FAIRFAX COUNTY, Va. (7News) — And now we wait: a jury will continue deliberations to determine whether or not Brendan Banfield will spend the rest of his life in prison.
Banfield has stood trial for the past three weeks, after being accused of killing his wife, Christine, and a total stranger, Joe Ryan, so he could start a new life with Juliana Peres Magalhaes, the family’s au pair with whom he was having an affair at the time of the killings.
Prosecutors have asserted that Banfield, a former federal agent with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Peres Magalhaes hatched a plan that involved creating an account on a sex fetish website to lure Ryan to the home, so they could frame him for Christine’s murder.
RELATED | Alleged affair to murder trial: A timeline of events in Virginia’s Brendan Banfield case
The jury heard witness after witness, 34 in total, paint a picture of what actually happened inside the Banfield family’s Fairfax County home on the morning of February 24, 2023.
But the two most notable witnesses were the former lovers and co-conspirators of the alleged murder plot, who found themselves on opposite ends of the witness stand.
For her part, Peres Magalhaes agreed to a plea deal: in exchange for a lesser charge with less jail time, she testified against Banfield.
Meanwhile, Banfield made the rare move of taking the stand in his own defense.
In their closing arguments, the prosecution and defense boiled the case down to a simple question: Who do you believe?
“He executed his plan to murder his wife and an innocent stranger. He was in love with Juliana. He can pretend this was a fling, an affair. He had them before, no big deal. He was in love with Juliana. He was afraid of losing her. He needed to get rid of his wife, so that they could be together,” Fairfax County Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Jenna Sands said. “Mr. Banfield gave you zero explanation for any of this evidence. They have provided no explanation for Christine’s blood smeared on the right hand of Joe Ryan, leaving voids between the fingers.”
John Carroll, Banfield’s lawyer, offered a different explanation.
“Is it reasonable after a six-to-eight week affair that someone is going to try to get rid of their companion of 19 years, wife of 12 years? Is that reasonable? You heard from my client. He thinks it’s absurd,” Carroll said. “You can’t just come up with a theory and make it fit. They’re trying to sell you a story without any facts, and we have the facts, and those facts are in evidence.”
Peres Magalhaes testified during the first two days of the trial.
Over hours of questioning, she offered details of the alleged catfishing plan, the choreography of the killings, and the moment she said she saw Brendan Banfield stab Christine Banfield.
Peres Magalhaes said, “Brendan said, he yelled, ‘Police officer!’ Christine’s first reaction – that was the first time I heard her say anything at that point – she yelled back at Brendan, ‘Brendan, he has a knife!’ That’s when Brendan first shot Joe… When I was bringing him the towel, he got on top of her, and that’s when I first saw him stab her with a knife.”
The prosecutor asked the former au pair to clarify, “Where in her body was he stabbing her?”
“Her neck,” Peres Magalhaes responded.
Carroll then spent several hours trying to pick apart the live-in nanny’s testimony.
He asked her to recall specific moments from the alleged plan before questioning her credibility regarding letters she wrote from jail.
One of those letters was sent to her family in Brazil, in which she claimed Netflix had offered her $10,000 for the exclusive rights to her story.
“I want a higher amount, especially since my whole life will be exposed to everyone, right? And they’re going to be making a lot of money off of it. We deserve something,” Peres Magalhaes said, as she read from her letter.
This passage led to the following exchange between Banfield’s lawyer and Peres Magalhaes:
Carroll: “You were charged with murder because you shot someone. Am I wrong?”
Peres Magalhaes: “No, you’re not.”
Carroll: “And so, why would you deserve something because of that?”
Peres Magalhaes: “Not because of that. I didn’t say I deserve something because of what I did.”
John Fishwick is a former federal prosecutor who served as U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, but is now a defense attorney and the current owner of the Fishwick & Associates law firm. He said the au pair’s testimony will likely be the most important factor in the jury’s decision.
“Well, ultimately, they’ve got to completely believe most of her testimony if they’re going to convict Mr. Banfield. After all, she’s the only eyewitness to the murder,” Fishwick said. “She’s, obviously, ground zero in this case. Juliana Peres Magalhaes, I think, is the most critical witness. I think her testimony was very powerful. When she came in there and testified, I thought it was very believable testimony that, sadly, she witnessed the murder of two individuals – Christine Banfield and Mr. Ryan – at the hands of Mr. Banfield. I think the prosecution did a good job of corroborating her.”
The trial took a dramatic turn when Brendan Banfield took the stand.
He began by testifying he loved his wife, and scoffed at the idea he would kill her over an affair.
