Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

And he's still going.................

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution closing is done.

Here comes the bumbling defense.

How did she do? Did she make most of the points we have discussed here and were in yesterday's texts about how implausible his whole story is?

I think good overall, I’m watching live and haven’t really analyzed but she overall focused a lot on how implausible it would be for Christine to set this up based on timing and the account activity, and ended with a good overview of the forensics that showed staging. She emphasized the defense never attempted to contradict any of that.

To answer another question, I don’t think she did bring up the work meeting. She did bring up that there’s no evidence Christine ever engaged in online dating or BDSM activity other than the defendant’s “self serving statements.”

Defense said he’s not gonna go through evidence but was just reading off a bunch of papers which were the digital PI’s slides that showed nothing except that sometimes Juliana used the account when Brendan was not home. It’s basically exactly what you would expect from the rest of the defense case, the points are there with respect to his job, but it’s very incoherent and rambling. He does have a portable mic today so that’s good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the guy that posted here saying he brought cookies to BB on his birthday. I’d like to publicly apologize. I did not believe in you at the time.

Me too I didn’t believe him, but I’m not apologizing cause I still think it’s weird AF especially since he said he’s just an acquaintance. My theory is he’s the parent of one of the kids Brendan coached or something like that. I could see bringing my kids coach cookies, but not some random Dad who is an acquaintance in the neighborhood.

Don’t call doing something nice for a friend or acquaintance weird AF. It’s nice. You’re weird AF for thinking that.

What PP said. I sometimes wonder about the people posting here. People calling/stopping by on your birthday is completely normal. OP, I hope you have someone in your life you thinks of you on your birthday.

You need to think about this from the perspective of discussing Brendan Banfield, not yourself and a friendly neighbor. Brendan Banfield, is an awkward narcissist who does not have a ton of friends. So yes, it does seem odd that someone who proclaimed himself a distant acquaintance who met him at the gym (where fitness is the point) Would drop off fat filled cookies for his birthday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution closing is done.

Here comes the bumbling defense.

How did she do? Did she make most of the points we have discussed here and were in yesterday's texts about how implausible his whole story is?

I wish she'd emphasized that his whole tale about having an important work meeting on Feb 24 was a big fat lie.

I didn't hear her mention that - did I miss it?

She’s was consistent. She’s a bit scrappy and it works. Impeccably succinct. Jurors will rely on it.
The jurors will remember nothing but the agony and sloppiness that Carroll put them through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution closing is done.

Here comes the bumbling defense.

How did she do? Did she make most of the points we have discussed here and were in yesterday's texts about how implausible his whole story is?

I think good overall, I’m watching live and haven’t really analyzed but she overall focused a lot on how implausible it would be for Christine to set this up based on timing and the account activity, and ended with a good overview of the forensics that showed staging. She emphasized the defense never attempted to contradict any of that.

To answer another question, I don’t think she did bring up the work meeting. She did bring up that there’s no evidence Christine ever engaged in online dating or BDSM activity other than the defendant’s “self serving statements.”

Defense said he’s not gonna go through evidence but was just reading off a bunch of papers which were the digital PI’s slides that showed nothing except that sometimes Juliana used the account when Brendan was not home. It’s basically exactly what you would expect from the rest of the defense case, the points are there with respect to his job, but it’s very incoherent and rambling. He does have a portable mic today so that’s good.

I don’t think she needed to bring up the work meeting- they just heard about it at the end of the day yesterday. That isn’t something they will forget. I thought she hit the right points. She made it clear that there is irrefutable evidence that shows BB and JM killed Joe and Christine.

[Anonymous]

Thankfully in the work meeting the jury will have remembered that from yesterday. And the point is obvious. Not like some of the other somewhat nuanced points made on this thread that need to be told.


But yes, weird of her not to mention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution closing is done.

Here comes the bumbling defense.

How did she do? Did she make most of the points we have discussed here and were in yesterday's texts about how implausible his whole story is?

I think good overall, I’m watching live and haven’t really analyzed but she overall focused a lot on how implausible it would be for Christine to set this up based on timing and the account activity, and ended with a good overview of the forensics that showed staging. She emphasized the defense never attempted to contradict any of that.

