If he felt threatened by being outted by JA, he could have wiped his computer clean. I wonder how deep the forensics went when checking his technology. Remember JA claims he had a deeper darker leaning. She claims everything changed after she witnessed/discovered that. On the outside chance she's telling the truth, he may have removed everything and anything relative to that subject from his personal records. I believe she said she witnessed that in December 2007. Can that be right? I wonder if he still owned the same computer, if any deletions were made, etc. These are the things the defense should have dug into if they knew she was going to made these kinds of claims during the trial.
How can her claims not be supported by any forensics? I remember she slipped in some comment about T's nephew or something. Of course, they'd never put him or his mother on the stand - but for her to even say that - wow!
p.s. Are you certain about the ejaculation thing? If that's true, I learned something new today.
Uh uh. No matter what you do, you cannot wipe a computer clean. Whatever you delete, download, whatever website you visit, it's there. Computer forensics can recover everything, even from formatted hard drives. She said she witnessed this on Jan 21. 2008. The texts from that day pretty much prove it could not have happened.
Also, keep in mind that when no child *advertiser censored* was found on his computer, she did not double down and suggest he got rid of it, she simply changed her story to he was laying in bed surrounded by pics of children. If this is something that really happened, why change the story? Because it didn't happen.
Quite certain. Men ejaculate in their sleep.
ETA: Just learned a computer forensics expert was added to Juan's rebuttal list yesterday.