“At this point, our relationship is, maybe, six-to-eight weeks old. I think that it’s an absurd line of questioning for something that is not serious, that a plan was made to get rid of my wife. That is absolutely crazy,” Banfield said.
However, he would later reveal his wife knew about at least two other affairs he had had before claiming she also had prior affairs.
On day two of his testimony, he walked the jury through his version of events.
Carroll asked him, “Can you explain to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what, if anything, took place that caused you to discharge your firearm?”
“It appeared he did a very forceful stab towards Christine,” Banfield said. “Christine told me that she was bleeding out and that she was sorry and she loved me.”
The prosecution then had its turn with Banfield.
A major point of focus was the number of times he saw his wife get stabbed.
Prosecutor Jenna Sands asked, “So there’s five more. When did he stab her those other five times?”
“The knife is inside of her hair. I can’t tell the movement. I can’t tell how that is,” Banfield responded.
Banfield’s own internet history also came up during the prosecution’s cross-examination.
Peres Magalhaes testified Brendan Banfield came up with the idea to use Christine’s laptop and cell phone while using the fetish website to make it look like she was the person communicating with Joe Ryan. Banfield’s lawyer countered by using digital forensics experts to say they believe Christine was behind that account.
However, prosecutors brought up Brendan Banfield’s use of a dating website in the past.
Sands: “One of those affairs is with a woman named Danielle, who you met on a fetish site searching for sugar babies, is that correct?”
Banfield: “I would not call it a fetish site.”
Sands: “What would you call it?”
Banfield: “An arranged relationship.”
Fishwick said it’s not often you see a defendant take the stand because of the possibility it would hurt their case.
“It’s a risky strategy that the jury may not believe the defendant. I think in this case, Mr. Banfield’s got a lot on the line. He faces a mandatory life sentence if convicted. So, he must have made the decision, ‘I want to testify, with so much on the line,'” Fishwick said. “I think there’s a lot for him to defend in that testimony: the fact he was having an affair with the au pair, and he talked about how both he and his wife were having affairs, and there was no real evidence his wife – Mrs. Banfield – would have been on one of these fetish websites. I think that hurts his testimony. And the fact that he had testimony that said his wife said certain things to him, that she loved him, when she was dying and had been stabbed multiple times, I think a jury may believe she really wouldn’t have been in a situation to talk at that point.”
After the closing arguments on Friday, the jury began deliberations over the last few hours of the day.
Banfield is formally charged with aggravated murder within three years of each other, aggravated murder in the same act or transaction, use of a firearm in the commission of a murder, and child endangerment. Banfield is charged with aggravated murder because he is accused of killing two people. The child endangerment charge stems from the fact that his then-4-year-old daughter was in the basement as the alleged murders were being carried out.
The jury of five men and seven women returns Monday at 10 a.m. to continue deliberating so they can reach a verdict.
RELATED | Fairfax County prosecutor taken off au pair double murder case after drinking incident
Day 1
The prosecution and defense begin with their opening statements. Fairfax County Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Jenna Sands tells the jurors that Brendan Banfield orchestrated this alleged double murder plot because he and family au pair Juliana Peres Magalhaes were “in love” and divorce was not an option. She goes on to say they spent months chatting with potential catfishing targets before convincing Joe Ryan to come to their home without meeting in public first. On the day of the killings, Sands says Brendan shoots Ryan, stabs Christine, then manipulates Ryan’s body to put Christine’s blood on him.
John Carroll, Banfield’s lawyer, offers the jury a divergent explanation. He starts by saying Ryan murdered Christine, before quickly shifting to Peres Magalhaes’ credibility. He says she is testifying against Banfield because she is motivated by the plea deal that springs her from jail early. He then focuses his opening statements on disarray within the Fairfax County Police Department’s investigative ranks, claiming anyone who didn’t agree with the catfishing theory faced retribution and a transfer off the case. Carroll also tells the jury that his digital forensics experts will prove that the catfishing theory is incorrect.
We quickly shift to the prosecution, which begins calling its witnesses.
They start by calling the custodian of records, who plays the 911 calls from the Banfield house the morning of the alleged double murder. The first call from Peres Magalhaes at 7:47 a.m. lasts only one second, in what appears to be a hang-up. The second call is an immediate call-back from the 911 center to Peres Magalhaes, which she does not answer. Peres Magalhaes then calls 911 again, at 8:02 a.m., which is 15 minutes after the apparent hangup. That call lasts eight minutes, during which you hear Peres Magalhaes struggle to answer the operator’s questions, with Brendan Banfield saying he shot Joe Ryan, and Joe Ryan stabbed Christine Banfield in the neck.
