Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wonder of Mama and Daddy Banfield destroyed their retirement savings paying for their mess of a son and his side piece.

Even odd they refuse to pay the sorry excuse of a lawyer and then declare bankruptcy if he tries to collect. A lot of defense lawyers get the money up front — given what a mess he was, I wonder if he failed to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Justice for my friend Joe, finally. RIP, bud. Go be with your beloved old dogs now.

I am so glad for this verdict for Joe and Christine. May their memories be blessings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder of Mama and Daddy Banfield destroyed their retirement savings paying for their mess of a son and his side piece.

Even odd they refuse to pay the sorry excuse of a lawyer and then declare bankruptcy if he tries to collect. A lot of defense lawyers get the money up front — given what a mess he was, I wonder if he failed to do that.

It was pooled by his father and stepmother and his mother and her partner. Maybe there is a loan on the house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why Brendan and Tess restricted access to the child from Christine’s parents. Wouldn’t that make them look 100000x more guilty? I feel so bad for the child.

I wonder if it is because she heard, or saw, things that would incriminate them. Or overheard them talking in the days after the murder. They didn't want to risk having her mention things she overheard to Christine's parents. I'm honestly glad they didn't kill her too at some point. They're so depraved.

Calling Juliana Mommy and sleeping in daddy’s bed would have been enough to relay. IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think that Christine’s parents or other family members will seek custody of the child? I know it will be hard for her to be moved now but she has been living with essentially an accessory after the fact to the crime, right? If Fairfax doesn’t prosecute Tess for anything related to the case, do Christine’s family have any chance of custody? Have they tried for custody ever in these years?

Maybe family member. Parents seem very old to take care of a kid.

And what do you think Tess is like? I envision an ogre 👹 plus the great grandmother lives with them in that house of horror!

Christine has a sister. Her father testified and was quite coherent and composed facing that monster. Her mother will fight to the death for custody.

Former au pair will absolutely step in. She has posted a lot about Christine on Instagram. She’s devastated. From the pics she posted of her wedding, it appears that Christine was matron of honor and Valerie was flower girl. IIRC, they talked every week. I did not stalk her socials. Someone posted a link in Reddit. She’s a lovely girl.

I truly believe statements like this are wishful thinking. The former au pair, as lovely as she may be, may not be willing to adopt and raise a child for the next 10+ years, even if she loved that child in the past, especially considering she now hasn't seen that child for more than 2 years, the child hasn't seen her, and the child will likely have significant psychological support needs as she grows up. I think it's easy to look at these situations with rose colored glasses and say "her babysitter from when she was in diapers will surely adopt her, even though now she's an 8 year old and hasn't seen her in years". I wish that would happen too, but, the most realistic scenario is that BB's mom continues to have custody for the short term, and that CB's parents get custody for the long term if they apply for custody, IF the state can show that BB's mom is detrimental to her well being. But plenty of parents are detrimental to a child's well being, and the state reunifies them over and over again even if a more capable, kinder, more stable family member wants custody of that child. Since BB's mom has had her this whole time, taking custody away from BB's mom will likely not be easy if she isn't physically abusing her and if the child seems to be doing relatively well. I hope I'm wrong. I do think a judge will force BB's mom to allow CB's parents to see her, though, now that custody will be taken from BB I'm assuming.

But didn't his mom basically get it because Brendan gave it to her because he was the only living parent and hadn't been convicted? And now, he can be deemed an unfit parent, and then I guess she becomes a ward of the state until someone petitions for custody, which I presume both sets of grandparents will do? Anyone know the procedure?

I believe that yes, since BB had (and likely, at this moment, still does have) full legal custody of her, he can fully control who she stays with. If he loses legal custody, then the state will have to decide where she goes, but the default is going to be to keep her where she is unless there is abuse, neglect, etc. because that would be considered the least disruptive for the child. This situation obviously has extenuating circumstances given that the person who she has been with for the past couple of years (and ONLY with, the past 6+ months since BB went to jail) is the mother of the person who murdered her mother, but it's also one of her 4 closest living relatives, and if they currently have a strong bond and the child is well cared for... i don't know. It would be hard to say.

