Read more closely the context of the conversation. The "package" remark seems to be in response to the "boxers" comment, a 22 second gap. Actually Foley says "good" 8 seconds before the package remark, so he would have typed it in 8 seconds, not 5, since the package remark is not in response to "lol" at 37 seconds. I tested myself three different times typing "shows your package then" and timed it at 4 seconds, 3 seconds, and 5 seconds. So it's possible.
The one second transition with "lol" does not seem unreasonable. I don't think that's impossible. I typed it several different times and it took under .5 seconds each time. But I don't know how accurate the timestamps are on AOL Instant Messenger servers, anyway.
That's a stretch. It's easy to get off a "lol" in a second, looking through my own past IMs I see that's happened many times.
As for the five second transition, notice that is a continuation of "good" (8 seconds earlier), not a response to what the teenager said 5 seconds earlier, which was just a "lol".
From the ABC report:
"This all came to a head in the last 24 hours. Yesterday, we asked the congressman about some much tamer e-mails from one page, and he said he was just being overly friendly. After we posted that story online, we began to hear from a number of other pages who sent these much more explicit, instant messages. When the congressman realized we had them, he resigned."
So..we are suppose to believe that all of these former pages (in college by now I suppose) just happen to read the report last night about the other email and started sending ABC the sexual messages dating back to 2003?!!