VA v. Brendan Banfield: Au Pair Affair Murder Trial

FAIRFAX, Va. (Court TV/AP) — A Virginia man is facing life in prison after a jury convicted him in the deaths of his wife and another man.

Brendan Banfield was found guilty of all charges, including two counts of aggravated murder, in the Feb. 2023 deaths of Christine Banfield and Joseph Ryan. Prosecutors alleged the murders were part of a larger scheme between Brendan and au pair Juliana Peres Magalhães, who were having an affair.

Brendan will face sentencing on May 8.

An evidence photo dated Oct. 13, 2023, shows a framed photo of Brendan Banfield and Juliana Peres Magalhaes on a nightstand in the master bedroom of the Banfield home. (Fairfax County VA Commonwealth’s Atty’s Office)

On the day of the killings, Magalhães called 911 at least three times, hanging up twice before reporting the emergency on the third call. Brendan then spoke into the phone and said he had shot a man because that man stabbed his wife, reported the Associated Press.

Authorities soon arrived at the Banfields’ home in Herndon, Virginia, and found that Ryan had been fatally shot and Christine suffered from stab wounds. She was taken to the hospital, where she died.

The story that Magalhães told the police raised suspicion. A months-long investigation revealed that Magalhães and Brendan were lovers. Prosecutors say the two schemed to kill Christine by luring a man to the house to play out a rape fantasy.

Ryan accepted the invitation, thinking he was meeting Christine for violent sex play, and brought a knife and restraints.

Magalhães was arrested in Oct. 2023 for the death of Ryan. Brendan was arrested nearly a year later in Sept. 2024 for the deaths of Christine and Ryan. The following month, Magalhães pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the death of Ryan. In a video obtained by NBC News, she said the plan was masterminded by Brendan to avoid a divorce.

DAILY TRIAL UPDATES

DAY 11 – 2/2/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 11 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• The jury reached a verdict, finding Brendan Banfield guilty on all charges.

DAY 10 – 1/30/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 10 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Jury deliberated for three hours and 14 minutes without reaching a verdict Friday.
• The seven-women five-men panel will resume deliberations on Monday at 10:00 AM.
• Jenna Sands closed for the Commonwealth, laying out the charges and elements required to prove each charge.
  • WATCH: Prosecution: ‘Plethora of Evidence’ Points To Brendan Banfield’s Guilt
  • She walked jurors through the evidence focusing on motive – Banfield’s desire to be with his mistress. Sands said the digital evidence cannot prove who was behind the screen engaging on FetLife but it was more likely Banfield and Magalhães than Christine, who had no digital history of online dating or infidelity while Banfield was a serial cheater.
  • She noted the blood evidence that was so reliable it led to the murder charges against Banfield.  Sands noted the blood evidence pointed to Banfield being Christine’s killer – Christine died after he shot Ryan, his body staged and manipulated after he was killed.
  • Sands noted castoff and fingerprint smeared blood on Banfield’s jeans. She argued that had to be the work of Banfield whose hands were covered in blood.
• Defense Attorney John Carroll argued that investigators rushed to judgement and did everything to break Juliana Magalhães so she would testify against his client. He urged jurors to look at the digital data, analyzed by experts from the defense and the Commonwealth, noting they agreed that Christine was in control of her devices and there was no significant gap in her usage of the devices that would allow for someone to misuse them. He noted that the 2-factor authentication code that was required to open the messaging app the two used had not been deleted from Christine’s phone.
  • WATCH: Brendan Banfield Defense: Au Pair Juliana Magalhães’ Story ‘Bought, Paid For’
  • Carroll argued Magalhães’ testimony was ‘bought and paid for’ by the Commonwealth, and her deal with the government would only benefit her if she implicated her ex-lover.
  • He argued that the government’s investigation was flawed, their theory dependent on the self-interest of Magalhães –noting that her story was not corroborated by the digital forensics and urged jurors to acquit his client.

