn't have made the road trip she did around the time of the murder. No, she knew that there was only one scenario in which fingers of suspicion wouldn't be pointed at her: her murder of Travis had to look like Travis had committed suicide..

9. She didn't forge the letters to blackmail Travis. She never intended to have him see the letters at all. The letters were to be found on his desk, along with a suicide note. Given what she wrote in the forged pedo letter dated Jan 21, I can easily imagine what she might have written- a thank you to her for protecting his reputation by not telling anyone about his abuse of her and his pedo, but that he simply couldn't live with himself any longer, because no matter how hard he tried, he knew he would never be the devout Mormon and good man everyone mistakenly believed him to be.

10. Found on his desk like that, after he was dead and had apparently committed suicide, and with a letter thanking the for PROTECTING him? In those circumstances I can believe the believed the content of the letters would be believed, and that there wouldn't be an extensive investigation of ANY kind, given the extreme sensitivity of what was found in the letters, in a neighborhood and city of devout Mormons, not one of whom would be likely (or able) to spot the discrepancies in dates and actions that would at trial and beyond be so blatantly obvious.
 
Last edited:
In scenario I'm playing out, TA's "threat" to her on May 9 may have made her worry she had pushed him too far and that she needed to act earlier than she'd planned, and so she called Brewer, but then reined herself in and kept on going. She may even have doubled down on one aspect of her plan. When was it she rolled out the Maria M set up?
Travis wrote in his journal on May 13 that he met a woman online and she seems too good to be true.
May 14 - T texted accusing her of viewing his LDS linkup account under bogus accounts.
May 13 - 14 is NA55 (it could be May 14-15. I have conflicting notes on this)
 
I wonder, if after all these years and all the information regarding her manipulations, lies (and apparent bloodlust*) do any of her past suitors wipe their brows, heave a sigh of relief and thank their lucky stars they never ticked her off...

I know that some appeared to be blind supporters during the trial, but with time and distance come clarity. I haven't heard of any of them writing books or doing interview circuits on tv or being interviewed for other people's books. I haven't been following this case for so long and have lost touch. Does anyone know of anything published from her past beaus?

* I say apparent bloodlust because of the time and planning and the time and execution (no pun intended) of the murder PLUS the camping trip with two guys she barely knew and we knew she had at least one weapon. I wouldn't doubt she would murder those guys and again, claim victim. A new Aileen Wuornos style "always the victim" serial killer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
3,280
Total visitors
3,416

Forum statistics

Threads
592,295
Messages
17,966,801
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top