Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Unlike this poster I do know the law, and about the actual case, and I am speaking up because this is smearing the commonwealth and the prosecution unfairly. The court of public opinion is just that but if I possibly can make it clear what is actually happening and support the prosecution, Fairfax County police, and help support justice for Joseph Ryan, and Christine Banfield, I will let people know the reality of the case with a clear and fair analysis of what is actually happening. Critical thinking is important here, especially when court tv and everyone under the sun pretends they know the truth, for them its about creating drama, for me its about the victims, their families, and justice.

If you have first hand knowledge of this case based on anything other than observing in the courtroom, then you must be aware that what you are doing by commenting here is highly improper.

Wrong! Nothing I said was false or improper, it’s all on public record, and I am not under your personal scrutiny, I am not part of the law at all. I am just not making up crap and smearing the prosecution, or the police. Stop pretending you have some moral ground or legal right to take away my accurate, I must say opinions, and information on the open legal case. My first hand knowledge is from knowing what is going on in the hearings and reporting back in simple terms what the judge has ruled publicly and consistently so far in court.

Please don’t let them silence you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Unlike this poster I do know the law, and about the actual case, and I am speaking up because this is smearing the commonwealth and the prosecution unfairly. The court of public opinion is just that but if I possibly can make it clear what is actually happening and support the prosecution, Fairfax County police, and help support justice for Joseph Ryan, and Christine Banfield, I will let people know the reality of the case with a clear and fair analysis of what is actually happening. Critical thinking is important here, especially when court tv and everyone under the sun pretends they know the truth, for them its about creating drama, for me its about the victims, their families, and justice.

If you have first hand knowledge of this case based on anything other than observing in the courtroom, then you must be aware that what you are doing by commenting here is highly improper.

Wrong! Nothing I said was false or improper, it’s all on public record, and I am not under your personal scrutiny, I am not part of the law at all. I am just not making up crap and smearing the prosecution, or the police. Stop pretending you have some moral ground or legal right to take away my accurate, I must say opinions, and information on the open legal case. My first hand knowledge is from knowing what is going on in the hearings and reporting back in simple terms what the judge has ruled publicly and consistently so far in court.

Please don’t let them silence you.

They won't and cant! thank you

[Anonymous]

News articles are out now stating the trial is delayed bc of the Commonwealths alleged “drinking in public” incident.

[Anonymous]

https://wjla.com/news/local/fairfax-prosecutor-taken-off-au-pair-double-murder-case-after-drinking-incident-brendan-banfield-eric-clingan-commonwealths-attorney

[Anonymous]

DumbaZz prosecutor! Still doesn’t change the fact that Brendan Banfield murdered his wife and a stranger then played house with his nasty nanny.

[Anonymous]

The longer the wait till trial the longer Juliana the murderer stays in prison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

DP- the PP was simply saying their DH was scheduled for jury DUTY that day. Not that he had been selected for the jury for this case. Relax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:News articles are out now stating the trial is delayed bc of the Commonwealths alleged “drinking in public” incident.

The lead prosecutor was sited for public intoxication. He is a person who is dealing with his alcohol use. I know he took a break to collect himself and is still dedicated to the prosecution. He is part of a team, and has a long career. He is in no way a delinquent or poor lawyer. This leak of the video was done at this exact time likely by the defense to further add doubt. So far the judge being aware of all this has ruled each time in favor of the prosecution team. The new court date in January was the defense attempting to get more time. The prosecution did not formally object so that later after the trial the defense can not use it as an excuse to try to get a mistrial.

The previous leak of the Juliana police interview was leaked to the press also in an attempt to help Brandons defense team. Who ever is posting these sorts of things are trying to sway what happened.

Todays new trial date is ONLY to give the defense more reasonable time for files they demanded that are inter police documents, for a police force and investigation the judge has repeatedly ruled and publicly stated has NO wrong doing, and followed procedure. The press and especially the news without knowing or investigating the real story behind the story is tossing out read meat to get people to read or watch their stories. They are inaccurate or use titles that are click bait.

Try everyone not to feed into what is intentional false or made up narrative on the part of the defense about many aspects of this case. One man drinking at the wrong time, but then clearly making personal shifts to correct this does not mean he is negative worthless lawyer not fighting for justice. It means he has some personal issues and needs to work through them and put this case first and not mess up again. It doesnt mean he and the entire team, and the Fairfax police department are worthless, or dropping the ball. It means they are all human still dedicated to the truth, and justice, and that they care about the murders of Christine and Joe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

DP- the PP was simply saying their DH was scheduled for jury DUTY that day. Not that he had been selected for the jury for this case. Relax.

they suggested that jury selection started, no one needs to relax. This is not a relaxed subject for many people who care about justice and truth, and who care about Christine and Joe, and their families. So I said what I said and I am not sorry, and I don't need to relax. Perhaps you should stop relaxing and take this seriously instead. It never feels good when someone tells you to relax, people are allowed to be passionate about what matters to them. This matters to Me, I dont need to behave, or be silent, I dont need to joke about it or be pretty...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

DP- the PP was simply saying their DH was scheduled for jury DUTY that day. Not that he had been selected for the jury for this case. Relax.

they suggested that jury selection started, no one needs to relax. This is not a relaxed subject for many people who care about justice and truth, and who care about Christine and Joe, and their families. So I said what I said and I am not sorry, and I don't need to relax. Perhaps you should stop relaxing and take this seriously instead. It never feels good when someone tells you to relax, people are allowed to be passionate about what matters to them. This matters to Me, I dont need to behave, or be silent, I dont need to joke about it or be pretty...

