Au Pair Affair Murder Trial: Opening Statements

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: - Opening statements from the Commonwealth. - Just a moment, Judge. - Good morning, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us today. I appreciate that you all came back. I know yesterday was a short day. Today might be a long one and you're in for several more following that, but we'll try to keep your attention and ask you to please, please remember that your job here is to listen to the evidence, right? Take notes if you need to follow along with the details. There will be many and then be thoughtful in how you consider this evidence when it's time to deliberate. We're here today because Brendan Banfield, the man seated behind me, killed his wife, Christine Banfield, and another man named Joseph Ryan. Those two individuals had no reason to know each other, but for the plotting and planning of Brendan Banfield. Christine, back in 2022, was 37 years old. She was an ICU nurse working at the Nova Fairfax. She was married to Brendan, who was then 38, and they had a daughter, four-year-old Valerie. Christine worked odd shifts. She was a nurse. Any of you know what nurses hours are. She could work nights. The schedule was irregular. It didn't occur with a nine to five pattern. So regular daycare was not an option for the family. They hired an au pair, Juliana Perez Magalhães. She was from Brazil. She was 22 years old when she joined the family. She provided care while Brendan traveled for work, and Christine worked her nurse's hours. The family lived in the Ruston area of Fairfax County at 13230 Stable Brookway. You'll hear that address referenced. You'll see pictures of the home. You'll have the opportunity to understand what the layout of the house was, as it is very relevant to what happened in February of 2023. Taking you back, in August of 2022, Brendan began an affair with Juliana. Initially, it was just sex when Christine was at work or asleep, but eventually it developed into a relationship. They went on dates. They went to bars, clubs, dancing. They went on romantic bike rides. By the fall of 2022, they were fully in love, planning their future. On a trip to New York, Brendan revealed his desire to get rid of Christine. Divorce was not an option for him. He didn't want to lose custody of Valerie. He didn't even want to share custody of Valerie. He thought Christine was a terrible mother. He wanted her out of the picture. And he convinced young Juliana, 22 years old, not from the United States, living in his home, in love with him, that they should get rid of Christine. He talked about hiring a hitman, finding someone to kill her for money. But he was concerned that that would tie back to him, that there would be too much evidence against him, and that he could end up at risk. So they crafted a plan. They would use Christine's email accounts to create a fake profile to lure someone in who was into kinky sex, violent sex. And they would get this guy to come into the house and fake rape Christine. Brendan would be the hero of the day. He would show up, kill the guy, kill his wife, pretending that it had been that guy. That was the plan. They put it into action. Brendan created a FetLife account. If you're not familiar with it, it's a social networking app for people interested in fetishes, sexual pain. He posted this Christine, seeking fulfillment of this stranger rape fantasy. He and Juliana spent weeks chatting with potential victims, searching for just the right guy who would follow Brendan's plan to a tee. Because remember, this plan hinged on several things. Christine never knowing that it existed. And Christine never being expected to meet with her potential fake rapist. In this community of people, there weren't many takers for such a risky plan. It had red flags all over the place. But by January 24th, 2022, Brendan had found his target, Joseph Ryan, posting as Taco Supreme 7,000. Joe engaged in friendly conversation with who he thought was an attractive woman due to kink. Brendan, posting as Christine, spent a month creating this relationship with Joe that would eventually lead to Joe's murder. Meanwhile, other things were going on to prepare for this murder. Brendan bought Juliana a gun and took her to the shooting range to teach her to shoot. Brendan had Juliana help him test out the soundproofing of the new windows that had been installed at Stable Brookway. By the time this plan was ready to be hatched, Joe was fully on board. He had not questioned any of the asks of him. He had continued to engage in this relationship and appeared to be the perfect, willing victim. Brendan created the narrative that Christine desperately wanted to be raped. Posing as Christine, he told Joe what to do. Come to the home in Reston. The door will be unlocked. Christine will be asleep in bed. Come straight upstairs, cut off her clothing, tie her, rake her, simple and fun. That was how it was posed. Joe