Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG!!! BBs mom!!

“Clingan said at Banfield’s bond hearing that Banfield’s mother is bankrolling the au pair’s defense and “controlling the ability of the co-defendant to cooperate.”

Watch out lady before you get charged with something yourself!

I was the one that questioned whether Banflied paying for Juliana's defense might be a conflict of interest and had two people suggesting I was an idiot, and well, well, well...

To be fair, just paying for the legal fees is not a conflict of interest, but the fact that BBs mom is not only paying for it, but went to the jail and asked Juliana if she knew what happened to snitches is potentially intimidating a witness, impeding and investigation and blackmail since she’s paying for the legal fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is it known that there were no signs of struggle? Has the prosecution or LE released a full autopsy?

I don't believe the full autopsy has been released. I think the prosecution has a mountain of evidence that has not been released and will only come out at trial or in pre-trial hearings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG!!! BBs mom!!

“Clingan said at Banfield’s bond hearing that Banfield’s mother is bankrolling the au pair’s defense and “controlling the ability of the co-defendant to cooperate.”

Watch out lady before you get charged with something yourself!

I was the one that questioned whether Banflied paying for Juliana's defense might be a conflict of interest and had two people suggesting I was an idiot, and well, well, well...

To be fair, just paying for the legal fees is not a conflict of interest, but the fact that BBs mom is not only paying for it, but went to the jail and asked Juliana if she knew what happened to snitches is potentially intimidating a witness, impeding and investigation and blackmail since she’s paying for the legal fees.

PP here - and I agree in general. Especially as it's the mom of the defendant and not the defendant himself. Still, the fact that the mother has been seemingly threatening Juliana while she's in jail is an indication that the mom is a meddler. If I'm the defense attorney I don't want to open myself up to a complaint that I was influenced by the person paying my bills. And if I'm the prosecutor I don't want to risk the defendant being able to raise an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new photos in that link…. Disgusting. I hope they rot in jail

Wow yeah, I missed those at first. No question at this point that the affair started prior to the murders (selfie of them kissing Jan 2023). Plus evidence it was not his first affair.

NOO WAY! you think they had affair prior to the murders!!?? You are a rocket scientist !

I always did, but there was some questioning if the affair did actually start prior. But thanks for the insult. Maybe get outside and touch grass?

When you feel the need to tell someone to touch grass, you’ve lost credibility.

Not if it's reserved for people who have clearly been online way too much. I don't mind it. There's no need to insult people on this thread. And we've got one person that really enjoys doing it.

Agree, but also Telling someone they need to “touch grass” is a passive aggressive insult.

There's nothing passive about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Prosecutors presented photo evidence of Banfield’s relationship with the au pair, noting this was not his first affair. They also highlighted the proximity of three major airports in the Washington, D.C. area, suggesting Banfield could easily flee. Additionally, evidence was shown indicating Banfield was learning Portuguese and preparing for a life in Brazil."

https://www.fox5dc.com/news/bond-denied-virginia-man-charged-double-homicide-left-wife-another-man-dead?

Whoa. That's a twist.

They had airline tickets booked as well as her obtaining a new passport.

I wonder if there was a passport for the child. Poor little girl.

I bet the plan was to leave her with Big Momma in US. Juliana was said to be jealous when BB paid attention to the child, there is the language issue, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it known that there were no signs of struggle? Has the prosecution or LE released a full autopsy?

I don't believe the full autopsy has been released. I think the prosecution has a mountain of evidence that has not been released and will only come out at trial or in pre-trial hearings.

So, then why are people posting here saying that there were no signs of struggle on CB’s body if there is no publicly released evidence of that?

[Anonymous]

Anyone know when BB’s trial date actually is? The news articles only say Feb 2025. Is the information posted online?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


a couple points about the photos here:

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2024/09/Brendan-Banfield-Court-Documents.pdf


Page 2. Not a very flattering photo of Julianna.

Page 3 Juliannas shooting stance looks pretty bad. She's back on her heels.

Page 5. Brenden didn't get the Glock blue label discount for the purchase of the 43x. Glock offers law enforcement officers a blue label price of a little under 400 bucks for the Glock 43x mos. oof.

Page 6. A photo of a knife, a rope and a chain. Anyone else notice anything conspicuously absent from the photo? I doubt this is the murder weapon. the pictured knife looks very clean.

the knife is shown with blood on it, on the floor at the foot of the bed, in the Post article

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-law/2024/09/04/herndon-au-pair-affair-trial/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


a couple points about the photos here:

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2024/09/Brendan-Banfield-Court-Documents.pdf


Page 2. Not a very flattering photo of Julianna.

Page 3 Juliannas shooting stance looks pretty bad. She's back on her heels.

Page 5. Brenden didn't get the Glock blue label discount for the purchase of the 43x. Glock offers law enforcement officers a blue label price of a little under 400 bucks for the Glock 43x mos. oof.

Page 6. A photo of a knife, a rope and a chain. Anyone else notice anything conspicuously absent from the photo? I doubt this is the murder weapon. the pictured knife looks very clean.

the knife is shown with blood on it, on the floor at the foot of the bed, in the Post article

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-law/2024/09/04/herndon-au-pair-affair-trial/

It’s possible that what is shown in the picture was staged by the accused. It doesn’t necessarily mean that that was the knife used in the murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


a couple points about the photos here:

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2024/09/Brendan-Banfield-Court-Documents.pdf


Page 2. Not a very flattering photo of Julianna.

Page 3 Juliannas shooting stance looks pretty bad. She's back on her heels.