The next three witnesses are Fairfax County police officers who were the first to arrive at the crime scene. They are asked to watch their body camera footage. The video is cut off from the public seating area, but can be seen by the officers on the stand, the jury, the lawyers, and the judge.
The assistant chief medical examiner is called to the stand to confirm the victims’ injuries.
For the final two hours of the day, the prosecution’s star witness testifies.
Peres Magalhaes walks into the courtroom with her head down and avoiding eye contact with Banfield. Banfield locks his eyes on her as she walks in from the jail entrance of the courtroom, all the way to the witness stand.
She begins her testimony by walking the jury through the evolution of her relationship with Brendan Banfield. She said it began professionally in October 2021, before turning sexual in August 2022. She then describes several social media photos, including one of them in what looks like a hot tub or bathtub, and another with his hand on her leg. Brendan’s face is concealed in all of these pictures.
The former live-in nanny said Brendan first discussed a plan to “get rid of” his wife in October 2022, telling the jury he said he wanted to marry and have kids with her. She said Brendan confided in her, telling her Christine did not care about him, and divorce was not an option because he did not want to share custody of their young daughter. She thought Brendan was joking at this point.
Peres Magalhaes then said she and Brendan created an account on sex fetish dating website FetLife, after he had taken her to a gun range in December 2022 to teach her to shoot. She said they created a fake Gmail account to create the FetLife profile, before creating an account on the Telegram messaging app, so they could communicate further with the person they were trying to catfish.
Throughout this testimony, the jury shows no emotional response, but the jurors take diligent notes.
The former au pair said Banfield typed messages on the FetLife account, or would dictate to her what to say in various chats. They were looking for men who would agree to show up at the home without wanting to meet in person first, and would also be willing to bring knives and items to tie up Christine.
Peres Magalhaes also said they used Christine’s laptop to communicate on FetLife, and only when she was home to make it look like she was the person using the account, because Brendan said he knew there would be an investigation into Christine’s death, and he knew detectives would be able to see where her phone was pinging during FetLife activity.
After this explanation, Peres Magalhaes then said they began chatting with Joe Ryan, and Brendan thought he would be the perfect person to catfish because he agreed to their demands.
The jury and public seating areas are shown a picture sent by Ryan on Telegram that shows knives and restraints.
The au pair then reveals that Banfield changed all of the windows in the house to make them soundproof, and the two of them tested that by having Brendan scream from the bedroom while Peres Magalhaes stood outside to listen. Then, she said Banfield went around the neighborhood to see if there were cameras at his neighbors’ homes.
Throughout the entirety of Peres Magalhaes’ testimony, Banfield can be seen scribbling notes on his notepad.
We now get to the morning of the alleged murders.
The two of them get up early, take Christine’s laptop, and confirm plans with Ryan.
Peres Magalhaes said she was tasked with waiting in her car at the cul-de-sac near the home and to call Banfield when Ryan arrived. Banfield was at a nearby McDonald’s, allegedly to wait for that phone call. Part of the alleged plan was for both of them to call Christine after Ryan arrived, to make it look like they had tried to alert her. However, Brendan allegedly turned off her phone and hid it in the drawer of a bar cart in the kitchen.
Shortly after Ryan walks into the home, Banfield arrives. Brendan, Peres Magalhaes, and Banfield’s daughter all enter the home through the basement.
After waiting with Banfield’s daughter in the basement for a few minutes, the plan dictated that Peres Magalhaes follow Brendan upstairs. She testified that Brendan gave her a hand signal to wait before he entered the bedroom. The two then went into the bedroom, and the au pair said that’s when she could see Ryan on top of Christine.
“Brendan said, he yelled, ‘Police officer!’ Christine’s first reaction – that was the first time I heard her say anything at that point – she yelled back at Brendan, ‘Brendan, he has a knife!’ That’s when Brendan first shot Joe,” Peres Magalhaes said on the stand. “When I was bringing him the towel, he got on top of her, and that’s when I first saw him stab her with a knife.”
The prosecutor then asks, “Where in her body was he stabbing her?”
“Her neck,” Peres Magalhaes replied.
She also testifies that she mistakenly called 911 too early, and Brendan signaled her to hang up.
The au pair then details how Brendan gets Christine’s blood on Ryan.
The judge ends the day at 5 p.m.
Peres Magalhaes walks out of the courtroom, again keeping her head down and not looking at Brendan Banfield. His eyes remained glued to her.
