Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Prosecution said they have 2 witnesses left. Who do you think it could be ?
Could the former au pair be one of them?

[Anonymous]

Brendan's mother was served a subpoena, so maybe she will be one of the two remaining witnesses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Brendan's mother was served a subpoena, so maybe she will be one of the two remaining witnesses?

I think she’s a defense witness, not prosecution’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we revisit that he paid $30k+ to get the windows?!

Why? That’s what that many windows for a house that big would cost. Have you priced windows lately?

Yes, but presumably he didn’t need windows, just got them to dampen the sound.

Eh, the house probably had builder grade windows, so they wanted better, as in the double pane with energy treatment. What they didn’t actually need were the triple pane which was more sound deadening. He had a different reason for wanting that.

The house is about 25 years old, so the builder grade windows probably needed to be replaced. As for double or triple pane, since they're being replaced, there's not a huge difference in price. Considering noise from Dulles and somewhat lower energy costs, he didn't need killing his wife to justify the cost delta.

The salesperson specifically said that most people don’t get the triple pane. I’m not sure what the difference is, but why pay more when money is already tight?

Most don’t, but most don’t live as close to Dulles. I do. They are about half a mile closer than I am and it can get annoying here.

[Anonymous]

I thought someone might testify to Christine’s blood clotting disorder. I was also surprised that that wasn’t mentioned in the prosecution’s opening statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the defense ask any questions about whether the forensic experts discovered any evidence that Christine fought back at anytime? Or if she was asleep until she was woken up by the stabbing? I hope the prosecution clears that time gap up because they will definitely show the jury the extent that the murder happened before Joe even started any of the planned fantasy. And it will dispute the claim that BB disrupted Joe attempting to kill Christine.

That doesn’t matter. They have evidence that BB catfished Joe. No one thinks BB tried to save the day.

It would be a big deal if they found Brendan’s dna under CB’s nails, for example

I thought the prosecution raised some unanswered questions about this. Juliana testified that she spoke to Joe on the phone and he commented on her accent. I'm not sure why they wanted to elicit that. How did Joe then not realize that Christine was a different person when he arrived in person?

I haven’t been listening to the testimony but my guess is that basically as soon as he walked into the bedroom he knew something was off and I think he was shot pretty much right thereafter. I don’t think the sex scenario had even started — there’s no indication that she was bound, for instance.

No, as soon as Joe pulled up, Juliana testified that she called Brendan who had to drive from McDonald’s which was several minutes from the house. So he was in that bedroom for at least several minutes. Brenden had to go home, enter enter through the basement and go up two flights of stairs. Also, they found Christine’s pajamas ripped or cut but I guess we don’t know if Joe did that or Brendan. I don’t recall Juliana talking about that.

I think it's most likely that Joe cut her clothes.. wasn't that part of the plan? lets face it, if Brendan had cut her clothes off, he would have screwed it up.

I think the blood on the interior of the closed backpack is a big point.

I would have preferred the prosecution spend more time on the backpack than the wet spot on JP's bed.

The defense mentioned that he intends to voir dire his first witness before the jury comes in. I'm guessing that's big mamma?

might get spicy if the prosecution goes into the snitches get stitches statement. gets messy with the search warrant on big mammas phone and the attorney's phones

“I think the blood on the interior of the closed backpack is a big point.”
I missed that fact!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought someone might testify to Christine’s blood clotting disorder. I was also surprised that that wasn’t mentioned in the prosecution’s opening statement.

They talked about it. Juliana said she wasn’t aware if Christine took medication for that or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the defense ask any questions about whether the forensic experts discovered any evidence that Christine fought back at anytime? Or if she was asleep until she was woken up by the stabbing? I hope the prosecution clears that time gap up because they will definitely show the jury the extent that the murder happened before Joe even started any of the planned fantasy. And it will dispute the claim that BB disrupted Joe attempting to kill Christine.

That doesn’t matter. They have evidence that BB catfished Joe. No one thinks BB tried to save the day.

It would be a big deal if they found Brendan’s dna under CB’s nails, for example

I thought the prosecution raised some unanswered questions about this. Juliana testified that she spoke to Joe on the phone and he commented on her accent. I'm not sure why they wanted to elicit that. How did Joe then not realize that Christine was a different person when he arrived in person?