was willing to follow these rules that Brendan set out posing as Christine. They would not meet in person beforehand. Joe's phones would be left in the car. Joe was to bring a knife, zip ties, chains. And most importantly, he was not too stuck. Even if she looked terrified, even if she was calling for help, he was to follow through 'cause that's what she really wanted. On February 24th, 2023, Brendan Banfield's birthday, the plan was put into action. Knowing that Christine had the day off, Brendan and Juliana arranged a fake outing at the zoo for Valerie. Juliana and Valerie packed the lunch, prepared for this fake outing. Christine, still in bed, asleep at 6:00 AM. Brendan takes her phone and Valerie downstairs. He chats with Joe to confirm a 7:20 arrival for the execution of the fake rape. And Brendan then disables the door lock, preventing it from automatically blocking. Turns off Christine's phone, and puts it in her drawer in the kitchen where she couldn't possibly find it to call for help when she finds an intruder in her home. Brendan leaves the house, followed shortly by Juliana. Brendan drives to a nearby McDonald's. Juliana waits in the cul-de-sac. The plan to give a call out to Brendan as soon as she sees Joe. Valerie's in the back seat, and Juliana has a gun in her pocket. When Joe arrives, Juliana calls Christine's cell phone first, to create a record of a fake warning, even knowing that the phone is turned off. She then calls Brendan, to let him know that Joe is in the house. Brendan leaves the McDonald's, drives directly to the home, meets up with Juliana, and with Valerie in the basement. On the top of the toe, they re-enter the house through the basement. Juliana, nervous, screws up the plan and calls 911, too early. She hangs up as soon as Brendan's giving her the signal that this wasn't the plan. They leave Valerie in the basement. They sneak up the stairs to the bedroom, where they hear Joe Ryan and Christine. Brendan enters the bedroom first, shooting Joe in the head. Picks up the knife that Joe had brought, and stabs Christine repeatedly in the neck. He directs Juliana to shoot Joe a second time with her gun. This time the bullet enters Joe's chest. With Christine dead or dying, Brendan spends the next several minutes manipulating Joe Ryan's body, in the process of leaving Christine's blood on Joe's hands and pants. Juliana calls 911, this time as scheduled, to report the intruder. And Brendan tells the police, "I shot him. He stabbed her." You'll hear all of this from Juliana, but we're not asking you to believe her alone. You'll hear from witnesses and experts about all of the evidence that corroborates the facts presented. You'll see the FetLife chats. You'll see the Telegram messages. You'll hear and see the phone call details. You'll hear the 911 calls where Brendan admits to shooting Joe. You'll see body-worn camera video from the responding officers. You'll see photos of the crime scene and the physical evidence collected. And that's where you should focus your attention. Because while Juliana presents us with the narrative, that story that we wouldn't necessarily know but for her details, it is the blood evidence that you can rely upon without a doubt. The blood cannot lie. And the blood puts Brendan Banfield standing over Christine, stabbing her in the neck until she died. With that evidence, we will ask you to find Brendan Banfield guilty of these murders, the associated charges of neglecting his child, and of creating a danger for her in that home. Thank you. [00:10:52] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:10:53] Speaker 1: Thank you, Ms. Stanz. [00:10:54] Speaker ?: All right. [00:10:55] Speaker 2: Defense. You're welcome. I think that's a problem. No. [00:10:59] Speaker ?: Yes. Thank you. [00:11:01] Speaker 2: We do. [00:11:02] Speaker ?: No. [00:11:02] Speaker 2: Yes. [00:11:03] Speaker ?: We do. [00:11:04] Speaker 2: Yes. [00:11:05] Speaker ?: We do. Thank you. [00:11:36] Speaker 2: Thank you ladies and gentlemen, once again we had a long day yesterday and we talked about a lot of the issues that would possibly come up and they're going to come up today in terms of the story that the Commonwealth just told you and what I think you should be looking out for in terms of the evidence. There's some interesting things that in order to assess first of all what they're saying and second of all the evidence that's going to be before you is you have to look at certain timelines. So the murder of Christine Banfield by Joe Ryan occurred on February 24th, 2023. The arrest of Juliana Perez Maglays took place in October of 2023. She was held for nearly another year before she made the statements that are the full and complete support of what the Commonwealth just told you. And she did that because the Commonwealth decided that they were going to give her something certain. They were going to give her a plea of guilty to a manslaughter, which is a lesser included offense