I do know that being incarcerated does NOT automatically terminate your parental rights. An old friend of mine has a child with a man who is currently doing a 10 year jail sentence (long story involving mental illness that developed after their marriage- think severe bipolar or similar). She has full/primary physical custody but they still share legal custody, even though he is in jail and the court does not force my friend to allow the young child to visit the father in jail. This situation might be different though since it was murder and since he is likely going to get a life sentence.

[Anonymous]

Justice prevailed. Our community is relieved. Prayers to the victims’ families. Praying the daughter be taken care of by Christine’s family, and be raised by loving people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why Brendan and Tess restricted access to the child from Christine’s parents. Wouldn’t that make them look 100000x more guilty? I feel so bad for the child.

Probably because they were afraid she would talk to them about what had been happening to her- that she might talk about the basement, or the relationship between BB and JM, or any number of things.

I hope the CW goes after Tess hard and fast, because that little girl has undoubtedly been gaslit and programmed like no one else. I pray she can be with her maternal family soon and receive the intensive therapy she needs. Unfortunately family law in VA is such a sh!tshow and the fact that the current custody is as it is says to me that they don't have a great judge. They are also so loathe to move a child. Maybe the publicity around the criminal verdict will place some pressure on them.

How do we know the custody arrangements? I find it very hard to believe that Christine's family has been kept from her daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think that Christine’s parents or other family members will seek custody of the child? I know it will be hard for her to be moved now but she has been living with essentially an accessory after the fact to the crime, right? If Fairfax doesn’t prosecute Tess for anything related to the case, do Christine’s family have any chance of custody? Have they tried for custody ever in these years?

Maybe family member. Parents seem very old to take care of a kid.

And what do you think Tess is like? I envision an ogre 👹 plus the great grandmother lives with them in that house of horror!

Christine has a sister. Her father testified and was quite coherent and composed facing that monster. Her mother will fight to the death for custody.

Former au pair will absolutely step in. She has posted a lot about Christine on Instagram. She’s devastated. From the pics she posted of her wedding, it appears that Christine was matron of honor and Valerie was flower girl. IIRC, they talked every week. I did not stalk her socials. Someone posted a link in Reddit. She’s a lovely girl.

I truly believe statements like this are wishful thinking. The former au pair, as lovely as she may be, may not be willing to adopt and raise a child for the next 10+ years, even if she loved that child in the past, especially considering she now hasn't seen that child for more than 2 years, the child hasn't seen her, and the child will likely have significant psychological support needs as she grows up. I think it's easy to look at these situations with rose colored glasses and say "her babysitter from when she was in diapers will surely adopt her, even though now she's an 8 year old and hasn't seen her in years". I wish that would happen too, but, the most realistic scenario is that BB's mom continues to have custody for the short term, and that CB's parents get custody for the long term if they apply for custody, IF the state can show that BB's mom is detrimental to her well being. But plenty of parents are detrimental to a child's well being, and the state reunifies them over and over again even if a more capable, kinder, more stable family member wants custody of that child. Since BB's mom has had her this whole time, taking custody away from BB's mom will likely not be easy if she isn't physically abusing her and if the child seems to be doing relatively well. I hope I'm wrong. I do think a judge will force BB's mom to allow CB's parents to see her, though, now that custody will be taken from BB I'm assuming.

But didn't his mom basically get it because Brendan gave it to her because he was the only living parent and hadn't been convicted? And now, he can be deemed an unfit parent, and then I guess she becomes a ward of the state until someone petitions for custody, which I presume both sets of grandparents will do? Anyone know the procedure?

I believe that yes, since BB had (and likely, at this moment, still does have) full legal custody of her, he can fully control who she stays with. If he loses legal custody, then the state will have to decide where she goes, but the default is going to be to keep her where she is unless there is abuse, neglect, etc. because that would be considered the least disruptive for the child. This situation obviously has extenuating circumstances given that the person who she has been with for the past couple of years (and ONLY with, the past 6+ months since BB went to jail) is the mother of the person who murdered her mother, but it's also one of her 4 closest living relatives, and if they currently have a strong bond and the child is well cared for... i don't know. It would be hard to say.

