Anonymous wrote:The local report on the arrest says they do not believe Juliana knew who the victim was ie he was unknown to her. Could the husband have orchestrated it alone?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is exactly why I never wanted an Au Pair.
We just had a horrible first time au pair experience and fired her and dropped the agency. I was angry at losing the Hoge placement fee to the agancy (bc they completely misrepresented the au pair - she didn’t have the skills they said she had and she had mental health issues that the agency knew about), but I keep thinking maybe we dodged a bullet?
You just bad luck. We have only had positive experiences with our au pairs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:^ messed up the quotes but the gist of it is she is telling the discredited story Brendan and Juliana have been telling all along and trying to smear Christine and Joe for having sex. No mention of her daughter's own affair with Brendan Banfield.
Her daughter also told her the case was closed 3 months ago.
In her telling, Juliana is a hero, not a killer.
She mentions her "arriving for work" but in the People article she had said she and the child had been out.
I don't get the "arriving for work" thing in the article b/c she lived there! Also, she said the kid was with her. Maybe it was something lost in translation.
Anonymous wrote:The local report on the arrest says they do not believe Juliana knew who the victim was ie he was unknown to her. Could the husband have orchestrated it alone?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The local report on the arrest says they do not believe Juliana knew who the victim was ie he was unknown to her. Could the husband have orchestrated it alone?
It was also reported that the husband did not know Joe either. So if he did orchestrate it, most likely he did it through Christine's phone.
Anonymous wrote:The local report on the arrest says they do not believe Juliana knew who the victim was ie he was unknown to her. Could the husband have orchestrated it alone?
Anonymous wrote:The local report on the arrest says they do not believe Juliana knew who the victim was ie he was unknown to her. Could the husband have orchestrated it alone?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not to veer too hard into speculation (I know, as though that’s not what all of this has been), but it looks like CB never engaged with any IG posts made by BB’s mom (aka her MIL) when BB’s mom occasionally posted granddaughter pics and tagged CB in them. That might mean nothing, or it could mean the relationship between CB and her MIL wasn’t mutually warm, which also could mean nothing in terms of the case. But the lack of interaction did catch my attention.
Different poster, but on a similar note, I'm sure others have noticed that BB sometimes responded to the AP's Facebook.
Yes, au pairs are not permitted to work for other families (or work any job - DoorDash, Starbucks, etc) while they are here on their J-1 visa. But, some au pairs do babysit on the side for extra spending money.
If she was trying to pick up a full time nanny job, then she intended to stay in the country illegally and get paid under the table. There's no way to do this legally. Au pair agencies are aware, but turn a blind eye. They basically send the au pair her plane ticket home at the end of her time in the program, and she simply doesn't board the plane. Instead, she stays in the US illegally and finds work as a nanny, getting paid in cash. Some au pairs do this.
If she was trying to pick up babysitting gigs here and there, she probably just wanted extra spending money while in the au pair program.
Anonymous wrote:Not to veer too hard into speculation (I know, as though that’s not what all of this has been), but it looks like CB never engaged with any IG posts made by BB’s mom (aka her MIL) when BB’s mom occasionally posted granddaughter pics and tagged CB in them. That might mean nothing, or it could mean the relationship between CB and her MIL wasn’t mutually warm, which also could mean nothing in terms of the case. But the lack of interaction did catch my attention.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A few comments as someone who used to have au pairs:
1. You agree with them in advance on their weekly schedule. So if Juliana is to be believed, she probably was slated to start work that morning at 8 AM. She could've taken the family's car to run an errand before her shift. I would be interested to hear if she took the child with her to run the errand. That would be highly unusual, since the au pair's "off time" means no child responsibilities. Would be quite suspicious.
2. Au pairs get a J-1 visa good for 1 year. Once her year is up (which apparently was now), they can:
1. Return home;
2. Continue staying with their host family for another year (called extending); or
3. Request to extend with a new host family (in which case they interview and hope to "match" with a family).
In the case of 2 and 3, that allows them to stay legally in the US for an additional year.
However, 2 and 3 require (1) the au pair agency to agree to the extension and (2) the Department of State to approve the extension. I'd be interested in how the agency handled this. I imagine they wanted her to leave the country right after the murder, or immediately re-match with a different family. The au pair agencies are pretty hands off, but allowing an au pair to stay in a home where the host mother was murdered seems... a lot, even for them.
Also, what BS that the au pair knows all about some sordid relationship between CB and JR but doesn't recognize his car?! Sure.
I thought this was an extended year with the Banfields? Am I mixing up their aps? So, then would have to rematch? And had applied to extend visa? Wonder what type and on what basis?
Hey, that girl KNOWS from sordid! And she was so in fear she did not call 911, did not go to a neighbor for help, but barged in with small child in tow? Totes plausible. But necessary tall tale to set up their discredited narrative.
If she was already in her extension year (i.e., this is her second year as an au pair), then there would be no way for her to extend her J-1 visa. The only way she would be able to stay in the US legally would be to switch to a student visa (difficult but not impossible for Au pairs to do) or get married. Either way, if her visa was up, it makes perfect sense that LE would make a move now to prevent her from going back to Brazil
Also she is already under pressure from visa status, opportune time to tighten the screws with a bit of an overcharge.
Her mother claims she recently applied to extend her visa. A poster on here said she was looking for childcare work, isn't that restricted for au pairs? If she had done 1 year with Banfields and was re-matching with Brendan, why would she be looking for other work? To extend her J-1 she would have to HAVE a match, yes? Anyone who knows more re: her current/future match care to chime in?