Closing arguments have concluded and a jury is deliberating the case of a Fairfax County husband accused of teaming up with his family’s au pair to kill his wife and another man.
Prosecutors have argued Brendan Banfield had an affair with the Brazilian au pair, and catfished a man through a fetish website in a scheme to get rid of his wife and blame her killing on someone else.
Banfield is charged with aggravated murder in the killings of Christine Banfield and Joseph Ryan, which took place in the family’s home in February 2023.
The former IRS law enforcement officer has pleaded not guilty and faces life in prison if convicted.
The jury deliberated for several hours Friday afternoon after attorneys’ final arguments before going home for the weekend.
Lead prosecutor Jenna Sands spoke for about 20 minutes Friday morning to deliver her closing arguments, highlighting the evidence she said supports the commonwealth’s case, including blood patterns and comments made during Banfield’s testimony.
Though Banfield’s testimony at times seemed to minimize the seriousness of his relationship with the au pair, Juliana Peres Magalhães, Banfield said he loved the au pair during the cross-examination.
“He was in love with Juliana,” Sands said. “He was afraid of losing her. He needed to get rid of his wife so that they could be together, so that they could marry, so that they could have those babies that he was picking out names for.”
That argument is backed by Magalhães.
Closing arguments from defense attorney John Carroll stretched for about an hour and a half, as he reiterated digital evidence, questioned the investigation and attempted to raise doubts about Magalhães’ story to the jury.
Banfield has admitted having an affair with Magalhães but denied the pair had plotted to kill his wife. He said both he and his wife had affairs throughout their near 20-year relationship but did not intend to end their marriage.
“I think that it’s an absurd line of questioning for something that is not serious, that a plan was made to get rid of my wife,” he testified. “That is absolutely crazy.”
DNA evidence
In his closing arguments, Carroll said certain DNA evidence referenced by the prosecution wasn’t tested and accused investigators of a rush to judgment in the murders.
“We didn’t test the stains down on the floor where the gun was lying in before it went up on the bed, and we didn’t test the gun,” Carroll said. “Yet, there’s some significance placed on the fact that there was a blood stain where the gun was when it had been sitting in a puddle.”
The blood pattern analysis has been center to the prosecution’s case; Sands has said it suggests inconsistencies with Banfield’s story.
Investigators said the pair fatally shot Ryan and Banfield stabbed his wife, then set up the scene to make it appear as if Ryan was behind the violence.
“Brendan stabbed Christine, let her bleed out on the floor, and then dripped, smeared and wiped her blood on Joseph Ryan’s body to make it look like he had attacked Christine,” Sands said.
Digital evidence
Prosecutors have said that Banfield and Magalhães lured Ryan to the family’s home by messaging him from an account they created on an adult fetish website impersonating Christine.
Carroll also referenced digital evidence that he claims discounts that catfishing theory proposed by detectives. A digital forensic examiner testified that Christine used her phone and laptop at the same time — raising questions about how Banfield could have used his wife’s devices to message Ryan.
Magalhães testified in court that Banfield spent months plotting to kill his wife. But at times, she said she couldn’t recall details, such as who made the account or who sent specific messages impersonating Christine.
One detective who questioned the theory was later removed from the case.
Sands also referenced digital evidence that she said supports the prosecution’s argument.
“There is no digital history, none, of Christine Banfield using dating sites, fetish sites, searching for pornography, talking to other men prior to the January inception of this scheme.”
Questions about au pair and husband
Magalhães was arrested eight months after the killings and charged with second-degree murder in Ryan’s death. But she has since pleaded guilty to a reduced manslaughter charge as part of a plea deal.
Banfield was arrested almost a year after Magalhães was taken into custody, when she confessed to investigators.
Carroll has raised questions about the motivation behind Magalhães’ confession, referencing her plea deal and conversations with a media company about selling her story for a documentary.
“Her entire story has been bought and paid for, first with their freedom, and then now a little bit on the back end,” he said.
But Sands argued in her rebuttal that Magalhães would have more to gain from backing Banfield’s version of events, which would potentially render her not guilty and allow her to walk free.
Referencing the potential documentary deal, Sands argued, “She said that she would use that to support her family, and then what? She’s going to work as a nanny? She’s a convicted murderer. Do we really think that it is so reasonable that she made up this complete lie for 10 grand?”
She said Banfield had lied about “collateral matters” on the stand.
“So you got to pick one, Juliana, Mr. Banfield. Whose story does the evidence support? All of that blood, the DNA, to some extent the digital forensics, the physical evidence collected at the scene,
that’s what you can rely on,” Sands said.
What happens next
The jury is deliberating the charges against Banfield, who faces two counts of aggravated murder.
That charge comes with several requirements.
Prosecutors must prove that Banfield killed his wife and Ryan, and that their murders were willful, deliberate and premeditated. They also must prove that the killings happened as part of the same act.
The jury has to be sure all those requirements are met beyond a reasonable doubt to convict Banfield.
He also faces a weapons charge related to using a firearm in the commission of a felony and a child endangerment charge, because the couple’s 4-year-old daughter was in the home’s basement during the killings.
Magalhães will be sentenced after Banfield’s trial concludes. She could be sentenced to the time she has already served.
What Banfield says happened
In his testimony Thursday, Banfield recounted what he said happened on the day of the killings, which occurred Feb. 24, 2023.
Banfield testified he came home after getting a call from Magalhães saying a strange man was in the family’s home. After arriving, he said he heard what he thought were sounds of sex.
When Banfield opened the bedroom door, he said he saw Ryan holding a knife to his wife, who was naked on the floor. Ryan, he said, was clothed.
“I did not want to shoot him. I wanted him to let her go,” Banfield said.
Banfield said he fired his gun after seeing Ryan do a “downward stabbing stroke.”
He said he noticed blood in his wife’s hair but didn’t initially see she had stab wounds.
“Christine told me that she was bleeding out and that she was sorry and that she loved me,” Banfield said.
Banfield said he then heard a gunshot and saw Magalhães holding a firearm.
“I looked up and I saw that Juliana had my other firearm, and I was stunned that Juliana had shot,” he testified.
Prosecutors have questioned whether Christine could have held a conversation with seven neck wounds, which were found in the autopsy.
Prosecutors have argued Banfield stabbed his wife multiple times before Magalhães called 911.
Banfield said he waited to shoot at Ryan out of fear of wounding his wife.
WTOP’s Neal Augenstein and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
© 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.