I do know that being incarcerated does NOT automatically terminate your parental rights. An old friend of mine has a child with a man who is currently doing a 10 year jail sentence (long story involving mental illness that developed after their marriage- think severe bipolar or similar). She has full/primary physical custody but they still share legal custody, even though he is in jail and the court does not force my friend to allow the young child to visit the father in jail. This situation might be different though since it was murder and since he is likely going to get a life sentence.

I don't think he will lose parental rights because he's incarcerated, but surely, because he's convicted of child endangerment, specifically for murdering her mother with her in the house - it has to be enough, if there's any justice!

[Anonymous]

Joe’s mom’s extended interview.
https://youtu.be/BaXm3H-Br0o?si=vBnlLO1HPMgCBtst

Justice is real

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder of Mama and Daddy Banfield destroyed their retirement savings paying for their mess of a son and his side piece.

Even odd they refuse to pay the sorry excuse of a lawyer and then declare bankruptcy if he tries to collect. A lot of defense lawyers get the money up front — given what a mess he was, I wonder if he failed to do that.

It was pooled by his father and stepmother and his mother and her partner. Maybe there is a loan on the house.

I hope this causes a mass family fight for money and they all live the rest of their lives miserably.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think that Christine’s parents or other family members will seek custody of the child? I know it will be hard for her to be moved now but she has been living with essentially an accessory after the fact to the crime, right? If Fairfax doesn’t prosecute Tess for anything related to the case, do Christine’s family have any chance of custody? Have they tried for custody ever in these years?

Maybe family member. Parents seem very old to take care of a kid.

And what do you think Tess is like? I envision an ogre 👹 plus the great grandmother lives with them in that house of horror!

Christine has a sister. Her father testified and was quite coherent and composed facing that monster. Her mother will fight to the death for custody.

Former au pair will absolutely step in. She has posted a lot about Christine on Instagram. She’s devastated. From the pics she posted of her wedding, it appears that Christine was matron of honor and Valerie was flower girl. IIRC, they talked every week. I did not stalk her socials. Someone posted a link in Reddit. She’s a lovely girl.

I truly believe statements like this are wishful thinking. The former au pair, as lovely as she may be, may not be willing to adopt and raise a child for the next 10+ years, even if she loved that child in the past, especially considering she now hasn't seen that child for more than 2 years, the child hasn't seen her, and the child will likely have significant psychological support needs as she grows up. I think it's easy to look at these situations with rose colored glasses and say "her babysitter from when she was in diapers will surely adopt her, even though now she's an 8 year old and hasn't seen her in years". I wish that would happen too, but, the most realistic scenario is that BB's mom continues to have custody for the short term, and that CB's parents get custody for the long term if they apply for custody, IF the state can show that BB's mom is detrimental to her well being. But plenty of parents are detrimental to a child's well being, and the state reunifies them over and over again even if a more capable, kinder, more stable family member wants custody of that child. Since BB's mom has had her this whole time, taking custody away from BB's mom will likely not be easy if she isn't physically abusing her and if the child seems to be doing relatively well. I hope I'm wrong. I do think a judge will force BB's mom to allow CB's parents to see her, though, now that custody will be taken from BB I'm assuming.

I think you misunderstood “step in” to mean custody and isolated that single sentence from the entirety of the post. Christine’s parents (grandparents) and sister (aunt) will demand custody.

Brendan wrote in one of his childlike letters to Julianna that living with Tess and his grandmother was a hostile environment. He didn’t write anything about how that hostile environment affects his daughter, only himself. That poor child will not be left with these sick people in the home where her mother was brutally slaughtered.

Would Judge Azcarate have any influence/authority on placing the child with Christine’s parents and sister before she retires on July 1?

[Anonymous]

I’m not an attorney but I doubt a judge presiding over a criminal matter would have influence/authority in a separate, but obviously related, family/civil matter. That seems like a conflict to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Joe’s mom’s extended interview.
https://youtu.be/BaXm3H-Br0o?si=vBnlLO1HPMgCBtst

Justice is real

She looks devastated, tears of grief. Grief etched on her face. Soooo sooo sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not an attorney but I doubt a judge presiding over a criminal matter would have influence/authority in a separate, but obviously related, family/civil matter. That seems like a conflict to me.

Quoting myself. I googled it and it’s apparently not a conflict.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How ironic that it’s Groundhog Day. Ha!

+1000