Day 2
Peres Magalhaes continues her testimony.
She now sheds light on the days, weeks, and months after the alleged double murder.
The prosecution begins by asking her why she took the plea deal.
The au pair said it was the “right thing to do,” and “I couldn’t keep it to myself.”
She then said she continues her romantic relationship with Brendan after Christine is killed. She moved into the primary bedroom with Brendan, where the alleged murders happened.
After her arrest, Peres Magalhaes said she sent letters to Brendan and his mother, and that they were financially supporting her and helping her to communicate with her family in Brazil. After she accepted the plea deal, she said everything stopped.
The prosecution finishes its questioning less than 15 minutes into the second day.
John Carroll, Banfield’s lawyer, spends the entirety of the day getting through all of his questions.
He begins by asking how they got access to Christine’s laptop. She responds by saying Mrs. Banfield left it in a backpack by the front door of the house.
Carroll asks several questions about very specific details and dates of the alleged murder plot. Peres Magalhaes struggles answering many of these questions, leading to the following exchange:
Peres Magalhaes: “I can’t remember the date.”
Carroll: “I mean, with all due respect, you don’t remember a lot of details. That’s what’s really concerning about this.”
Peres Magalhaes: “If you were in my shoes, you wouldn’t remember either. Your brain has a way to, a defense mechanism it’s called, and it protects you from losing your mind.”
Carroll then has the au pair read aloud dozens of her jail letters to her family and Banfield.
Many of these letters reflect Peres Magalhaes’ growing concerns and anxiety about her lawyer, as well as her apparent desperation before accepting the plea deal.
“During the day, I just feel like crying, sad, depressed, racing thoughts, heart pounding. It looks like there’s just one line highlighted there. What does that say? It says I’m not willing to spend life in prison for something I didn’t do,” Peres Magalhaes read from one of her letters.
This culminates in one of the more eyebrow-raising revelations in the trial.
Peres Magalhaes confirms to Carroll that she had been negotiating to sell her story to various producers and media companies, claiming that at least one of these producers had already deposited money into her jail canteen account so she could buy food and call family in Brazil.
In another letter to her family, she claims Netflix has offered her $10,000 for the exclusive rights to her story. She then read a passage from that letter to the jury that reverberated across the media ecosystem covering the trial.
“I want a higher amount, especially since my whole life will be exposed to everyone, right? And they’re going to be making a lot of money off of it. We deserve something,” Peres Magalhaes said as she was reading along.
This, ultimately, paved the way for the following exchange with Carroll:
Carroll: “You were charged with murder because you shot someone. Am I wrong?”
Peres Magalhaes: “No, you’re not.”
Carroll: “And so, why would you deserve something because of that?”
Peres Magalhaes: “Not because of that. I didn’t say I deserve something because of what I did.”
Carroll wraps up his question after even more questions about the details of the alleged plan and murders.
When he’s done, the judge ends the day early after a long day of testimony.
Day 3
The prosecution now shifts to crime scene detectives.
The first witness is the crime scene photographer, who shows – among other things – a picture showing Christine’s cell phone inside the drawer of the bar cart in the kitchen, matching up with the location where Peres Magalhaes testified Brendan put his wife’s phone on the morning of the alleged double murder.
That same crime scene detective, Officer Kenner Fortner, returned to the Banfield home in October 2023, eight months after the killings, to take more pictures as part of a warrant. A series of pictures shows that Peres Magalhaes moved her clothing, including lingerie, into the same primary bedroom closet where Banfield kept his clothes. This series of photos included another stunning revelation: pictures of Brendan and Christine Banfield were taken down and replaced with pictures of Brendan and Peres Magalhaes on the mantle and bedside tables next to where Christine was stabbed to death.
The lead crime scene detective, Det. Terry Leach also took the stand. He walks through gruesome crime scene photos with the victims’ bodies still there.
These pictures are shown only to Leach, the jury, lawyers, and the judge.
The public seating area is later shown pictures of the blood-soaked crime scene after the victims’ bodies have been removed. Family members of the victims are visibly upset. One woman is closing her eyes to avoid looking at the monitor.
Leach then explains the timeline of events shown in the surveillance video from the McDonald’s, where Peres Magalhaes testified that Brendan Banfield waited for her call while Ryan arrived at the home.
At 7:18 a.m., Brendan is seen ordering food from his car at the drive-thru. He is seen on video returning at 7:29, parking his car, and walking into the bathroom.
He is then observed exiting the bathroom at 7:37 a.m., eight minutes later, with the phone to his ear, walking back to his car, and driving away.