and guaranteed time served upon her testimony here today or tomorrow or whenever that testimony is. You're going to hear a timeline of events and evidence that you'll have an opportunity to look at where she was arrested in October of 2023. And the whole reason she was arrested was to flip her against my client. You'll hear that evidence from someone other than her and other than me. And they tried. And they tried. In a correspondence that she wrote to my client on January 1st that was given to him. She says, "They want you. All they want is to get you in this case. They want me to say things that aren't true. They want me to say things that I did that aren't true. They offered me a misdemeanor." She declined a misdemeanor, facing second degree murder at the time. And then as the case went on, it became very clear that they wanted him so badly that they were willing to do anything. They made offers, not as good as a misdemeanor, but as time went on for a manslaughter, suspended time, but she had to testify against Brendan. And you'll hear there were at least four or five times during that year leading up to Brendan Banfield being charged, where they came to her, they went through her attorney, and they offered that deal that she now stands to have taken. Now, why is it that she wouldn't have taken that then? Well, we heard in the first instance, she said, "They're asking me to say something that isn't true." And so let's look at another timeline that I think is appropriate. After she was arrested, she had a preliminary hearing in April of 2024. And you'll see communications that show real anxiety in terms of what was going to happen. After the preliminary hearing, then the first trial is set for July of 2024. Her attorney continues the case against her will. There's correspondence that says, "I want her to go forward. I want her to show my innocence." Continued it to October, I believe, no, to November 12th. During that point in time, she'd lost trust in her attorney. She lost hope because he was the only person for someone who was thousands of miles away from her home, from her family, from the people that supported her. She lost hope in the person who was there to represent her. Whether that's true, whether that's right or not, I don't know. So what you'll see in this timeline that I'm going to create for you through Evans is that she was upset. And she said at one point, "I can't believe he continued this case. That's, that's, I don't want, I didn't want that. I don't want that. I just want to go forward. He better not do that again." So we go through a period of time into September, the stress and the anxiety starts to really ramp up for her. Approaching her November 12th court date. My client gets arrested. And in her mind, she loses even more hope because he was the person who was on the outside who she really was depending on. They had an affair. You're not going to get any disputes from us. But he played a role, a supportive role to her while she was in jail, while they tried to do their little experiment on what would she take in order to come forward and tell a story. You'll hear in October, she went for emergency surgery, had a gallbladder surgery, spent two weeks in the hospital, and soon after she got out, she received word that her attorney was going to continue the case again because he needed to get a digital forensics examiner. In order to review the evidence. That hadn't been done up until that point. That was the last straw. Whatever deals that had been rejected, the most recent time was September 30th. Whatever deals had been rejected, she was in for now. One of the deals was suggested by her attorney after she was upset with her, after she was upset with him in July. They get together, they arrive at this, and they have a recording of the questions that they're asking her during what they call the recant. You're going to hear some of those recordings. Now, any of you who have any sort of investigative roles in anything that you do, when you're talking to someone who's deciding to flip, you don't just take their word for it, you challenge them. Investigators challenge the statements that are being made. October 25th marks the first day that statements were made. Many of you may have seen that because it's showing up on media. And you hear someone asking her questions and then she answers those questions. Well, what we're going to be able to show you is that those answers are wrong based upon other evidence that we have in this case. But no one ever challenged her, no one ever questioned her. And so, in order to have this narrative that in this story that you were saying, Juliana Perez-Magalais is at the center of all of it. She's going to talk about where the gun was at one point and then I think in the next recant, she says it was a different situation with the gun. She said she ran into the bedroom and used the combination on the safe to get the gun and then she had it been given to him