Brendan Banfield, a former IRS law enforcement officer, was convicted Monday in Virginia of killing his wife, Christine Banfield, and Joseph Ryan in a case prosecutors said was built around an elaborate ruse involving the couple’s Brazilian au pair.
Prosecutors argued that Banfield and Juliana Magalhães impersonated Christine Banfield on a sexual-fetish website to draw Ryan to the home and then set up a scene meant to portray an intruder attack. Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano said the details attracted mainstream attention in Brazil and elsewhere, but the trial outcome is also about the deaths of two local victims.
“The details of this case attracted national attention — because it involved an affair, a fetish website and a premeditated plot,” Descano said after the verdict. “But beyond the spectacle, we are here today because of the tragic deaths of two of our community members, Christine Banfield and Joseph Ryan.”
At trial, the prosecution presented evidence and witness testimony meant to support its theory that Banfield and Magalhães used the website to lure Ryan for a sexual encounter that prosecutors said involved a knife. Officials said the pair left the front door open and staged the scene to look as though they had shot an intruder attacking Christine Banfield.
Banfield, according to testimony described in court, told police that he came across Joseph Ryan attacking his wife with a knife on the morning of Feb. 24, 2023, and that he shot Ryan and then shot Magalhães. Defense counsel argued to the jury that prosecutors’ narrative was built on Magalhães’ testimony and that her statements could not be trusted.
Magalhães previously pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 2024 and testified against Banfield at his trial. Defense attorney John Carroll told the jury that her testimony reflected her cooperation with prosecutors in hopes of avoiding a longer prison term, and Carroll also elicited evidence suggesting that there was dissent within the police department over parts of the prosecution’s digital-evidence theory.
Carroll said the prosecution’s account depended on determining who controlled or behind a social media presence that prosecutors described as “catfishing” Christine Banfield, and he argued that an officer who concluded Christine Banfield was behind a social media account was later transferred, which Carroll described as punishment for disagreeing with a theory favored by higher-ups.
Prosecutor Jenna Sands pushed back on the defense’s depiction of the technology and the prosecution’s narrative. During questioning, Sands asked Banfield about multiple affairs, including one involving a woman named Danielle that Banfield met while searching on a fetish site for “sugar babies,” and Banfield responded that he would not call it a fetish site, testifying that he had an arranged relationship with someone who knew he was married.
In closing arguments, Sands told the jury it did not have to rely solely on Magalhães’ testimony, pointing instead to what she described as a “plethora of evidence.” That evidence included expert testimony that blood stains on Ryan’s hands suggested Christine Banfield’s blood had been dripped onto him from above.
Banfield was also convicted of child endangerment. Prosecutors said his 4-year-old daughter was in the home’s basement on the day of the killings, though she was physically unharmed.
The jury deliberated for nearly nine hours across two days before reaching its verdict. Banfield faces the possibility of life in prison at sentencing, which is scheduled for May 8, while Magalhães was slated to be sentenced after the Banfield trial, with attorneys saying she could be allowed to walk free if she received time served and returned to her home in Brazil.