Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

I wonder what did they tell the child why they hid her in basement by herself? Was the dog in a crate or with her? It’s hard to believe a child would have stayed by herself given the frenzy if they truly were scared. This piece is so bizarre on why they brought child into home. Makes no sense. No parent with common sense would allow that if an intruder was really what they thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what did they tell the child why they hid her in basement by herself? Was the dog in a crate or with her? It’s hard to believe a child would have stayed by herself given the frenzy if they truly were scared. This piece is so bizarre on why they brought child into home. Makes no sense. No parent with common sense would allow that if an intruder was really what they thought.

Agree and of course that is not what they thought. I wonder if the au pair suite could be locked off so the child could not enter the house? Assume the dog was with her and she had headphones or similar and a screen.

[Anonymous]

Police scanner from that day dispatched PD after the second 911 call. They could tell that there was a prior hang-up from that location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what did they tell the child why they hid her in basement by herself? Was the dog in a crate or with her? It’s hard to believe a child would have stayed by herself given the frenzy if they truly were scared. This piece is so bizarre on why they brought child into home. Makes no sense. No parent with common sense would allow that if an intruder was really what they thought.

Agree and of course that is not what they thought. I wonder if the au pair suite could be locked off so the child could not enter the house? Assume the dog was with her and she had headphones or similar and a screen.

Exactly!

[Anonymous]

Just saw the Reddit posts on this case:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nova/comments/1bth6lr/herndon_au_pair_charged_in_death_of_springfield/

Anyone know if websleuths is still following? Hadn’t found link to old updates on that site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just saw the Reddit posts on this case:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nova/comments/1bth6lr/herndon_au_pair_charged_in_death_of_springfield/

Anyone know if websleuths is still following? Hadn’t found link to old updates on that site.

Yes but Websleuths only has 6 pages of discussion and not very interesting...

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/va-herndon-joseph-ryan-shot-christine-banfield-stabbed-both-deceased-in-home-feb-2023.668556/page-6

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just saw the Reddit posts on this case:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nova/comments/1bth6lr/herndon_au_pair_charged_in_death_of_springfield/

Anyone know if websleuths is still following? Hadn’t found link to old updates on that site.

There are older threads than that on Reddit. WS deletes a LOT of posts and has re: this case, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, BB left the safe open that day with the gun ready to go (if he put the gun in the safe at all!). Maybe he just gave the gun to AP when they went into the house and she brought it up to the bedroom when she was ready to go.

I think this was a planned setup by BB, but something went wrong. Given the newly purchased gun and the visit to the shooting range with AP, I think BB planned for AP to shoot Joe with the new gun. Since he was obviously the big brains of the operation, he would have taken measures to appear as innocent as possible and have AP be the shooter. But something went wrong and he had to use his service weapon first. They panicked and decided to follow through on the original plan and have AP take the fatal shot with the gun from the safe. And they used the time between the 911 calls to come up with a story. Something always goes wrong in a planned crime and people panic and make mistakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw the Reddit posts on this case:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nova/comments/1bth6lr/herndon_au_pair_charged_in_death_of_springfield/

Anyone know if websleuths is still following? Hadn’t found link to old updates on that site.

There are older threads than that on Reddit. WS deletes a LOT of posts and has re: this case, too.

Ok that makes sense as some old posts were deleted that I thought I read before.

[Anonymous]

Quick question: I know that, in Brazil, even if it was self defense Brendan would be in jail for shooting JR in the head.

Usually self defense is valid when you shoot to “disable” or neutralize the threat, not to kill. Say, shoot the person on the leg or hands, etc.

Isn’t it the same here? Can you actually shoot someone in the head and declare it was self defense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quick question: I know that, in Brazil, even if it was self defense Brendan would be in jail for shooting JR in the head.

Usually self defense is valid when you shoot to “disable” or neutralize the threat, not to kill. Say, shoot the person on the leg or hands, etc.

Isn’t it the same here? Can you actually shoot someone in the head and declare it was self defense?

That’s a good question, especially since BB was trained to neutralize threats for his job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what did they tell the child why they hid her in basement by herself? Was the dog in a crate or with her? It’s hard to believe a child would have stayed by herself given the frenzy if they truly were scared. This piece is so bizarre on why they brought child into home. Makes no sense. No parent with common sense would allow that if an intruder was really what they thought.

I have four kids, the youngest is four. No way my (neurotypical) children would've stayed put unless I took precautions - headphones, iPad + locking the door in a way they couldn't unlock it. I doubt the LE will get into those nitty gritty details from the au pair, but I can tell you from experience, telling a 4 year old to simply stay put while you causally go check on all the screaming in the other room is not a winning strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quick question: I know that, in Brazil, even if it was self defense Brendan would be in jail for shooting JR in the head.

Usually self defense is valid when you shoot to “disable” or neutralize the threat, not to kill. Say, shoot the person on the leg or hands, etc.

Isn’t it the same here? Can you actually shoot someone in the head and declare it was self defense?

That's a good question. I wonder too if BB is held to a higher standard since he has had gun training. (Of course, now we know the AP did too!). Self defense seems to be quite case by case. Someone knocks on your locked door in broad daylight and you shoot them through a window? Not self defense. Someone breaks into your home in the middle of the night and attacks you - self defense. But here, you had two able bodied adults and JR had already been shot in the eye. Seems like a shot in the heart was unnecessary - couldn't they have subdued him? Kicked him? Wrestled the knife away from him? Maybe his large size works against him here...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick question: I know that, in Brazil, even if it was self defense Brendan would be in jail for shooting JR in the head.

Usually self defense is valid when you shoot to “disable” or neutralize the threat, not to kill. Say, shoot the person on the leg or hands, etc.

Isn’t it the same here? Can you actually shoot someone in the head and declare it was self defense?

That’s a good question, especially since BB was trained to neutralize threats for his job.

Once you make the decision that someone is a serious threat to your life, you are allowed to shoot-to-kill in defence of self. The seriousness of the threat and your inability to retreat will be judge by a reasonable person standard. Some states don't require you to retreat before claiming self defense (stand your ground laws).

I have a hard time believing that other countries require the person being attacked to find a way to injure-but-not-kill the attacker...that is putting a big responsibility on someone to know how to just injure a threat just enough to stop them in a high intensity situation with little time to react.

Either the person is a threat to your life or not. If they are, then the law says you can shoot them dead. You had better be right about the attacker actually being a threat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quick question: I know that, in Brazil, even if it was self defense Brendan would be in jail for shooting JR in the head.

Usually self defense is valid when you shoot to “disable” or neutralize the threat, not to kill. Say, shoot the person on the leg or hands, etc.

You watch too much tv.