by, or it was given to him by Brendan Banfield. I'm sorry, given to her by Brendan Banfield. You're going to hear there are significant differences in many of the things that she's providing to the commonwealth, some of which are changing even up to most recent prep sessions, which we had access to, of December 30th. So, the question will be, what's the final statement? I think we're all going to get that. But you're also going to see what she's done all along the way. The commonwealth used her for their case. I understand the situation that she's in and I understand the fact that she's away from home and she's young and she depended on people and she's also depending on the commonwealth. And they put her in this situation. And she's accepted it gladly and I'm sorry to say, many people would. But it's the devastation that that causes when you ask for that kind of testimony to be included in your case. Now, let's just talk a little bit, can I just get a sip of water? Sorry, a little dry mouth. Let's just talk a little bit about some of the other things that are going on in this case. And I think you'll find this through the evidence. So what essentially, and you may have heard it in media, is there's a theory called catfishing. And catfishing, for those who don't know it, and people more experienced and more expert than I will be able to tell you specifically, essentially is assuming the devices of someone in order to get something done, is the easy quick. There's probably more sophisticated explanation for it. But what they're saying is Brendan Banfield assumed his wife's devices, his computer, her computer, her phone, any other devices, in order to take on this, take on her persona in order to invite this gentleman, Joe Ryan in. Catfishing is a theory that requires a conclusion that Christine Banfield gave up her devices. The Commonwealth's experts have concluded from the moment that the devices were examined and contracted that she did not give up her devices. And so then started the turmoil within the police department that I think is going to come out here. I doubt it would be in the Commonwealth's case. But there were people within the command staff who were trying to change what the experts said about Christine Banfield's devices. They were trying to say that Christine Banfield did give up these devices or was away when those devices were being used. But you're going to have a conclusion that was from the very early moments that she had not given that up. Now that's significant because all of the things that Juliana Perez Magalhaiz has talked to you about is inextricably intertwined with catfishing. And so you're going to hear evidence from their expert witness. You're going to hear evidence from an expert witness that I have that concurs in their expert witness's findings. And in the world of digital forensics, they're just saying, digital forensics doesn't lie. People lie. And there are going to be plenty to see. You're going to see manipulation within the police department where if those that wanted the catfishing theory, if the lying homicide prosecutors, homicide detectives didn't agree with this theory, they were transferred. When this case started, there were 12 people in the homicide squad. As this case goes to trial now, there's only four of those 12 there. Important ones that were removed, in part because they didn't agree with the people that peddled the catfish theory, the lead homicide detective, the digital forensics detective. And this was back in late 2024. I don't know how many of you are familiar with criminal prosecutions and investigations. I was a prosecutor myself here in Fairfax. I've never experienced a homicide investigation where the lead homicide detective was moved prior to a trial. Digital forensics, I probably aged out of digital forensics, but that's a very important aspect of this. So I couldn't say personally whether that would have happened back in my day, but there are there are factors here that I think that haven't been brought forth by the Commonwealth. And in my efforts at presenting evidence, I'm going to be trying to bring that to light. So, as I indicated, there are serious timelines. There's a vulnerable person who's open to prey for what it is that they need. And I would respectfully suggest that Juliana Perez Magalhaes is the linchpin to all of that. Now, ultimately it's the evidence. It's not what I say. It's not what the Commonwealth says. But I say these things to you so that your ear is ready. Because you're going to see a presentation of a horrible, tragic, awful event for everyone involved. And there's no disputing that. And as I said earlier, we're not disputing, you won't hear any dispute as to the relationship between Brendan Banfield and Juliana Perez Magalhaes. But there's an awful lot more to look for, ladies and gentlemen, and that's what I'm asking you to do. Thank you very much. [00:28:37] Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Garrett.