To answer another question, I don’t think she did bring up the work meeting. She did bring up that there’s no evidence Christine ever engaged in online dating or BDSM activity other than the defendant’s “self serving statements.”

Defense said he’s not gonna go through evidence but was just reading off a bunch of papers which were the digital PI’s slides that showed nothing except that sometimes Juliana used the account when Brendan was not home. It’s basically exactly what you would expect from the rest of the defense case, the points are there with respect to his job, but it’s very incoherent and rambling. He does have a portable mic today so that’s good.

I don’t think she needed to bring up the work meeting- they just heard about it at the end of the day yesterday. That isn’t something they will forget. I thought she hit the right points. She made it clear that there is irrefutable evidence that shows BB and JM killed Joe and Christine.

Yes she did well, can't tell you how important being succinct is - especially as counter to Mr. Stumble/Bumble. I would have given 1 sentence to blatant meeting lie (just to get in notes jurors are taking during closing).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t think she needed to bring up the work meeting- they just heard about it at the end of the day yesterday. That isn’t something they will forget. I thought she hit the right points. She made it clear that there is irrefutable evidence that shows BB and JM killed Joe and Christine.

I do agree, I don’t think it detracted from her closing at all. I think it was better to focus on tying things together and it wasn’t really necessary to review self evident items like that.

[Anonymous]

I assume defense counsel hasn’t brought up the work meeting lie and try to explain it?

Would be incredibly stupid. But…

If he did, could she do 5 minute rebuttal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the guy that posted here saying he brought cookies to BB on his birthday. I’d like to publicly apologize. I did not believe in you at the time.

Me too I didn’t believe him, but I’m not apologizing cause I still think it’s weird AF especially since he said he’s just an acquaintance. My theory is he’s the parent of one of the kids Brendan coached or something like that. I could see bringing my kids coach cookies, but not some random Dad who is an acquaintance in the neighborhood.

Don’t call doing something nice for a friend or acquaintance weird AF. It’s nice. You’re weird AF for thinking that.

What PP said. I sometimes wonder about the people posting here. People calling/stopping by on your birthday is completely normal. OP, I hope you have someone in your life you thinks of you on your birthday.

You need to think about this from the perspective of discussing Brendan Banfield, not yourself and a friendly neighbor. Brendan Banfield, is an awkward narcissist who does not have a ton of friends. So yes, it does seem odd that someone who proclaimed himself a distant acquaintance who met him at the gym (where fitness is the point) Would drop off fat filled cookies for his birthday.

It seems like he had plenty of friends? Even back in NY? Even during the trial he mentioned a birthday party being thrown by friends in New York? Narcissist, yes. Manipulative, yes. Psychopath, maybe. He's sociable enough to have multiple affair partners, why do you think he had no friends?

[Anonymous]

He had friends, people have spoken up earlier in this thread saying they used to be his friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution closing is done.

Here comes the bumbling defense.

How did she do? Did she make most of the points we have discussed here and were in yesterday's texts about how implausible his whole story is?

I wish she'd emphasized that his whole tale about having an important work meeting on Feb 24 was a big fat lie.

I didn't hear her mention that - did I miss it?

I didn't hear her point that out either. I hope they didn't miss this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume defense counsel hasn’t brought up the work meeting lie and try to explain it?

Would be incredibly stupid. But…

If he did, could she do 5 minute rebuttal?

You would be amazed at what he is bringing up, but I think the fake work meeting just stands on its own imo. An obvious lie.

Prosecution does get a rebuttal but I imagine it’ll focus on some stuff Carroll just insisted about Christine logging onto the laptop at 7:33am, placing her “devices” in the drawer, meeting Joe and walking upstairs with Joe.

Honestly Carroll just did a lot so I don’t know, but that part stood out.

[Anonymous]

Prosecution starting off with “defense has an interesting recollection of the evidence, but it doesn’t match ours.”

[Anonymous]

I’m behind but a lecture on understanding digital forensics from the I’m not a cat guy is rich!