DAY 9 – 1/29/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 9 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Brendan Banfield made some stunning disclosures to the jury during his second straight day on the witness stand, including the following:
  • WATCH: VA v. Brendan Banfield: Key Moments from Day 9
  • He returned home from McDonalds’ after receiving a call from Juliana Magalhães and believed he would encounter the man with whom Christine was having an affair.
  • When the sounds of sex sounded more painful than pleasurable, he drew his service weapon and went upstairs, where he found his wife naked on all fours and Joseph Ryan kneeling behind her.
  • He announced he was police – to which Ryan told him to drop the gun. He said Ryan had a knife to Christine’s neck which was partially obscured by her hair.
  • Christine warned him that Ryan had a knife and when he told him to drop the knife, “He told me that she was hers [his]. She gave herself to me.”
  • He said he fired on Ryan when it appeared he made a forceful stab at Christine causing her to rotate and fall on her stomach.
  • He said he knelt next to Christine to help her stem the blood flow from her neck wounds, at this point she had sustained seven stab wounds and a cut to her neck, yet she was able to move his hands over his and tell him she was ‘sorry’ and that ‘she loved him.’
  • He said he was focused on rendering aid to Christine and could not call 911 and told Magalhães to call. He said he did not realize that she hadn’t and did not notice that Ryan who had struck him from behind, causing Magalhães to shoot him.
  • He testified that he had never heard of FetLife before this happened and was unaware of Christine’s activity on FetLife, though he was aware that Christine was interested in BDSM after seeing bruises all over her body including her buttocks.
  • MORE: Brendan Banfield says he and au pair had split before wife’s killing
• On cross-examination: Prosecutor Jenna Sands noted Banfield had not shared his story and what happened in the bedroom with law enforcement before the trial, despite multiple hearings.
  • WATCH: Brendan Banfield Grilled Over Inconsistencies During Cross-Examination
  • She also noted that he had writtenMagalhães letters professing his love for her. He conceded he fell in love with Magalhães but only after Christine’s death when they had a chance to spend more time together.
  • He said Magalhães was a ‘hero’, believing she saved his life when she shot Ryan. ‘It’s easier to fall in love with someone that saved you,’ he said.
  • He agreed that they had discussed baby names for the children they were planning to have.
  • When prosecutor noted that he had had an affair with a woman he met on a Fetish website looking for ‘sugar babies,’ he disputed that it was a fetish website but an ‘arranged relationship.’
  • The prosecutor suggested he had an affair with his best friend’s wife. He claimed his friends were not ‘together’ at the time.
  • Prosecutor ridiculed his testimony that Christine could talk after suffering 7 stab wounds to her neck, and noted that he only reacted to defend his wife after ‘6 stab wounds in.’
  • Prosecutor also noted that he did not use the towel or blanket to stop the blood flow.
• Evidence closed in the case after both sides rested. The defense rested after calling a video/audio forensic analyst who compared the groaning sounds heard on the 911 call to the sounds made by the Banfield’s dog. Nick Barreiro testified the sound of groaning on the 911 call was consistent with the sounds made by the dog.
• The Commonwealth called two rebuttal witnesses. A detective testified the groaning on the 911 call was made by a human and a new witness who came forward after the first day of Banfield’s testimony.
• Banfield’s supervisor, Thomas Patrick Smith, testified that there was no meeting planned on February 24 when Banfield said he had to leave for work early to prepare for a meeting with his manager.
• Defense made its second motion to dismiss based on codefendant testimony arguing Juliana Magalhães’ testimony is unreliable and untrue. Judge denied the motion and the case will go to the jury for deliberations.

DAY 8 – 1/28/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 8 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Defendant Brendan Banfield took the stand in his own defense and testified he knew nothing about his wife’s FetLife account, and the exchanges on Telegram until after Christine’s death.
  • He denied using any of his wife’s devices in a scheme to set her up for a catfish ambush with Joseph Ryan on the day she was killed. He said he has no reason to use Christine’s laptop because he has his own work laptop and cell phones.
  • Banfield admitted to having an affair with Juliana Magalhães after she came on to him while Christine and their daughter were out of town.
  • After they began their affair, he told Magalhães that he had multiple affairs and had no intention of leaving his wife. He claimed Christine had her own extramarital relationships and that she was aware of his previous infidelities but did not know about his relationship with Magalhães.
  • He told jurors that he loved his wife and wanted to stay in the marriage.
  • Banfield claimed he practiced shooting at Silver Eagle to qualify for his certifications as a law enforcement officer for the IRS. Magalhães tagged along so they could spend time together outside of the house.
  • WATCH: Brendan Banfield Says He ‘Didn’t Stop’ Au Pair Advances
  • MORE: Brendan Banfield testifies he did not plot wife’s murder with au pair
• Harry Lidsky, the defense forensic digital expert, said he found no gaps in the usage of Christine’s devices that would present an opportunity to misuse them to concoct the catfish plot as alleged by prosecutors.
  • He testified that the FetLife activity was happening contemporaneously with activity on Christine’s personal Gmail account and the activity transitioned back and forth between accounts within seconds or minutes, leading him to conclude Christine’s devices were always within her control.
  • Concluded his testimony by opining that based on his analysis of the data, Brendan Banfield’s devices were not in the house when the FetLife account was created or when it was active.
  • On cross-examination, the defense expert agreed that while Banfield’s devices were out of the house, Magalhães was home, and could have gone on the FetLife account or the app that was being used to chat with Joseph Ryan.
  • On cross, the prosecutor noted that there was no activity on FetLife when Banfield and Magalhães were away on weekend trips.
  • She also noted that there were two distinct themes of activity taking place.
    • FetLife activity on the laptop, while on her phone, evidence of shopping and vacation research and other benign activity.

