Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are the evidences from yesterday not going to be made public?

Not the ones that are sealed (explicit crime scene photos)

The ones from yesterday are not available, and they’re not sealed.

Anonymous wrote:TBH - the prosecution was NOT good at their job. I think he will be found guilty but mostly because Brendan’s attorney was not good either. FFX needs to get their act together.

Can you give some reasons why you think that?

Anonymous wrote:TBH - the prosecution was NOT good at their job. I think he will be found guilty but mostly because Brendan’s attorney was not good either. FFX needs to get their act together.

If he’s found guilty like you expect I’m not sure your complaint matters.

TBH - the prosecution was NOT good at their job. I think he will be found guilty but mostly because Brendan’s attorney was not good either. FFX needs to get their act together.

Anonymous wrote:Found a more recent court case against BB and wondered if anyone knows what it is about.
Cary Cucinelli, et al. vs. Brendan Robert Banfield, et al. Case# CL-2025-0002673

maybe guardianship of his daughter by his inlaws?

Anonymous wrote:Are the evidences from yesterday not going to be made public?

Not the ones that are sealed (explicit crime scene photos)

Anonymous wrote:Found a more recent court case against BB and wondered if anyone knows what it is about.
Cary Cucinelli, et al. vs. Brendan Robert Banfield, et al. Case# CL-2025-0002673

Cucinelli Geiger, PC is a law firm in Fairfax, Virginia, specializing in elder law, estate planning, special needs planning, and fiduciary services, assisting clients with long-term care planning, guardianship, and estate documents for themselves or family members. They serve Northern Virginia, including Fairfax, Alexandria, Arlington, Loudoun, and Prince William Counties, offering personalized legal services for complex issues related to aging and disability.

Found a more recent court case against BB and wondered if anyone knows what it is about.
Cary Cucinelli, et al. vs. Brendan Robert Banfield, et al. Case# CL-2025-0002673

Are the evidences from yesterday not going to be made public?

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

Hah.

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

"The digital forensics say...", from the lawyer who had constant microphone and laptop issues. I wouldn't trust him to program my toaster.

This wasn’t a super complicated case. So I wonder if they will need/ask to review any evidence. Juries take their jobs seriously an sometimes ask to review to show diligence and seriousness v an immediate verdict.

Here. We will see. Not so sure.

Off to deliberate. Jury has to leave by 4:30 today, plus they can take breaks and lunch, so I don't think we are looking at a verdict until at earliest, late Monday.

Carroll word vomit…
“Digital forensics is reasonable doubt.”
“Digital forensics often times…um, for people who don’t understand it, will say, well isn’t it possible that this…?”
“Digital forensics is not being given the strength that it is due.”

That’s your job! But you didn’t do your job because you are a digital forensics illiterate.
Where is your EVIDENCE that your client is innocent?

Jury has their verdict. La Finé.

Work meeting lie addressed on rebuttal