I haven’t been listening to the testimony but my guess is that basically as soon as he walked into the bedroom he knew something was off and I think he was shot pretty much right thereafter. I don’t think the sex scenario had even started — there’s no indication that she was bound, for instance.

No, as soon as Joe pulled up, Juliana testified that she called Brendan who had to drive from McDonald’s which was several minutes from the house. So he was in that bedroom for at least several minutes. Brenden had to go home, enter enter through the basement and go up two flights of stairs. Also, they found Christine’s pajamas ripped or cut but I guess we don’t know if Joe did that or Brendan. I don’t recall Juliana talking about that.

I think it's most likely that Joe cut her clothes.. wasn't that part of the plan? lets face it, if Brendan had cut her clothes off, he would have screwed it up.

I think the blood on the interior of the closed backpack is a big point.

I would have preferred the prosecution spend more time on the backpack than the wet spot on JP's bed.

The defense mentioned that he intends to voir dire his first witness before the jury comes in. I'm guessing that's big mamma?

might get spicy if the prosecution goes into the snitches get stitches statement. gets messy with the search warrant on big mammas phone and the attorney's phones

“I think the blood on the interior of the closed backpack is a big point.”
I missed that fact!

I may have misspoke when I said that. In preliminary statements, out of court, I think they mentioned that the contents of the backpack were changed after Joe was deceased. I believe they also mention Joe's position was moved post mortem. I went back and looked at the transcript of the opening statements the backpack wasn't mentioned in the opening statements.

If the CW presented evidence that the backpack was manipulated or Joe was positioned after death either they did a poor job of that, or I missed it.

There are parts of this story that don't make sense like BB directing JMP to the safe when she already had the gun.

It doesn't make sense that BB armed JMP.

I believe the murders went down as the prosecution theorized. I believe they'll secure a conviction...

I'm a little surprised the bit about the JMP's wetspot wasn't objected to and was allowed in.. what probative value does that add?

the defense admitted to the affair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution said they have 2 witnesses left. Who do you think it could be ?
Could the former au pair be one of them?

I’d love to hear the previous au pair’s impressions of Brendan while living in the same house. But then again, I’m sure the prosecution has interviewed her and if she had nothing to say to support the prosecution she won’t be called as a witness.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know if the victims families are at court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution said they have 2 witnesses left. Who do you think it could be ?
Could the former au pair be one of them?

She has not been subpoenaed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we revisit that he paid $30k+ to get the windows?!

Why? That’s what that many windows for a house that big would cost. Have you priced windows lately?

Yes, but presumably he didn’t need windows, just got them to dampen the sound.

Eh, the house probably had builder grade windows, so they wanted better, as in the double pane with energy treatment. What they didn’t actually need were the triple pane which was more sound deadening. He had a different reason for wanting that.

The house is about 25 years old, so the builder grade windows probably needed to be replaced. As for double or triple pane, since they're being replaced, there's not a huge difference in price. Considering noise from Dulles and somewhat lower energy costs, he didn't need killing his wife to justify the cost delta.

The salesperson specifically said that most people don’t get the triple pane. I’m not sure what the difference is, but why pay more when money is already tight?

Future savings on rising energy bills? It's possible to think about the future when making decisions.

To break even on 30k??

Sigh. To break even on the marginal value of triple- versus double- pane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought someone might testify to Christine’s blood clotting disorder. I was also surprised that that wasn’t mentioned in the prosecution’s opening statement.

There is an OBGYN subpoenaed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution said they have 2 witnesses left. Who do you think it could be ?
Could the former au pair be one of them?

I’d love to hear the previous au pair’s impressions of Brendan while living in the same house. But then again, I’m sure the prosecution has interviewed her and if she had nothing to say to support the prosecution she won’t be called as a witness.

Im curious about this as well. I also wonder if she gets to see Valerie.

No. Tess cut everyone off. Everyone that defendes or believed CB was not the one that caused all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the victims families are at court?

I saw Christine’s parents and her sister. Did not see anyone from Joe’s side.