DAY 7 – 1/23/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 7 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Defense attorney John Carroll announced his client would testify during Friday’s charge conference when attorneys met to discuss jury instructions with the judge.
• Carroll’s painstaking slog through exhibits ran out the clock keeping his client off the stand Friday.  Most of the day was spent eliciting testimony from Defense Digital Forensic Analyst Harry Lidsky who opined that Christine was not a victim of catfishing.
  • He noted that Christine had taken a selfie in a bathing suit and shared it with her husband on Facebook on January 17, 2023. That same photo was later downloaded from Facebook, edited, and posted to Anastasia’s FetLife account which was opened on the same day.
  • Based on his analysis of pattern usage there were no significant gaps during what he says was Christine’s use of her laptop to allow for someone else to take over her device to do what Juliana Magalhaes says she and Brendan did to set her up to Rendez-vous with Joseph Ryan on February 23, 2026.
  • For instance, on February 20, 2023, he noted the devices of Brendan and Magalhaes were out of the house between 9:00 pm and 11:00 pm when geolocations put them at a gym. Christine’s laptop had logged into her work website at approximately 11:07, about 24 seconds later he noted activity on FetLife.
  • “We’ve gone from activity unrelated to the scheme to activity central to the scheme in a 24 second window,” said Lidsky.
  • Lidsky noted patterns of laptop activity late into the night that associated with Christine’s email, which frequently transitioned into exchanges between Anastasia and Ryan.
• The defense also called Nick Barreiro a forensic audio/visual expert who was asked to analyze the 911 call and audio from Lily the Banfield’s dog. The focus of his analysis is the 1.5 seconds in which the Commonwealth contends Joseph Ryan is groaning, the defense is expected to argue that the sound is the dog not Ryan.
  • The prosecutor challenged the lack of foundation for the dog exemplar used by Barreiro so he did not complete his testimony and will return to the witness stand. The dog bark was recorded by Banfield’s mother, who has been excluded from the courtroom as she is on the government’s witness list.

DAY 6 – 1/22/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 6 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Defense lawyer John Carroll continued to make his claim that law enforcement was so fixated on blaming Brendan Banfield for his wife’s murder that they put the squeeze on Juliana Magalhaes to ‘recant’ and pressured detectives to get behind the theory that Banfield masterminded the murders.
• Among the witnesses called were John Patrick Brusch who headed the major crimes unit of the Fairfax County PD and oversaw the Banfield investigation. He was grilled about his decision to reassign Brendan Miller, the forensic digital examiner who analyzed the electronic devices in the case. The Defense contends that Brusch was the driving force behind the arrest and transferred  detectives out of the unit who did not agree with him.
  • Touting his own master’s degree in digital forensics Brusch testified that he found Miller’s conclusions so flawed that he barred Miller from performing digital analysis on any future Major Crimes case and reassigned him to the sex crimes unit. Brusch said Miller was mistaken in attributing activity to a person rather than the device without any corroborating evidence.
  • Brusch was also questioned about transferring the lead detective off the case  and handpicking a supervisor to do an end run around his own detectives by having him report directly to him.
  • Brusch agreed that he thought the lead detective was inexperienced and ‘in over his head,’ so brought in David Giaccio to supervise the homicide unit. Defense claims the two were aligned in their theory of the murders.
• Defense Attorney Carroll called Giaccio as a witness and pressed him on adopting the catfish theory early in the investigation and needed Juliana Magalhaes to implicate Banfield as the mastermind. Giaccio testified that her proffer helped to fill in the blanks but the blood evidence they had was significant and he did not think they needed her testimony to make their case that Banfield and Magalhaes set up Christine in a catfish plot.
• Carroll called Saly Fayez, the director of Victim Services for the Fairfax County PD, who was part of the management team. Fayez agreed the catfish theory  came up in discussions but on cross she revealed an exchange between Banfield’s 4-year-old daughter and Juliana that made her suspicious.
  • Fayez testified that she heard Valerie ask Magalhaes, “Can I call you mommy now?”
  • Juliana allegedly responded ‘Yes.’
  • And the girl asked, “Are you going to marry my father?”
  • To which Magalhaes said, “I wish.”

