This is also interpretation, not fact.
Quote from the foreman's interview:
"We however did find something that wasn’t brought out in court. It was a text from Jodi Arias to Travis Alexander stating to him she needed to speak to the Bishop about the sex stat.
We felt this may have been the trigger for Travis’s anger. At this point I still had the impression Travis’s emotional abuse was consistent over time. We ended our day and went home."
The interview can be found here:
http://thetrialdiaries.com/exclusivethe-foreman-from-the-jodi-arias-trial-speakshear-his-story/
Also, Chris and Sky Hughes mentioned in their interview with Dr. Phil (gag) that TA's bishop already knew about the sex, and that the catalyst for May 26 couldn't have been that.
Their interview (comments on this topic start at 21:30)
[video=youtube;W2qr05dBgsg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2qr05dBgsg[/video]
So, yes, interpretation is one thing, and facts are another. Unfortunately, we don't have any facts that explain why TA was so mad that day.
Kate
Lordy, if we all knew the FACT of what happened on May 26 I would have moved on from all this at least a year ago. Nope, we sure don't know.
But it is a fact that we did not know until after the PP2 trial the fact that JA had threatened TA just before May 26 with going to her bishop. That was new. And, according to the foreman, extremely relevant to the jury. Yep, I agree with that interpretation.
The Hughes' bald statements that TA's bishop "knew about the sex" or that TA had caught her in some scam or fraud is nonsense, IMO. TA's bishop would never have confided n anyone what TA did or did not tell him. Sky and Chris didn't even know until after his death that TA had lost his TR for the second time in January 2008. They invited him in spring 2008 to an event that required him to be temple-worthy. He didn't tell them why he wasn't going to be able to attend.
I'll spare you what I think of the opinion of "friends" who knew about JA sleeping under TA's Christmas tree, and who had witnessed for themselves her slobbering all over him in public, and hitting on PPL fellers to make him jealous, yet believed the crap she told them about their dear friend, and were willing to take her word over that of their dear friend. Yep, the same dear friends who believed Nurmi that TA was a pedophile (yah, yah, innocent of the law and all that).
After TA's murder they learned of that loss of TR. For TA to have lost it, he must have voluntarily confessed his sexual transgressions to his bishop. So yes, his bishop knew of his transgressions as of January. But..he transgressed again, and yet again. The Hughes have no way of knowing whether or not TA reported each transgression. It comes too close to victim-bashing to bring up what is clear from the texts, but suffice it to say..nope, I very much doubt TA was reporting to his bishop the repeats of what caused him to lose his TR.
JA knew about at least some of those transgressions, though, in part because they involved her, and in part because she was hacking into his SM accounts. She spent a whole lot of time manufacturing an online record she could use against him. For whatever reason. To whomever.
She knew on May 14th that TA had busted her for hacking, etc., and by May 19 she knew TA was exposing her. What she did in response is a matter of opinion, but I'm very comfortable with my opinion that her response was to try to retaliate by exposing him, given the coincidental "theft" of her Helio at that time, and her threat she sent to TA about going to her bishop.