Leach goes through the call logs, showing that Banfield received a call from the au pair at 7:37 a.m., followed by two outgoing calls to Christine and one outgoing call to the au pair. Peres Magalhaes’ call log confirms her outgoing calls to Brendan and Christine, which aligns with her testimony that the plan included trying to call Christine’s turned-off phone to make it appear they were alerting her.
The prosecution calls up the salesman for the company that sold Banfield the triple-pane windows. He said most people do not buy this kind of window because double-pane windows meet most customers’ needs. He also states that the type of windows Banfield buys helps reduce noise.
Next up is a woman who works at the gun range where Peres Magalahaes said Brendan took her to teach her how to shoot. This employee confirms the two dates Banfield and the au pair were there, as well as the federal form filled out to buy a gun.
Prosecutors also question a fingerprint specialist, a forensic firearm analyst, a forensic DNA analyst, a forensic molecular biologist, and another DNA analyst.
Day 4
The prosecution spends almost the entirety of this day questioning Iris Dalley Graff, a blood stain pattern expert witness.
This was the first time the public viewing area was shown pictures of the crime scene with Joe Ryan still there.
But this was not played for shock value.
The pictures show only a portion of Ryan’s arm, hand, and hip.
Dalley Graff used these pictures to explain how the stains indicate Ryan was moved after he was shot.
Why is this important? It’s because it speaks to Peres Magalhaes’ testimony that Brendan Banfield moved Ryan to get Christine’s blood on him to frame him for her murder.
“I see in addition to the solid covering of blood on the face, on the chin, and down towards the neck, there are flows – multiple flows – and they are not all in the same direction,” Dalley Graff said.
The prosecutor asked her to clarify, “What did the different direction of the flows indicate to you?”
“That there were different positions while the blood was wet and flowing,” Dalley Graff said.
Dalley Graff would go on to testify that certain stain patterns on Ryan’s body suggest blood was moved there, instead of naturally spilling out of a wound.
The prosecutor asked: “Can you describe how that stain was created on the hand?”
“Some surface wet with blood was in contact with the hand, so that blood transferred from the wet, bloody surface to the hand,” Dalley Graff responded. “There are several blood stains on the right leg. In particular, there’s a stain parallel of somewhat parallel transfers that are finger-like in shape.”
The prosecution followed up, asking, “Could these stains be cast-off or spatter?”
“No,” Dalley Graff said.
The day concluded with very brief testimony from Christine Banfield’s father, Gary Benson. He confirmed Christine had been managing a blood-clotting disorder since childhood, continuing through her adult life.
The prosecution rests its case.
Day 5
Carroll calls Officer Zachary Beckner to the stand. He was one of the officers the prosecution called, as well.
However, prosecutors played only the portion of his body camera footage at the crime scene. Banfield’s lawyer plays the nearly hour-long clip, which follows Brendan to the hospital, where he learned his wife died.
At the time of this testimony, the body camera was sealed evidence and was not shown to the public viewing area. We could only hear the audio.
However, this evidence was unsealed later and made available to the public.
This video begins in the Banfield home.
Police officer: “Hey, can you check him out?”
First responder: “Yeah, I’ve got more units here. We’ll check him out.”
Police officer: “He’s starting to freak out a little bit.”
Police officer: “Knife’s there. Guns are on the bed.”
[Police officer mouths “He doesn’t know.”]
Footage continues in the ambulance while on the way to the hospital, where Christine was taken.
First responder: “Would you like to run up to the hospital?”
Brendan Banfield: “Can I be with her?”
First responder: “Uh, they’re going to work on her when they get there. You’re not going to be able to see her immediately, anyway, if you do choose to go.”
Brendan Banfield: “Yes, I want to be with her.”
The video ends at the hospital, after a doctor tells Brendan his wife has died.
Doctor: “Your wife has died.”
Brendan Banfield: [drops head, begins crying]
Doctor: “I’m so sorry.”
Brendan Banfield: “I was trying to apply pressure.”
Doctor: “I mean, those were enormous wounds.”
Brendan Banfield: “There were so many.”
Doctor: “Yes, and the neck is not compressible, so it’s not possible, really, to stop all of the blood loss.”
As these videos are playing, you can see Brendan and his family in the courtroom, as well as Christine’s family, tearing up and wiping their eyes.
The body camera footage also shows the officer allowing Brendan to wash the blood off his hands, without a detective swabbing them for evidence.
After Beckner is done answering questions, Banfield’s lawyer plays body camera footage from another officer responding to the scene. This testimony does not go nearly as long.
