Glad WS didn't go down today. Sure saved me a lot of time & effort. I googled "NA55



" (ok, her name, but I never use it) and what popped up was a post here I wrote 2 years ago (!), which when I linked to it led me to the transcription I posted here that long ago of the NA55 texts. And in the same thread, (#6), all that discussion we had about those texts, and, also in the thread, the day by day synopsis of TA's texts in Feb & March I posted. And more and more and more.
I seem to have forgotten not only specific dates & bits & pieces, but a great deal of the work I've done and posted about. Sigh.
Going back over just that chunk of the work & discussions reminded me why I remained so convinced the letters were forged post arrest (though none of what I reread had to do with the letters at all).
I'm back to believing it is most probable that she forged the letters post-arrest, and most likely, after April 10, 2010.
Will wait (again) for the board to go down & be reborn before (re)posting stuff, but here's one point I thought about back then (that I'd completely forgotten about) but that seems even more relevant now:
About the NA55 texts, during which TA explicitly says to (mysterious woman he's texting with) that he's seen her photo, and that she looks very young - like a 12 year old girl.
That phrase jumped out back then, and still does. It's impossible to skim over or miss, even if one reads it without pedo accusations and letters on one's mind.
So, here's the question. Nurmi read those texts too, and he almost certainly did so by mid to late 2010, at the latest, precisely the time he was beginning to put her self defense case together, with pedo accusations at the core of the case.
He had very little to go with to "prove" pedo before or during trial. During trial, he hopped all over the 12 year old girl line from the sex tape, repeatedly, disgustingly, and with convinction.
Why then did he never bring up the NA55 texts at trial? Or at least try to get them admitted into evidence?
Or, after the fact, in his book, why no mention there? Especially since he went to great & ridiculously twisted lengths to bring up every little piece of "evidence" that had suggested to him TA was indeed a pedophile?