I agree. And his focus/interest is supported by what he chose to write about...the conviction, and not much beyond.
His dissection of the evidence in his book supports this as well. He reads from Washington's notes (oh to see them all), and says things like...that was interesting, but not relevant in terms of premeditation, moving right along.
He investigated enough and presented enough in trial one to be able to demonstrate several of her "accidental" texts were never sent to those fictitious recipients, just to Travis. That was enough to prove his point that she went out of her way to make Travis jealous.
He also remarks that the texts/ghat were problematic, that they had the potential to make the jury feel sympathy for the . To present more than he did of the electronic record he would have had to spin a far more convoluted narrative than he did about both TA and the , and there was no advantage for him in doing so.
He is quite explicit about his strategic reasons for not focusing more on Travis as good guy victim (which would have brought in more of her manipulations of him). It didn't matter in terms of proving what he had to prove.