Carroll then calls LeeAnn Singley to the stand, the defense’s own blood stain expert.
Singley is called to provide a counter to the prosecution’s expert, Iris Dalley Graff.
The defense expert said she does not believe there was enough evidence to make the conclusions Dalley Graff made.
Singley specifically pointed to one particular blood stain where she disagreed.
“The forearm stains was one area – the four irregularly shaped stains that are on the forearm – she provided a classification for as being drip stains, and I did not,” Singley said.
However, during the prosecution’s cross-examination, Singley said that Dalley Graff’s conclusions remain a possibility and that she could not definitively rule them out.
Carroll closed out the day by calling two of his digital forensics experts.
Det. Brendan Miller was the lead digital forensics detective on this case for the Fairfax County Police Dept. His findings indicated that all activity on the Gmail, FetLife, and Telegram accounts at the center of the investigation originated from Christine’s cell phone and laptop.
He also testified that he found no evidence that Christine ever lost control of these electronic devices.
Miller states he was transferred off the case and out of the division, against his own volition, because of his work on the Banfield case.
However, the prosecution got Miller to admit on the stand that he could not definitively say Christine herself was the person using her laptop and phone during the activity on these accounts, only that her devices were in use.
Carroll also called up Harry Lidsky, a private digital forensics investigator, but could not get through many questions because of issues with entering exhibits into evidence. He will be recalled later in the trial.
At the end of the day, Judge Penney Azcarate asks the jury to see if they are able to come in on Friday, in anticipation of trial dates being canceled because of the forecasted winter storm. At the beginning of the trial, the jury was told they would get Fridays off.
Day 6
Carroll focuses today on the Fairfax County Police investigative ranks and supervisors, aligning with his opening statements that claim disarray within the law enforcement agency regarding this case.
Homicide Det. Leah Smith said one of her supervisors told the rest of the homicide detectives, within the first week of the killings, there were two theories, and they needed to get behind the right one. However, she also said the supervisor did not specify the correct theory at the time. Smith testified that she responded by saying no one in the room should have a theory that early in the investigation.
Smith then said she had never faced retribution and that she had investigated the case with an open mind. She also said Peres Magalhaes’ cooperation in the investigation is not the reason Banfield was charged. In fact, Banfield was arrested before the au pair agreed to a plea deal.
Patrick Brusch, a former deputy chief at FCPD, then testified. He said he was involved in getting Det. Miller, one of Carroll’s expert witnesses, transferred out, adding that he had indicated he would not work another digital forensics case related to the major crimes bureau.
He said this move was not disciplinary, but rather because “his analysis was incorrect,” and he made unsubstantiated deductions.
Specifically, Brusch said Miller stated Christine was responsible for the FetLife, Gmail, and Telegram activity, instead of her electronic devices, which was the source of dissatisfaction.
Carroll then asked Lt. David Giaccio, another of Miller’s supervisors at the time, a similar line of questioning.
Giaccio said he was not trying to get Miller to change his data, but to understand why he believed his findings were incorrect.
Later in his testimony, Giaccio revealed detectives reviewed Christine’s digital footprint dating back to the mid-2000s, and found she never even visited a porn website. They also found two occasions when Peres Magalhaes and Brendan Banfield were out of the house for 36 to 48 hours, and the online accounts in question were not used. Giaccio remarked he thought it was odd Christine would not use the fetish website account while her husband was out of the home.
Saly Fayez, the director of victim services, then took the stand, with perhaps the most shocking testimony of the day.
In the days after the alleged double murder, Brendan Banfield, his daughter, and Peres Magalhaes were put up in a hotel while detectives continued investigating the bloody crime scene in their home.
At that point, a detective stationed at the hotel overheard Banfield’s daughter ask the au pair if she could call her mommy. The daughter also asked if the au pair and Brendan would get married, to which she allegedly said, “I wish.”
Judge Azcarate gets confirmation that the jury can come in on Friday to minimize days lost to the weather.
Day 7
Before the jury comes in, the prosecution and defense begin discussions with Judge Azcarate about jury instructions.
It is at this point that Carroll confirms he anticipates calling Brendan Banfield, himself, to the stand before the trial is over.
But not today.
Carroll spends almost the entirety of the day having Harry Lidsky walk the jury through his digital forensics findings.
“Catfishing did not occur,” Lidsky asserts to the jury.
For hours, Lidsky painstakingly walks through all of the digital data indicating Gmail, FetLife, and Telegram activity on Christine Banfield’s laptop or phone.
He points out the moments Christine’s devices indicate activity on these accounts, while one of Brendan or the au pair is out of the house.
