Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Separate trials, PP.

Separate trials for the same events.

If the commonwealth's theory is that BB and JPM conspired to murder JR and CB, then I'd think that JPM's charges would be superseded to a more serious Aggravated Murder count.

My understanding was that with the second degree charge for JPM, the commonwealth would only need to prove that JR wasn't a threat at the time JPM shot him. the difference between the levels of the charges is just a curious inconsistency to me.

I am curious too. If they are going to file superseded charges that will delay the trial. Time is now. Very curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“In a search warrant affidavit obtained by News4, investigators detailed recorded conversations between Peres Magalhaes and Banfield's mother, Teresa Banfield.

Detectives wrote that Peres Magalhaes communicated with Brendan and Teresa Banfield almost daily after she was jailed, either by phone or by texting and emailing with a jail tablet. The jail closely monitors both.

Detectives report that recordings reveal both Banfields warned Peres Magalhaes not to talk about the alleged crimes since the phone calls were recorded.

In one phone call, Teresa Banfield told Peres Magalhaes she’d been texting with one of the defense attorneys, who offered to make a delivery during a jail visit, according to the search warrant.

The document states Teresa Banfield then read the text aloud to Juliana. “Hi Tess. I will be going to visit Juliana this morning. Expected to be there around 9. If I, you know, if I have anything I’d give it to her," the affidavit said.

Detectives wrote that in the call, Teresa Banfield said she complained to the attorneys that some “things” were not getting to Peres Magalhaes and told them: “It’s the only way we can communicate with her about what’s happening.”

The defense attorney for Peres Magalhaes denied helping his client get any type of correspondence to Brendan Banfield or his mother.”

Well now we see how Brendan came to be such a morally upstanding citizen and husband.

[Anonymous]

Why would TB read that aloud knowing it’s monitored? If lawyer was going and making a handoff why create a record? Would happen either way.

Not finding letters in her cell proves nothing. She could have disposed of or he could have shown to her then taken when leaving, etc.

Is this something criminal lawyers do often? Why risk charges or disbarment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“In a search warrant affidavit obtained by News4, investigators detailed recorded conversations between Peres Magalhaes and Banfield's mother, Teresa Banfield.

Detectives wrote that Peres Magalhaes communicated with Brendan and Teresa Banfield almost daily after she was jailed, either by phone or by texting and emailing with a jail tablet. The jail closely monitors both.

Detectives report that recordings reveal both Banfields warned Peres Magalhaes not to talk about the alleged crimes since the phone calls were recorded.

In one phone call, Teresa Banfield told Peres Magalhaes she’d been texting with one of the defense attorneys, who offered to make a delivery during a jail visit, according to the search warrant.

The document states Teresa Banfield then read the text aloud to Juliana. “Hi Tess. I will be going to visit Juliana this morning. Expected to be there around 9. If I, you know, if I have anything I’d give it to her," the affidavit said.

Detectives wrote that in the call, Teresa Banfield said she complained to the attorneys that some “things” were not getting to Peres Magalhaes and told them: “It’s the only way we can communicate with her about what’s happening.”

The defense attorney for Peres Magalhaes denied helping his client get any type of correspondence to Brendan Banfield or his mother.”
-Adding TB’s cellphone was also seized.

Wasn’t the allegation that her lawyer was helping pass along communications FROM them? Thus the search of her cell for letters from them? This is outrageous conduct.

[Anonymous]

Didn't BB and JPM get rid of their phones and got new ones after the murder?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't BB and JPM get rid of their phones and got new ones after the murder?

Shortly, as in days, before, actually.

[Anonymous]

Have the prosecutors sought all communications between her attorney and the Banfields? They are not privileged.

If the attorney was trying to pass things along by cloaking them in privilege, he is going to be disbarred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would TB read that aloud knowing it’s monitored? If lawyer was going and making a handoff why create a record? Would happen either way.

Not finding letters in her cell proves nothing. She could have disposed of or he could have shown to her then taken when leaving, etc.

Is this something criminal lawyers do often? Why risk charges or disbarment?

Could she be trying to somehow throw the case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have the prosecutors sought all communications between her attorney and the Banfields? They are not privileged.

If the attorney was trying to pass things along by cloaking them in privilege, he is going to be disbarred.

I got to tell ya. It’s been a wild ride so far.

That judge has to be fuming at the allegations.

Seems like she may have more than one lawyer repeating her. Seems the one that has been mentioned on here is reputable.

Sounds like these goofs hired a serious attorney and, in addition, big mamma also hired Saul Goodman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have the prosecutors sought all communications between her attorney and the Banfields? They are not privileged.

If the attorney was trying to pass things along by cloaking them in privilege, he is going to be disbarred.

Cannot imagine why he would take that risk. If she ate the paper, flushed it, or he removed it when leaving, makes it harder to prove. Did the Banfields think paying the fee gave them A/C privilege?

[Anonymous]

The News4 video says that the hearing was held and judge was satisfied re: this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have the prosecutors sought all communications between her attorney and the Banfields? They are not privileged.

If the attorney was trying to pass things along by cloaking them in privilege, he is going to be disbarred.

I got to tell ya. It’s been a wild ride so far.

That judge has to be fuming at the allegations.

Seems like she may have more than one lawyer repeating her. Seems the one that has been mentioned on here is reputable.

Sounds like these goofs hired a serious attorney and, in addition, big mamma also hired Saul Goodman.

Same attorney/team.

[Anonymous]

Hopefully there will be additional coverage of the that search warrant and the hearing that was held with more details to be forthcoming. If the judge was satisfied that no letters were found, it must be the prosecutors that are fuming.

The NBC4 video posted has more details, the written story does not mention the hearing last month.

Looks like JPM is going to trial next month, with current legal team in place. SMH.

Does anyone know of a case with similar allegations re: the defense attorney?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully there will be additional coverage of the that search warrant and the hearing that was held with more details to be forthcoming. If the judge was satisfied that no letters were found, it must be the prosecutors that are fuming.

The NBC4 video posted has more details, the written story does not mention the hearing last month.

Looks like JPM is going to trial next month, with current legal team in place. SMH.

Does anyone know of a case with similar allegations re: the defense attorney?

Sorta similar, I think: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Stewart

[Anonymous]

Thanks, PP.