No. They said their DH has jury duty on 10/20. Nothing about jury selection for a specific trial. Do you understand how jury duty works? The man STILL has jury duty that day. There are dozens of cases on the docket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

DP- the PP was simply saying their DH was scheduled for jury DUTY that day. Not that he had been selected for the jury for this case. Relax.

they suggested that jury selection started, no one needs to relax. This is not a relaxed subject for many people who care about justice and truth, and who care about Christine and Joe, and their families. So I said what I said and I am not sorry, and I don't need to relax. Perhaps you should stop relaxing and take this seriously instead. It never feels good when someone tells you to relax, people are allowed to be passionate about what matters to them. This matters to Me, I dont need to behave, or be silent, I dont need to joke about it or be pretty...

They did not, and while your posts are informative you're going to end up talking to yourself if you continue to just be rude and attacking everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

DP- the PP was simply saying their DH was scheduled for jury DUTY that day. Not that he had been selected for the jury for this case. Relax.

they suggested that jury selection started, no one needs to relax. This is not a relaxed subject for many people who care about justice and truth, and who care about Christine and Joe, and their families. So I said what I said and I am not sorry, and I don't need to relax. Perhaps you should stop relaxing and take this seriously instead. It never feels good when someone tells you to relax, people are allowed to be passionate about what matters to them. This matters to Me, I dont need to behave, or be silent, I dont need to joke about it or be pretty...

They did not, and while your posts are informative you're going to end up talking to yourself if you continue to just be rude and attacking everyone.

I attacked no one. I was told to relax, which is not appropriate in this case. Maybe I should relax but I still don't need lectures and I wasn't rude. Should I just be silent and not inform people about what is actually happening in court? That seems like a mistake. Perhaps using less emotion might be a good plan and perhaps you are right however it's a very emotional topic for me. I am doing my very best to interject appropriately when I can see clearly there are messages intended to intentionally mislead the public by both the press and the defense. In the presses case it is to get people to pay attention, and they are suggesting inproper and inaccurate things from the prosecution as a team, and the police department itself. I think these things are serious and so I react because of that. Clearly I misunderstood what the one poster said. However I am sincere about what I said and why about the case. I do care and that is why I am doing my best to not call names or attack posters. This is a public forum and I am simply trying to be clear about what I see is happening and doing my best to convey it in an appropriate way. I make mistakes, but I am not being openly rude. I see attacks as name calling or being crude in someway. I have not done this at all. Being asked to relax is a trigger for most people. I think the information I have given about the case is more important than always having a perfect tone. I will try to improve but why must I walk on eggshells in this way when my intentions are clearly to advocate for a fair trial and to tell the truth as I see it. It sure is different than the narrative the defense is attempting to create, or the click bait that journalism or court tv creates to increase viewers and eyes. At least what I seek is justice. Cut me some slack my filter is at least honest and humanitarian rather than manipulative, self serving, or dishonest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the jury.

It has not been chosen yet. But I sure hope someone from here is on there.

If it had actually started on 10/20 as planned, my DH was called for jury duty that day.

this is NOT accurate. The new trial date with jury selection start on January 13th of next year. This date was decided today in court. There has NOT been a jury selected as of yet at all.

DP- the PP was simply saying their DH was scheduled for jury DUTY that day. Not that he had been selected for the jury for this case. Relax.

they suggested that jury selection started, no one needs to relax. This is not a relaxed subject for many people who care about justice and truth, and who care about Christine and Joe, and their families. So I said what I said and I am not sorry, and I don't need to relax. Perhaps you should stop relaxing and take this seriously instead. It never feels good when someone tells you to relax, people are allowed to be passionate about what matters to them. This matters to Me, I dont need to behave, or be silent, I dont need to joke about it or be pretty...

No. They said their DH has jury duty on 10/20. Nothing about jury selection for a specific trial. Do you understand how jury duty works? The man STILL has jury duty that day. There are dozens of cases on the docket.

do you understand that you are calling me out and saying Im being rude while speaking in a degrading way to me? Yes I understand how jury works, and jury selection did not start, and it doesnt matter if a room of people were asked to show up, the actual selection process starts now at the new date I listed on January 13th. It doesn't so much matter that I misunderstood what they said and reacted slightly. There is no need to police what I am sharing and to call me out while also then doing the actual thing you are saying I did. It doesnt make much sense to do this, and I would ask you to stop monitoring how I am posting and focus on your own please. Why not worry about the real things going on here, the important things and not about personally regulating other posters? My reactions related to reading posts in this forum over all that were casting a bad light on a defense that is fighting for the justice of two murdered people. I think one thing might be more important to focus on than if I am a bit reactionary or even confused about what a poster was trying to say. Is being so right more important than the grief those who might be reading this or posting these things might be feeling right now. This is a double murder case of people who have friends and family, here now, in this moment... reading and posting this.