Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would CB be naked?? Do we think BB or AP drugged her?

Nah, they would have found that in the autopsy.

The case against AP focuses on JR and the shooting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would CB be naked?? Do we think BB or AP drugged her?

Nah, they would have found that in the autopsy.

Anonymous wrote:NBC does a chilling writeup
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/twisted-fetish-sex-plot-left-wife-and-a-stranger-dead-inside-herndon-home-prosecutors-allege/3580961/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_DCBrand

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would CB be naked?? Do we think BB or AP drugged her?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have so many questions about the second gun and the need for the AP to use it...

*Why would BB, a trained LEO with a service weapon on him which he had already used once, need assistance from his employee to access a second gun and finish off the "intruder" when he could have easily done that himself? What possible reason could he have thought up to give authorities for the need for assistance from the AP?

*Obviously, having the AP shoot the second gun was part of BB's plan, but how was BB planning to explain to authorities why his employee knew the location of the gun, the combination of the safe, and how to use the gun? It can't be common practice for households that employ au pairs and have gun safes with guns in them to instruct the au pair on how to access and use the gun. You might instruct them on how to use an alarm system or dial 911 but teach them how to access a gun? Doesn't make sense.

*It seems like BB wanted the AP to be complicit in the shooting, which is why he took her to the gun range to train her on how to use the gun, subsequently purchased a gun for her to use, told her how to access it, and then told her to use it on Joe. But what convoluted reason could he have possibly given her for why she needed to do that in the first place? Was he thinking it would somehow make him personally less culpable if there was a second shooter?

Make it make sense!

I have had the same questions. If they thought Ryan was still a threat even after being shot/ blinded, why did they take the time for her to go to the safe get the code to open the safe, retrieve the gun and shoot it instead of him just shooting again. It just doesn’t make sense.

I'm starting to think that Banfield set this up for Magalhes to carry out on her own, but on the morning of she chickened out and that's why you have this string of events that don't make sense.

That would explain a lot of things. It's an interesting theory. But they'd still have to explain the visits to the gun range to practice how to shoot a gun, how she knew the location of the gun and the gun safe combination, and how to handle the gun.

I agree with half of this - guns are so ubiquitous in US society I think you could plausibly argue that evidence of going to a gun range doesn't mean anything/isn't admissible. The gun being in the safe is harder to explain.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have so many questions about the second gun and the need for the AP to use it...

*Why would BB, a trained LEO with a service weapon on him which he had already used once, need assistance from his employee to access a second gun and finish off the "intruder" when he could have easily done that himself? What possible reason could he have thought up to give authorities for the need for assistance from the AP?

*Obviously, having the AP shoot the second gun was part of BB's plan, but how was BB planning to explain to authorities why his employee knew the location of the gun, the combination of the safe, and how to use the gun? It can't be common practice for households that employ au pairs and have gun safes with guns in them to instruct the au pair on how to access and use the gun. You might instruct them on how to use an alarm system or dial 911 but teach them how to access a gun? Doesn't make sense.

*It seems like BB wanted the AP to be complicit in the shooting, which is why he took her to the gun range to train her on how to use the gun, subsequently purchased a gun for her to use, told her how to access it, and then told her to use it on Joe. But what convoluted reason could he have possibly given her for why she needed to do that in the first place? Was he thinking it would somehow make him personally less culpable if there was a second shooter?

Make it make sense!

I have had the same questions. If they thought Ryan was still a threat even after being shot/ blinded, why did they take the time for her to go to the safe get the code to open the safe, retrieve the gun and shoot it instead of him just shooting again. It just doesn’t make sense.

I'm starting to think that Banfield set this up for Magalhes to carry out on her own, but on the morning of she chickened out and that's why you have this string of events that don't make sense.

That would explain a lot of things. It's an interesting theory. But they'd still have to explain the visits to the gun range to practice how to shoot a gun, how she knew the location of the gun and the gun safe combination, and how to handle the gun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have so many questions about the second gun and the need for the AP to use it...

*Why would BB, a trained LEO with a service weapon on him which he had already used once, need assistance from his employee to access a second gun and finish off the "intruder" when he could have easily done that himself? What possible reason could he have thought up to give authorities for the need for assistance from the AP?

*Obviously, having the AP shoot the second gun was part of BB's plan, but how was BB planning to explain to authorities why his employee knew the location of the gun, the combination of the safe, and how to use the gun? It can't be common practice for households that employ au pairs and have gun safes with guns in them to instruct the au pair on how to access and use the gun. You might instruct them on how to use an alarm system or dial 911 but teach them how to access a gun? Doesn't make sense.

*It seems like BB wanted the AP to be complicit in the shooting, which is why he took her to the gun range to train her on how to use the gun, subsequently purchased a gun for her to use, told her how to access it, and then told her to use it on Joe. But what convoluted reason could he have possibly given her for why she needed to do that in the first place? Was he thinking it would somehow make him personally less culpable if there was a second shooter?

Make it make sense!

I have had the same questions. If they thought Ryan was still a threat even after being shot/ blinded, why did they take the time for her to go to the safe get the code to open the safe, retrieve the gun and shoot it instead of him just shooting again. It just doesn’t make sense.

I'm starting to think that Banfield set this up for Magalhes to carry out on her own, but on the morning of she chickened out and that's why you have this string of events that don't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would CB be naked?? Do we think BB or AP drugged her?

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would CB be naked?? Do we think BB or AP drugged her?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to offer the AP US citizenship. That will flip her. And it is reasonable offer for cooperating with a killer. We may not like her or the thought of this offer, but it is for greater good.

I really think it would help. Have had many APs including from Brazil. And her attorney would be a fool not to encourage her to take it.

The Commonwealth of Virginia has no ability to offer that. And I'm pretty sure there's not a visa/citizenship category for flipping on your would be co-defendant in a state murder trial. Plus, an inducement like that wouldn't help the case against Banfield. Any plea the AP cute will be fair game for BB's defense attorney.

He is a federal law enforcement. A dirty cop. The feds can help if they wanted to help.