You're right. In fact, I suspect Jaimee wanting to watch "desperate housewives" was her asking to watch secret footage Woods recorded of his wife Elin Nordegren whenever she was distressed. Utterly depraved.

Edit: Joking aside, "the benefit of the doubt" implies there's doubt, but you're manufacturing the doubt. People in a normal, healthy headspace do not think this way about text messages.

Yeah, if there were a pattern of that, I might agree. You're taking a single data point and extrapolating way beyond reason. If you look at the rest of the texts, there's nothing to suggest he treated her like you're suggesting, and even if we didn't have those other texts, there are just a million reasons why someone might've not gotten back until that third message. You're chalking up what's exceedingly likely just a coincidence (again, it's an hour) to malice.

There's literally even another text that reads: "don’t text me back till tomorrow morning. I have to many people around me right now". Like this is an obvious problem for anyone cheating, let alone a celebrity. It was, again, the middle of a Wednesday; there's no reason to expect Woods wasn't just, like, a little busy for an hour. (Edit: I personally did this yesterday, realizing I outright forgot to reply.)

We don't know that's what he did, there aren't even timestamps on this. If I text you a joke now, and then don't get anything back, and then I send you a follow-up text saying "I was just joking", and then sometime after that you get back to your phone and see the joke and the follow-up, no one can assume you only texted because of the follow-up.

Maybe you got my first one and said "screw them" and waited for an apology, maybe you didn't get the first one until after the second had been sent and saw them both together and replied to both, or maybe you saw the first and went "heh" but forgot to actually respond to me in the moment, and it wasn't until after the second came through that you went "ah shit, right"

But only the receiver can know which is which.

Anyways! I don't give a shit about Tiger Woods, I just hate miscommunication and assumptions of ill-intent, and I've seen first hand too many times a person who is more connected drawing all sorts of conclusions for what a silence might mean, or how mad someone must be, or reading into a gap that simply isn't there. The receiver just is doing something, they're not on their couch staring at their phone, and the sender is spinning out all sorts of stories to explain how they're being ignored or attacked. It's anxiety.

Of the things to get upset about with tiger woods, this communication thing is an odd one.
Someone makes a joke. You chuckle and go back to what you were doing, or you don't chuckle and still go back to what you were doing. They send another message that makes you realize they expected a response and took your lack of response the wrong way, so you reply telling them you knew they were joking.

Not every message needs a reply, to say nothing of an immediate one. How would you have had him reply?

Do you reply to every message immediately?