From that article… “ Magalhaes’ lawyer acknowledged that it would come out that the au pair and the husband had a sexual relationship but said that she had “many relationships,” none of which was exclusive. He added that Banfield and her husband each had affairs and were unfaithful to one another.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Friday, during her bond hearing, Magalhaes’ lawyer told the judge that Banfield had gotten Magalhaes tickets to take Banfield’s 4-year-old child to the zoo. The lawyer claimed that Banfield made plans for Ryan to meet her at the home for sex, stating that the two met on some sort of website.”

Not entirely clear based on this info, but it seems to suggest AP knew CB was going to be meeting with someone for sex. Which, to me, seems like it wouldn’t immediately raise a red flag if you saw an unfamiliar car in the driveway. And if the suggestion is that she subsequently called BB because she was either concerned or wanted to rat out CB’s perhaps unauthorized affair…well, I don’t know about you all, but if I was having an “unapproved” affair that I was trying to keep under wraps, I sure as s*** wouldn’t be telling my au pair about it. Any way you examine what’s being said here, it’s impossible for it to pass the smell test.

I don’t get the zoo part… If they were on their way to the zoo why did they come back? And can you imagine driving from Herndon to the zoo at 7:30 AM!? A traffic nightmare.

Also, can’t you get food at the zoo?

Anonymous wrote:“Friday, during her bond hearing, Magalhaes’ lawyer told the judge that Banfield had gotten Magalhaes tickets to take Banfield’s 4-year-old child to the zoo. The lawyer claimed that Banfield made plans for Ryan to meet her at the home for sex, stating that the two met on some sort of website.”

Not entirely clear based on this info, but it seems to suggest AP knew CB was going to be meeting with someone for sex. Which, to me, seems like it wouldn’t immediately raise a red flag if you saw an unfamiliar car in the driveway. And if the suggestion is that she subsequently called BB because she was either concerned or wanted to rat out CB’s perhaps unauthorized affair…well, I don’t know about you all, but if I was having an “unapproved” affair that I was trying to keep under wraps, I sure as s*** wouldn’t be telling my au pair about it. Any way you examine what’s being said here, it’s impossible for it to pass the smell test.

I don’t get the zoo part… If they were on their way to the zoo why did they come back? And can you imagine driving from Herndon to the zoo at 7:30 AM!? A traffic nightmare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution revealed some of the case they’re building, including evidence of a sexual relationship between AP and BB: https://www.wusa9.com/amp/article/news/local/virginia/nanny-charged-murder-denied-bond-brazil-passport/65-a76c7728-3e74-46e5-ad73-4ac3681ac847

“The prosecution presented evidence Friday that Magalhaes and the husband of the family she worked for, 38-year-old Brendan Banfield, had a sexual relationship for months. The attorney showed pictures of the Banfield's bedroom and closet the day of the murders compared to shortly after the au pair's arrest. In the eight months since the murders, it appears the au pair moved all her belongings into the primary bedroom. The prosecution also pointed out two photos of Magalhaes and Brendan Banfield together -- one on a nightstand and another on a dresser.”

This.is.so.gross.

What’s further infuriating now is that BB’s mother has been defending him all this time yet she’s been staying at the house on and off since the murders and must have known AP had moved into bedroom with B. Yet she persisted in defending her low-life son to any and all.

This shouldn’t be surprising at all. She raised this monster so clearly she’s not all there either

“Friday, during her bond hearing, Magalhaes’ lawyer told the judge that Banfield had gotten Magalhaes tickets to take Banfield’s 4-year-old child to the zoo. The lawyer claimed that Banfield made plans for Ryan to meet her at the home for sex, stating that the two met on some sort of website.”

Not entirely clear based on this info, but it seems to suggest AP knew CB was going to be meeting with someone for sex. Which, to me, seems like it wouldn’t immediately raise a red flag if you saw an unfamiliar car in the driveway. And if the suggestion is that she subsequently called BB because she was either concerned or wanted to rat out CB’s perhaps unauthorized affair…well, I don’t know about you all, but if I was having an “unapproved” affair that I was trying to keep under wraps, I sure as s*** wouldn’t be telling my au pair about it. Any way you examine what’s being said here, it’s impossible for it to pass the smell test.

Also interesting that AP's lawyer is admitting that she shot Ryan dead -- but in his telling, it was after BB shot him the first time and didn't kill him. Then Ryan was flailing about and threatening AP. So, she got BB's other gun from the bathroom and shot Ryan right then and there.

Not sure why their story doesn't have BB shooting Ryan more than once -- oh wait -- that's because their story has to fit the medical/ballistic facts that AP actually DID shoot Ryan.

In real life, every LEO is trained to shoot to kill. Once you start shooting, you don't stop until the threat is completely neutralized. So, there is no world where a real LEO would shoot an alleged murderer (i.e. Ryan stabbing CB), and then tell the nanny to get a gun and finish the job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/

Is this a legitimate website? I've never heard of it.

It looks legit? And the info being reported as being stated during Titus’s hearing is so specific that it seems bizarre that it would be fabricated. I guess we’ll know soon enough.

Anonymous wrote:Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/

Interesting story....

So you are so concerned about a stranger being at the house that you call the husband to come check it out..... and then you GO INTO THE SUPPOSEDLY SCARY house WITH the husband/LEO and you go to the basement.

Sure, that makes ALOT OF SENSE! Not. If you are worried that there is a stranger prowling in the house, and you are just the nanny, you don't go INTO the house with the 4 yr old. You stay outside until you are given the all clear.

