IMO, the defense may have won a pretrial motion to exclude this evidence from testimony on hearsay. The only person who could absolutely validate the intent in a text message would be MM, and she was silenced.
Also, when you start digging into someone MM may have confided in, you are opening that person's life, and any misdeeds in their life can possibly be used to impeach their testimony without MM there to validate the authenticity of that person's testimony. They would also have to prove that the information provided by that person is not prejudiced based on the relationship with MM, and a true statement of facts. IMO, a confidant would be very partial to MM.
In regard to the divorce lawyer, these discussions are covered by attorney-client privilege, and again, the only person that could speak to MM's intentions/reasons for consulting with an attorney for any reason could only be validated by MM and only MM. I also remember reading months ago that MM had the family's financials independently forensically audited, but again, confidentiality comes into play, and MM may have signed something to that effect with a forensic accountant.
All of this is JMO, but I have wondered about the same topics and whether or not they would come in, and these are some of the reasons I assume could be that we will not hear this information. JMO. moo
