Virginia Man Found Guilty In Double-Murder Plot With Au Pair

In a case that has gripped Fairfax County, Virginia, and sent shockwaves far beyond, a jury found Brendan Banfield, a 40-year-old former IRS law enforcement officer, guilty of orchestrating a chilling double-murder plot involving his wife, Christine Banfield, and a stranger, Joseph Ryan. The verdict, delivered on February 2, 2026, capped a trial marked by jaw-dropping revelations, a web of deceit, and a courtroom drama that left observers questioning where the truth ended and manipulation began.

The murders occurred on February 24, 2023, inside the Banfield family home. According to prosecutors, the crime was the culmination of an elaborate scheme devised by Banfield and the family’s au pair, Juliana Peres Magalhães, 25, with whom he was having an affair. Their goal? To eliminate Christine so they could be together, and to frame an innocent man as the fall guy.

As reported by multiple outlets including CNN and Fox News, Banfield and Peres Magalhães used a fetish website to pose as Christine, luring Joseph Ryan, 39, to the house under the pretense of a consensual, violent sexual encounter. The plot, prosecutors argued, was to stage the scene so it appeared Ryan had attacked Christine, prompting Banfield to shoot him in self-defense.

During the trial, Peres Magalhães testified that Banfield had expressed his desire to "get rid of" his wife as early as October 2022. "At first, I thought he was joking," she told the court, recounting how the plan was crafted and executed. She described helping Banfield catfish Ryan, with the intention of framing him for Christine’s murder. "He wanted to marry me and have children with me," she testified, adding that Banfield was reluctant to divorce Christine because he feared she would get more money and custody of their daughter.

The prosecution, led by Jenna Sands, argued that the murders were meticulously planned. Sands told jurors, "He was in love with Juliana. He can pretend that this was a fling and affair -- he'd had them before, no big deal. He was in love with Juliana. 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." Sands also pointed out that there was no evidence Christine had ever used dating or fetish websites, and highlighted forensic evidence suggesting the crime scene had been manipulated.

The crime itself was brutal. Christine Banfield, a 37-year-old pediatric intensive care nurse, was stabbed seven times in the neck. Joseph Ryan, the stranger lured into this deadly trap, was fatally shot in the head. Their then-4-year-old daughter was in the basement of the house during the killings, a detail that led to an additional conviction for child endangerment.

Banfield, who took the stand in his own defense—a rare move for a murder defendant—called the allegations "absolutely crazy." He claimed that on the morning of the murders, he received a call from Peres Magalhães saying a stranger had entered the home. Banfield testified that he rushed home, entered the bedroom with his service weapon drawn, and found Ryan attacking his naked wife. "I was extremely terrified," he told the jury. "I don't think I've ever been more panicked in my life." Banfield said he shot Ryan after seeing him stab Christine, and insisted that his affair with Peres Magalhães was not serious enough to motivate murder.

Defense attorney John Carroll tried to cast doubt on the prosecution’s theory, arguing that the investigation was flawed and that Peres Magalhães had changed her story to secure a plea deal. "Is it reasonable, after a six- to eight-week affair, that someone is going to try to get rid of their companion of 19 years, wife of 12 years? Is that reasonable?" Carroll asked the jury. He also pointed to evidence suggesting dissent within the police department about the catfishing theory, and claimed that some digital evidence could have indicated Christine herself was behind the social media account used to lure Ryan.

But the jury was not convinced. After nearly nine hours of deliberation over two days, they found Banfield guilty on all counts: two counts of aggravated murder, using a firearm during the commission of murder, and child endangerment. The mandatory penalty for the highest murder charge in Virginia is life in prison, and Banfield’s sentencing is scheduled for May 8, 2026. He faces life without the possibility of parole.

The role of Juliana Peres Magalhães was pivotal. Initially charged with second-degree murder, she ultimately pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 2024 as part of a plea agreement. In exchange for her testimony against Banfield, prosecutors agreed to recommend a sentence of time served. Her cooperation was crucial in unraveling the plot and securing Banfield’s conviction.

Forensic evidence played a significant role in the trial. Prosecutors presented expert testimony that blood stains on Ryan’s hands suggested Christine’s blood had dripped onto him from above—consistent with the prosecution’s narrative and not Banfield’s self-defense claim. Digital data, blood smear analysis, and testimony from about 20 prosecution witnesses helped build a case that, in the words of Fairfax County’s Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano, revealed Banfield’s “monstrous” actions. "I hope he thinks about his wife in jail and about what a heinous thing he did," Descano told reporters after the verdict. "Because that’s something he’s rightfully going to have to live with for the rest of his life."

The defense, meanwhile, attempted to sow doubt about the thoroughness and impartiality of the investigation. Carroll argued that prosecutors rushed to judgment and manipulated evidence to fit their narrative, even suggesting that Peres Magalhães’ cooperation was motivated by self-interest rather than truth. He also noted that some evidence, such as DNA testing on certain items, was not pursued, and questioned the reliability of the prosecution’s star witness, given her plea deal and media contacts.

Despite these arguments, the jury sided with the prosecution, finding the weight of evidence and the testimony of Peres Magalhães compelling. The case has sparked conversations about trust, manipulation, and the dangers of online deception. It’s a story that’s likely to be dissected for years to come, both for its lurid details and the questions it raises about justice, motive, and the limits of human loyalty.

As Brendan Banfield awaits sentencing, the Banfield family—and the wider community—are left to grapple with the devastating consequences of a scheme that shattered lives and exposed the darkest corners of human ambition.