In Fairfax County Circuit Court, Brendan Banfield continued his testimony in his aggravated murder trial on Thursday by disputing prosecutors’ description of what happened the day his wife, Christine Banfield, and Joseph Ryan were killed. Banfield told jurors that, contrary to the prosecution’s theory, he did not fatally stab his wife but instead shot the man he said was standing over her with a knife.
Banfield testified that he was “more panicked in my life” and said he had hoped to “de-escalate the situation.” He told the court, “I did not want to shoot him. I wanted him to let her go,” and described firing a single shot at Ryan, whom he said held a knife. He also testified that Juliana Peres Magalhães, the family’s au pair and his romantic partner, shot the man moments later.
Prosecutors, however, have maintained that Banfield fatally stabbed his wife and lured Ryan to the house as part of a plan to frame him. In their presentation to the jury, prosecutors said Ryan connected through social media with an account Magalhães said she and Banfield created in Christine Banfield’s name, and that Ryan planned to meet for a sexual encounter involving a knife on the day of the killings.
During cross-examination, Chief Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Jenna Sands pressed Banfield about his claimed state of mind and about the timing of his relationship with Magalhães. Sands asked whether Banfield’s “strong feelings” about wanting to be together “for the rest of our lives” existed only after his wife was alive, and Sands also asked whether those feelings motivated him to kill his wife. Banfield responded that he and Magalhães “weren’t even together when Christine died,” describing their affair as volatile.
Sands also questioned Banfield’s account of whether he needed to kill his wife to get her back. “Definitely not,” Banfield replied. Sands’s questions reflected the prosecution’s effort to tie the killings to a narrative in which Banfield and Magalhães allegedly orchestrated events to lead Ryan into the home.
Banfield’s attorney, John Carroll, focused on the defense’s contention that investigators embraced the wrong theory early and ignored evidence that undercut it. Carroll elicited testimony from Leah Smith, a homicide detective, who said investigators discussed “two theories” within the first week of the incident and that the supervisor at the time told them to “get behind the right one.” The defense also presented testimony suggesting disagreement within the police department about whether Ryan was catfished.
One witness Carroll called was Brendan Miller, a digital forensics examiner with the department, who testified that there was no indication Christine Banfield lost control of her devices before the slayings. Carroll also submitted a video showing Banfield learning of his wife’s death; in the video, Banfield cried at times while holding his bloodied hands, as a doctor patted his back.
Banfield took the stand after jurors watched that video and described his movements earlier that morning. He testified that he woke up, took a shower, told his wife goodbye before leaving his house extra early for what he said was an important work meeting. Banfield told the jury that the meeting was particularly important because he believed it could lead to a promotion to senior special agent, but his boss later testified that there was no such meeting on the calendar.
The testimony on Thursday places Banfield’s account of the shootings against prosecutors’ theory that he stabbed his wife and used the circumstances involving Magalhães and the social media account to set up Ryan. A jury will decide which version of events is supported by the evidence presented in the trial.