Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is going back but I thought they were holding her passport and then when it was expiring she attempted to renew it, which made her a flight risk and was part of the reason she was arrested. I am not sure she had her passport and the ability to go home to Brazil.

I'm sure more detail will come out as to when the passport was taken. Given her immediate and very long chat with a detective, perhaps immediately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

FFNow does a good job laying out the charges against her. There is no motive element. Her own statements about shooting him after BB had shot him in the head and he was on the ground, are pretty damning. There does not seem to be any reason for her to go to another room for a 2nd gun. BB could have shot again, he is LE and gun was in his hand. Her lawyer claims she was following the direction of BB but why shoot again rather than call 911 and NOT hang up? Why not say, hey, BB, hand me your gun that is right here? Why not go down and get the child out of the house and to the car or a neighbors for safety?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least the Banfield dog was not attacked. DAMN Herndon, what is going on out there? Just divorce

https://wtop.com/crime/2024/04/herndon-police-officer-shoots-man-while-responding-to-domestic-stabbing/

BB thought he would be lauded as a hero like the police officer in this incident.

BB thought big mama would be proud of heroic Baby Boy(BB).

Instead BB is a pariah waiting for the eventuality of when, not if, the AP rolls on him. Tick Tok BB, Tick Tok. Think of the personal hell that BB has to look forward to.. he won't know that the AP has spilled the beans to police until they knock down his door to yank him out of his slumber. BB knows the time of day when Law Enforcement executes most arrest warrants. Each day when he sleeps past that moment is he knows it could be the last day of freedom.

I feel like there is a huge draw to this case because it's a modern day spin on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. BB had it all. He wanted more. He could have divorced and downsized for a while. Instead he engaged in the stupidest murder plot. BB flew too close to the sun on wings of pastrami.

You are completely unhinged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going back but I thought they were holding her passport and then when it was expiring she attempted to renew it, which made her a flight risk and was part of the reason she was arrested. I am not sure she had her passport and the ability to go home to Brazil.

I'm sure more detail will come out as to when the passport was taken. Given her immediate and very long chat with a detective, perhaps immediately.

This already came out in the previous bond/preliminary hearings. They had her passport since the shooting, she requested it back, but they didn’t return it. She had to get new passport so she could apply for visa. That’s why they arrested her in the first place, because her visa was expiring, and they were afraid she would go back to Brazil. Now they have also have the new passport. Now they won’t release her because they’re afraid she’ll get deported once she’s outside of Fairfax County custody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least the Banfield dog was not attacked. DAMN Herndon, what is going on out there? Just divorce

https://wtop.com/crime/2024/04/herndon-police-officer-shoots-man-while-responding-to-domestic-stabbing/

BB thought he would be lauded as a hero like the police officer in this incident.

BB thought big mama would be proud of heroic Baby Boy(BB).

Instead BB is a pariah waiting for the eventuality of when, not if, the AP rolls on him. Tick Tok BB, Tick Tok. Think of the personal hell that BB has to look forward to.. he won't know that the AP has spilled the beans to police until they knock down his door to yank him out of his slumber. BB knows the time of day when Law Enforcement executes most arrest warrants. Each day when he sleeps past that moment is he knows it could be the last day of freedom.

I feel like there is a huge draw to this case because it's a modern day spin on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. BB had it all. He wanted more. He could have divorced and downsized for a while. Instead he engaged in the stupidest murder plot. BB flew too close to the sun on wings of pastrami.

You are completely unhinged.

Oh no, the unhinged troll is back again.

Has the grand jury indicted yet?

[Anonymous]

https://patch.com/virginia/reston/amp/31722775/au-pair-2-cold-case-homicide-suspects-indicted-by-grand-jury-descano

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least the Banfield dog was not attacked. DAMN Herndon, what is going on out there? Just divorce

https://wtop.com/crime/2024/04/herndon-police-officer-shoots-man-while-responding-to-domestic-stabbing/

BB thought he would be lauded as a hero like the police officer in this incident.

BB thought big mama would be proud of heroic Baby Boy(BB).