Even her alibi doesn't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/

“Ryan supposedly stabbed Banfield several times in her neck. Magalhaes’ lawyer said Banfield’s husband shot Ryan in his head, not killing him, but in a way the medical examiner said would have blinded Ryan. The lawyer said Banfield’s husband told Magalhaes to grab his gun, which she got out of a safe in the bathroom. Magalhaes said Ryan started flailing around or posed a threat of some sort, possibly moving to get up off of the ground. Her lawyer said that’s when she shot Ryan, hitting him in the heart, and killing him.”

Sincerely trying to be objective here but this makes no sense to me. BB already had Ryan incapacitated, but he told AP to go get his (other?) gun from the safe, which she would have access to and be able to open? Why would there be any need for both of them, one of them presumably with little to no firearm experience, to have guns drawn on an already-shot JR?

From https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/: "Magalhaes’ lawyer said Magalhaes went into the house with Banfield’s husband and took the 4-year-old child to the basement. She supposedly dialed 911 at that point but didn’t know what to say to the emergency dispatcher, so she hung up. The lawyer said Magalhaes left the basement and that she and Banfield’s husband heard some sort of interaction involving Banfield and Ryan above them. They weren’t sure if it was consensual or not. Magalhaes said Banfield’s husband, who is a special agent for the IRS, pulled out his service weapon and went into the bedroom where he saw Ryan with a knife to Banfield’s throat."

And why would anyone in their right mind bring a child into a house when they suspect a potential thread (unknown man)? Also, the timeline is so tight for everything they claim to have happenedin the span of 10-15 minutes (the time between the 9-1-1 calls).

Anonymous wrote:Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/

Is this a legitimate website? I've never heard of it.

Anonymous wrote:From the news

On Friday, prosecutors alleged that Ryan came into the picture because he responded to an account for sexual fetishes. The attorney said the account had been created from the Banfield home. Police have previously said Christine Banfield and Ryan were known to each other but have not explained the nature of their relationship.


But doesn’t say when account created or by whom. Had it been going on for months? Or was this the first contact by Ryan after responding to the post.

It really doesn't matter why he was there or what relationship he had with Christine. What matters is that he was clearly set up to take the fall for Christine's murder.

Anonymous wrote:Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/

“Ryan supposedly stabbed Banfield several times in her neck. Magalhaes’ lawyer said Banfield’s husband shot Ryan in his head, not killing him, but in a way the medical examiner said would have blinded Ryan. The lawyer said Banfield’s husband told Magalhaes to grab his gun, which she got out of a safe in the bathroom. Magalhaes said Ryan started flailing around or posed a threat of some sort, possibly moving to get up off of the ground. Her lawyer said that’s when she shot Ryan, hitting him in the heart, and killing him.”

Sincerely trying to be objective here but this makes no sense to me. BB already had Ryan incapacitated, but he told AP to go get his (other?) gun from the safe, which she would have access to and be able to open? Why would there be any need for both of them, one of them presumably with little to no firearm experience, to have guns drawn on an already-shot JR?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecution revealed some of the case they’re building, including evidence of a sexual relationship between AP and BB: https://www.wusa9.com/amp/article/news/local/virginia/nanny-charged-murder-denied-bond-brazil-passport/65-a76c7728-3e74-46e5-ad73-4ac3681ac847

“The prosecution presented evidence Friday that Magalhaes and the husband of the family she worked for, 38-year-old Brendan Banfield, had a sexual relationship for months. The attorney showed pictures of the Banfield's bedroom and closet the day of the murders compared to shortly after the au pair's arrest. In the eight months since the murders, it appears the au pair moved all her belongings into the primary bedroom. The prosecution also pointed out two photos of Magalhaes and Brendan Banfield together -- one on a nightstand and another on a dresser.”

These people are seriously just SO STUPID.

I also can’t get over how stupid it is. Morality aside, how the hell did they think it would LOOK to have the au pair just slide in as the replacement wife, knowing full well the investigation was ongoing? It’s like they forgot they didn’t work for the prosecution.

But, separately, that poor kid. I can’t even imagine how confusing this must be, to lose her mom and then your skanky caretaker just takes over and sleeps in your parents’ bed. What the actual F. I wonder if CB’s family knew about this living arrangement. I feel like they’d have gone insane if they did.

In all seriousness, even if these two weren’t involved in the murders (which they clearly are), this behavior would be sick.

You know that little girl has been crying for her mom numerous times... wondering when she would come back and where she is. Imagine the psychology of the AP and BB in "comforting" the little girl and telling her something about the mom -- knowing full well that THEY killed her! That is some sick compartmentalization. If you can hold up your lies to a 4 yr old girl crying for her mother, you are C.O.L.D.

I'm sure the girl has been adjusting to the new -norm -- and as she gets older, each loss is going to be more scarring to her. The girl surely loves the AP, and her dad -- and she will lose both. That's some hard trauma on this child. Losing literally everyone she's every trusted. I can only hope that she is placed with a loving family member and that because of her youth, the memories will fade. She might not remember much of when she was 4. But, you have memories of traumatic things when you are 5 and older.

Anonymous wrote:Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/

“As far as for the way that Magalhaes’ lawyer said Banfield and Ryan met and knew each other, prosecutors said that someone other than Banfield set up an account on a fetish website and that Ryan responded to it. They added that it was part of a plan that would allow Magalhaes and Banfield’s husband to end up together.”

Additional details in this report about what AP claimed happened on the morning of the murders: https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/virginia/fairfax-county/defense-prosecution-outline-adult-relationships-activities-at-hearing-for-au-pair-charged-in-reston-murder-fairfax-county-judge-denies-bond/amp/