Lidsky highlights the day the accounts are created. Christine’s phone can be seen in use, looking up Lululemon sales or Broadway in Baltimore tickets for Frozen, while the fake Gmail and FetLife accounts are being created on her laptop.
However, this testimony does not go smoothly.
The prosecution raises a bunch of successful objections to exhibits Carroll wants to enter, or to assumptions Lidsky tries to make based on the data.
Carroll also has trouble getting his exhibits to work on his laptop and keeping them in order.
After the jury was dismissed at the end of the day, Judge Azcarate asked the lawyers to use the weekend and the anticipated days off from the snow to get their exhibits ready and organized, specifically chiding Carroll.
“We’re just spinning our wheels right now,” Azcarate said. “I’m just not interested in wasting the jury’s time.”
Day 8
We are back after the snow and ice closed the courthouse down for the first two days of the week.
Carroll picks up where we left off, again having Lidsky go through several data points showing FetLife activity on Christine’s laptop, especially when Brendan is not home.
Lidsky: “It turns out, as we can see from the image on the right, [Brendan’s cell phone is] at a gas station.”
Carroll: “And what’s the significance of the login and any communications on FetLife and the timing?”
Lidsky: “Mr. Banfield’s device was not at home during any of that activity.”
During cross-examination, however, Lidsky acknowledges that he cannot definitively confirm that Christine was the person using her laptop.
Sands: “So you acknowledge we’re talking about two different devices, right? The laptop and the phone, two different things happening?”
Lidsky: “Yes.”
Sands: “And you can’t say who’s in control of either device. All you can tell us is what the devices are doing, correct?”
Lidsky: “Correct.”
After a 15-minute afternoon break, Brendan Banfield is sworn in, taking the stand, answering the “Will he or won’t he” questions asked by casual observers and members of the media since the trial began.
Banfield begins by describing his relationship with Christine. They met as freshmen in college. Since then, “We were inseparable,” Banfield says.
The jury’s eyes are glued to him. Christine’s family also sternly looks on.
Brendan then talks about helping his daughter with her homework before saying how much his daughter loved Christine.
“It was tragic, their separation,” Banfield said.
Carroll also asked if Brendan loved Christine and if he wanted to continue the marriage. He said yes to both.
Throughout this part of the testimony, Banfield did not have any emotional outbursts.
Carroll then spent about 10 minutes showing the jury pictures of Brendan and Christine smiling while on vacation.
After a few successful objections from prosecutors over relevance, Carroll moved on to asking Banfield about his relationship with Peres Magalhaes.
Banfield said it started as a professional relationship in October 2021, but became sexual in August 2022 when she initiated the relationship.
“I did not stop her advances,” Banfield said.
Then, in a jaw-dropping revelation, he admits Christine had known he had at least two affairs before, though he did not think she knew he was having an affair with Peres Magalhaes. He also makes the claim that Christine had affairs, as well.
Carroll then flat-out asks Banfield if he and the au pair conjured the alleged murder plan.
“At this point, our relationship is, maybe, six-to-eight weeks old. I think that it’s an absurd line of questioning for something that is not serious, that a plan was made to get rid of my wife. That is absolutely crazy,” Banfield said.
Next, Carroll asked about the day of the killings.
Banfield said he had an important meeting with managers at work to discuss a future undercover operation that would likely lead to a promotion if successful.
He woke up early to grab breakfast at McDonald’s. While getting ready to leave the house, he testifies that he saw Christine awake and on her phone.
Banfield then said he picked up his food from the drive-thru, but parked his car because he had to use the bathroom.
He said he got a call from Peres Magalhaes while he was using the bathroom, during which she said a stranger entered the home.
We leave it here before Judge Azcarate ends the day at 5 p.m., informing the court that the jury has agreed to come in on Friday to make up for the missed days due to the weather.
Day 9
Banfield begins describing the moments before, during, and after the shooting of Joe Ryan and the stabbing of Christine Banfield.
He said he entered the home and did not know what was going on. He says he did not call 911 because he thought Christine was having an affair. He tells the jury he’s walking up the stairs to the bedroom. At first, he thinks he’s hearing sex noises, but then thinks it sounds like Christine is getting hurt.
Banfield then testifies that he walks into the bedroom and sees Joe Ryan grabbing Christine from behind. It’s at this point that Banfield said he yelled, “Police,” and heard Christine yelling back, “Brendan, he has a knife!”
Carroll: “Can you explain to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what, if anything, took place that caused you to discharge your firearm?”