Page 5. Brenden didn't get the Glock blue label discount for the purchase of the 43x. Glock offers law enforcement officers a blue label price of a little under 400 bucks for the Glock 43x mos. oof.

Page 6. A photo of a knife, a rope and a chain. Anyone else notice anything conspicuously absent from the photo? I doubt this is the murder weapon. the pictured knife looks very clean.

the knife is shown with blood on it, on the floor at the foot of the bed, in the Post article

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-law/2024/09/04/herndon-au-pair-affair-trial/

Well that is interesting. So then two knives.? The one pictured in the wapo article that is bloody and the other one pictured with the rope and chain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone know when BB’s trial date actually is? The news articles only say Feb 2025. Is the information posted online?

Yes it’s in the case info online.
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/apps/ECS_Public/

02/03/2025 10:00 AM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing I was thinking. Isn’t Telegram a phone app? So technically it would have to be on CB’s phone, right? Or it would be too obvious….

She could’ve had telegram on her phone, but never communicated with Joe. Two things can be true.

Yea, but the police had to get those conversations somehow. They know which phone was used.

Exactly, I don’t think they would just use BB or JM’s phone bc that would be too obvious. Technically, it had to be CB’s phone. That would be part of the story they were trying to set up.

Yes, obviously.

Why would they have needed to send a photo of CB in swimsuit to their email if they were going to use her phone to upload it? If that was the case, they would upload the photo from her phone, which it appears they did not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing I was thinking. Isn’t Telegram a phone app? So technically it would have to be on CB’s phone, right? Or it would be too obvious….

She could’ve had telegram on her phone, but never communicated with Joe. Two things can be true.

Yea, but the police had to get those conversations somehow. They know which phone was used.

Exactly, I don’t think they would just use BB or JM’s phone bc that would be too obvious. Technically, it had to be CB’s phone. That would be part of the story they were trying to set up.

Yes, obviously.

Why would they have needed to send a photo of CB in swimsuit to their email if they were going to use her phone to upload it? If that was the case, they would upload the photo from her phone, which it appears they did not.

Thought the Commonwealth is claiming they used her LAPTOP, not phone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


a couple points about the photos here:

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2024/09/Brendan-Banfield-Court-Documents.pdf


Page 2. Not a very flattering photo of Julianna.

Page 3 Juliannas shooting stance looks pretty bad. She's back on her heels.

Page 5. Brenden didn't get the Glock blue label discount for the purchase of the 43x. Glock offers law enforcement officers a blue label price of a little under 400 bucks for the Glock 43x mos. oof.

Page 6. A photo of a knife, a rope and a chain. Anyone else notice anything conspicuously absent from the photo? I doubt this is the murder weapon. the pictured knife looks very clean.

the knife is shown with blood on it, on the floor at the foot of the bed, in the Post article

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-law/2024/09/04/herndon-au-pair-affair-trial/

It’s possible that what is shown in the picture was staged by the accused. It doesn’t necessarily mean that that was the knife used in the murder.

I don’t know what the respective pictures are supposed to represent. I do know that bb is remarkably bad at criming.

My man wasn’t an agent long enough to learn that. Three people can keep a secret if two are dead?

JM has done better than one might expect. Only little slips along the way. (That we know of).

Bb is in a rough spot and he knows it. He’s going away until he’s a feeble old man, if not forever. He deserves everything coming to him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one thing that certain PPs keep asserting without ANY evidence from police is that CB was drugged.

That's a HUGE leap from what is publicly known. All the other hypotheses about who was where and who did what are based on the pieces of evidence that we know. But, the whole premise that she was drugged is entirely unsupported despite recent international events.

The strongest theories of the case account for CB's whereabouts and actions without adding drugs into the theory.

It best accounts for no signs of struggle or defensive actions or wounds to BB as she fought for her life.

What else explains?

Very simple to do. Then only 1 victim to overpower.

What are your theories as to where she was?

Why do you think there were no signs of struggle?

Why do you think there were no scratches to BB as CB fought for her life?

I’m finding it fascinating what theories people are willing to entertain and which ones they say are victim blaming/shaming and wildly inappropriate.

What are your theories as to where she was?

Why do you think there were no signs of struggle?

Why do you think there were no scratches to BB as CB fought for her life?

I don’t have theories, but I’ve asked the same questions you have and was told that I was derailing the conversation 🙄

The ones who want to baselessly speculate about CB in ways that are similar to BB's agenda don't like the brutal killings to be discussed, only victim smearing speculation. Just ignore and as Jeff says, don't feed the trolls. The victim smearing did not work re: LE or Commonwealth, nothing else matters. A jury will be horrified by the facts of the KILLINGS. And that a little girl was left with no mommy.

It isn't baseless speculation. There are many reasons why there is valid speculation into what CB knew of JR prior to the morning of the murder:
-The account was created on her computer
-JR talked to someone he thought was CB
-A friend of JR said he was planning to meet a couple he had previously met. JR was sent a picture of CB so he knew what she looked like
-There was likely a time when CB and JR were in the house prior to BB arriving. This would have been easier to manage if CR was expecting JR
-There have been NO reports of CB being drugged

We are all here speculating, including you. You don't get to draw the line on what is OK and your speculation isn't more acceptable than anyone else's because you end it with faux concern for the victim's families.

It really doesn't matter whether Christine was into kinky fetish sex or not. What matters is that her husband and his girlfriend killed her and Joe. The reason that Joe was in the house DOES. NOT. MATTER.