Instead BB is a pariah waiting for the eventuality of when, not if, the AP rolls on him. Tick Tok BB, Tick Tok. Think of the personal hell that BB has to look forward to.. he won't know that the AP has spilled the beans to police until they knock down his door to yank him out of his slumber. BB knows the time of day when Law Enforcement executes most arrest warrants. Each day when he sleeps past that moment is he knows it could be the last day of freedom.

I feel like there is a huge draw to this case because it's a modern day spin on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. BB had it all. He wanted more. He could have divorced and downsized for a while. Instead he engaged in the stupidest murder plot. BB flew too close to the sun on wings of pastrami.

You are completely unhinged.

Oh no, the unhinged troll is back again.

Has the grand jury indicted yet?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

Or, the guy who had apparently just stabbed a woman in the neck was moving towards her and her husband who was focused on rendering aide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

Or, the guy who had apparently just stabbed a woman in the neck was moving towards her and her husband who was focused on rendering aide.

I think you have the facts of the story wrong. She shot Joe after Brendan already shot Joe and stabbed Christine. Christine and Brendan being Julianas’ employers and also Brendan’s affair partner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

Or, the guy who had apparently just stabbed a woman in the neck was moving towards her and her husband who was focused on rendering aide.

Sure, anything is possible. So walk us through this. JR has been shot and - per an expert - blinded. Blood is pouring down his face. The Au pair comes to the room to save the day. In your scenario, he “moves toward her.” Does he follow her as she runs from the doorway to the gun safe? He can’t see, so is he following her scent? I guess there’d be a trail of blood backing this up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

Or, the guy who had apparently just stabbed a woman in the neck was moving towards her and her husband who was focused on rendering aide.

Sure, anything is possible. So walk us through this. JR has been shot and - per an expert - blinded. Blood is pouring down his face. The Au pair comes to the room to save the day. In your scenario, he “moves toward her.” Does he follow her as she runs from the doorway to the gun safe? He can’t see, so is he following her scent? I guess there’d be a trail of blood backing this up?

I think it was established JR was on the ground when shot by the au pair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that.

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it.

Or, the guy who had apparently just stabbed a woman in the neck was moving towards her and her husband who was focused on rendering aide.

I think you have the facts of the story wrong. She shot Joe after Brendan already shot Joe and stabbed Christine. Christine and Brendan being Julianas’ employers and also Brendan’s affair partner.

I don't believe it has ever been established when CB was stabbed. LE says they anticipate an additional arrest, so, probably don't think it was the dead guy.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The common theme seems to be that she hasn't made a sensical decision throughout the entire process.

Also, having an affair isn't a crime. So regardless of any "conspiracy" if they had hooked up before, it's not unreasonable to believe that they would hook up after. It doesn't require a conspiracy to see that. [/quote]

She’s not on trial because she hooked up with BB. She’s on trial because she killed a man and it is hard to see how it’s justified.

She wakes up in the middle of the night and JR is in her room? Sure.

She saves CB’s life and CB confirms that without the Au pair’s action, she would’ve died, because JR had BB in a chokehold or something? Sure.

But here, the Au pair sought out the situation and then - even though BB was armed and had already shot JR - she runs to a safe, grabs another gun and fatally shoots JR? And ends up not “saving” anyone’s life anyway? She made a dumb decision to use lethal force and she should go to prison for it. [/quote]

Or, the guy who had apparently just stabbed a woman in the neck was moving towards her and her husband who was focused on rendering aide.[/quote]

Sure, anything is possible. So walk us through this. JR has been shot and - per an expert - blinded. Blood is pouring down his face. The Au pair comes to the room to save the day. In your scenario, he “moves toward her.” Does he follow her as she runs from the doorway to the gun safe? He can’t see, so is he following her scent? I guess there’d be a trail of blood backing this up?[/quote]

I think it was established JR was on the ground when shot by the au pair.[/quote]
He’s shot, but not stopped in that he is clearly still alive. The husband can’t both cover him and tend to his bleeding wife. He tells the au pair to get his gun from the safe, cover the guy, and if he so much as moves, to shoot him. She gets the gun, husband focuses on wife, guy moves (who knows for what purpose) and she shoots.

[Anonymous]

Now we have the BB defenders AND AP defenders.

Let's see what a jury says re: AP's actions. Since no motive is required to be established by statute, her own admissions are quite damning.