The prosecution and defense read their closing arguments today in the Au Pair Affair murder trial. A jury began deliberating on whether the defendant, Brendan Banfield, is guilty of teaming up with his Brazilian Au Pair Juliana Peres Magalhães to catfish a man through a fetish website and make it look like his wife was murdered by a third party. 

Au Pair Affair

Banfield is charged with two counts of aggravated murder in both February 2023 killings of his wife, Christine, and an unsuspecting stranger, Joseph Ryan, which took place in their family home. He pleaded not guilty to the charges and could spend the rest of his life in prison if the jury convicts him.

Throughout the trial, prosecutors have consistently argued that Banfield was having an affair with his au pair and, in an attempt to stay with her, he hatched a scheme to get rid of his wife and blame her killing on someone else. 

Closing Arguments

After closing arguments concluded on Friday, the jury deliberated for several hours before going home for the weekend. They are expected to return first thing Monday to continue deliberations and hopefully render a verdict. Lead prosecutor Jenn Sands spent 20 minutes Friday morning delivering her closing remarks, reminding the jurors of the evidence presented before them that supports Banfield’s guilt. She noted the blood patterns throughout the crime scene and the comments made during his testimony. 

At times during Banfield’s testimony, his relationship with the au pair Juliana Peres Magalhães seemed less than serious. However, when he was cross-examined, he admitted to being in love with her. “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.”

On the first day of trial, Magalhães confirmed the prosecution’s argument that he was in love with her and felt that they could only be together if he got rid of his wife, so he did. Banfield’s defense attorney John Carroll delivered his closing remarks for nearly two hours, desperate to convince the jury of the defendan’t innocence. He spoke about the digital evidence, questioned the investigations, and raised doubts about Magalhães’ credibility. 

Banfield shamefully admitted to having an affair with the au pair but thorughly denied plotting to kill his wife. He and his wife were married for almost 20 years, and both engaged in affairs with other people, but had not intention of breaking 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.”

Forensic Evidence

The evidence presented throughout trial that Carroll reiterated during his closing arguments was the DNA that was never tested and he accused investigators of rushing the investigation and accusing Banfield for a quick out.

“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 the center of the trial with prosecutors arguing it shows inconsistencies with Banfield’s story. A blood spatter expert and forensic analyst testified to the blood stains at the scene and on Ryan’s body.

She agreed with the prosecutor’s argument that the scene was likely manipulated. The blood flow on Ryan’s face went in different directions, the blood on his hands were transferred from an object and it flowed down to his elbow instead of his wrist, suggesting his arms were not at his sides.

Investigators say Banfield and Magalhães shot Ryan and stabbed Christine and set it up to make it look like Ryan was the perpetrator. “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.

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

The jury is supposed to decide whether Banfield is the one who killed both Christine and Ryan, and disrupted a crime scene by staging the murders. The prosecution was meant to prove that the murders were intentional and premeditated, and the jury will discuss those aspects during deliberations. 

If they find beyond a reasonable doubt that Banfield is guilty, he will be convicted and possibly charged further with child endangerment as his 4-year-old was in the basement during the time the murders took place. Magalhães is expected to be sentenced after Banfield’s trial ends, and will receive time served.