Banfield: “It appeared he did a very forceful stab towards Christine.”
After shooting Ryan, Brendan said he rushed to Christine to render aid.
He told the jury her final words to him, before paramedics arrived and took her to the hospital.
“She was holding her neck. She told me she couldn’t see, and I asked her to let me see,” Banfield said. “Christine told me that she was bleeding out and that she was sorry and she loved me.”
Banfield’s voice cracks a few times, and he wipes his eyes once, but not an emotional outburst.
The jury does not offer any emotional response, but many of them take notes.
Christine’s family appears to be upset. Her father is seen putting his arm around another family member.
Carroll finishes asking questions about two hours into the day.
The prosecution peppers Banfield with questions about specific details in his story.
But Sands begins by asking Banfield to confirm the love letters he sends to Peres Magalhaes while she’s in jail, including one where he discusses baby names for children they want to have together. He confirms he had fallen in love with the au pair just months after his wife’s death.
Then in rapid succession, Sands homes in on Banfield’s claims of Ryan stabbing Christine and Christine’s last words.
Sands: “So there’s five more. When did he stab her those other five times?”
Banfield: “The knife is inside of her hair. I can’t tell the movement. I can’t tell how that is.”
Sands: “We know from the medical examiner, and you know because you got to hear it, she was stabbed seven times and got an eighth cutting wound, correct?”
Banfield: “I didn’t know the exact number off the top of my head, but yes, that sounds familiar.”
Sands: “Okay, well, she had to get five more wounds at some point, and you’re telling us when you get into the room, she’s capable of speech, correct?”
Banfield: “Yes.”
There was also an exchange about one of Banfield’s prior affairs and which dating website he used to meet her.
Sands: “One of those affairs is with a woman named Danielle, who you met on a fetish site searching for sugar babies, is that correct?”
Banfield: “I would not call it a fetish site.”
Sands: “What would you call it?”
Banfield: “An arranged relationship.”
Sands also points out that Christine’s phone showed no activity around the time Brendan claimed he saw her using her phone while he was getting ready for work.
Banfield’s testimony takes almost the entire day.
During rebuttal, the prosecution’s last witness calls into question a major part of Banfield’s testimony.
Prosecutors called IRS investigator Thomas Patrick Smith to the stand. He’s Banfield’s supervisor.
Banfield previously testified he had an important meeting with managers at work on the day of the killings, which could help him get a promotion.
Smith said no such meeting was on the books. In fact, all of the managers who would have had any such meeting were out of the state, with one even out of the country.
Day 10
Judge Azcarate begins by giving the jury their instructions for deliberations.
We then move to closing arguments.
Prosecutor Jenna Sands reminds the jury of the testimony from her blood stain expert, who concluded Christine’s blood was placed on Joe Ryan, and Ryan’s body had been moved. She then asks why Christine would seek out knife play during sex when she has a blood-clotting disorder. Sands also brought to the jury’s attention the pictures of Brendan and the au pair together just months after his wife’s death, before also bringing up the 15-minute gap between the 911 hang-up and the real call.
“He executed his plan to murder his wife and an innocent stranger. He was in love with Juliana. He can pretend this was a fling, an affair. He had them before, no big deal. He was in love with Juliana. He was afraid of losing her. He needed to get rid of his wife, so that they could be together,” Fairfax County Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Jenna Sands said. “Mr. Banfield gave you zero explanation for any of this evidence. They have provided no explanation for Christine’s blood smeared on the right hand of Joe Ryan, leaving voids between the fingers.”
John Carroll, Banfield’s lawyer, offered a different explanation during his closing arguments.
He again claims this was a home invasion Brendan tried stopping, pointing to digital forensics evidence he believes indicates Christine was using the FetLife account, before again bringing up disarray within the investigative ranks at the Fairfax County Police Department.
“Is it reasonable after a six-to-eight week affair that someone is going to try to get rid of their companion of 19 years, wife of 12 years? Is that reasonable? You heard from my client. He thinks it’s absurd,” Carroll said. “You can’t just come up with a theory and make it fit. They’re trying to sell you a story without any facts, and we have the facts, and those facts are in evidence.”
Both sides, essentially, boil their arguments down to one question: Who do you trust more? Juliana Peres Magalhaes or Brendan Banfield?
The jury composition was nine men and seven women before the alternates were randomly selected. All four alternates are men, meaning the final jury is now five men and seven women.
Judge Azcarate sends the jury out of the courtroom to deliberate at 12:33 p.m.
The day ends at 4:30 p.m., with no verdict reached yet.
National Headline