DAY 5 – 1/21/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 5 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Defense called five witnesses Wednesday, arguing prosecutors developed “tunnel vision” in charging Brendan Banfield, pressured a codefendant to lie, and sidelined a detective whose findings conflicted with the state’s theory.
• Defense questioned Detective Brendan Miller about his reassignment while the case was pending, after he analyzed devices belonging to Christine Banfield and the suspects.
  • Miller concluded Christine Banfield was in control of her devices when a new Gmail account and FetLife profiles were created.
  • Defense attorney John Carroll suggested Miller was not called by prosecutors—and was transferred—because his conclusions did not align with the government’s theory.
  • Miller testified he reviewed his findings and did not change them after Juliana Magalhaes gave a statement to prosecutors.
  • The defense argued the forensic data and Miller’s conclusions remained unchanged even after Magalhaes claimed she and Banfield created the account to lure an unsuspecting user and frame Christine Banfield for murder.
  • On cross-examination, Miller agreed he could not say with certainty who was behind the screen when the accounts were created and acknowledged context is critical in attributing online activity.
• Defense also called patrol officers to play bodycam video showing Banfield’s reaction when hospital personnel informed him of his wife’s death.
  • WATCH: Bodycam Audio: Brendan Banfield Sobs After Learning His Wife Has Died
  • Jurors viewed footage capturing what sounded like an emotional reaction at the moment Banfield learned Christine Banfield had died from severe wounds.
  • Banfield became tearful while watching the video and wiped tears from his face in court.
• The defense presented its own bloodstain pattern analyst to rebut the prosecution’s expert.
  • LeeAnn Singley testified the droplets on Joseph Ryan could not be reliably classified as castoff or airborne blood, citing distortion caused by the target surface.
  • Singley also noted knife injuries are common, pointing to a bruise and puncture wound on Ryan’s finger, while Banfield—whom prosecutors allege stabbed Christine—showed no injuries to his hands.
• The defense submitted 71 letters Magalhaes wrote while in custody, asserting she changed her story and implicated Banfield to secure her release from jail.
  • VIDEO: Newly Released Bodycam Follows Brendan Banfield After Killings

DAY 4 – 1/20/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 4 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• The Commonwealth rested its case-in-chief after calling Christine Banfield’s father to talk about a life-long blood disorder she had that made her prone to bruising and excessive bleeding.
• Gary Benson’s testimony appeared to counter the suggestion that Christine was ‘Anastasia 9’ — the user who invited Joseph Ryan to the house for violent sex. Benson’s testimony suggested that Christine’s condition would have kept her from exposing herself to knife play as requested by Anastasia of Ryan.
• The Commonwealth also called a blood spatter expert who analyzed the blood stains at the crime scene and on Joseph Ryan’s body. Her analysis could advance the government’s contention that the defendant manipulated the scene to frame Ryan for Christine’s murder.
• Blood Stain Analyst Iris Dalley Graff opined:
  • Blood flow on Ryan’s face traveled in different directions suggesting his head was moved while blood was wet.
  • Blood on Ryan’s hands was transferred from an object with blood to his hands
  • Blood on Ryans’ hands flowed down toward his elbow not toward his wrist – so his hands were held up not in the down position making it more likely his body was manipulated.
  • Droplets on the defendant’s pants and on Ryan’s body were indicative of cast off, such a pattern would indicate an object with blood was in motion causing blood to be airborne before it landed on a surface.
• On cross examination the defense suggested that a bruise and blood on Ryan’s hands could be indicative of using the knife to stab Christine.
• Blood flows on Ryan’s face could also be indicative of blood he coughed up out of his mouth.
• At the conclusion of the Commonwealth’s case the defense made a motion to dismiss the charges arguing that Juliana Magalhaes’ testimony was not reliable, and the DNA evidence did not implicate his client. Judge denied the motion.

DAY 3 – 1/15/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 3 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Crime scene detective Terry Leach played a video from the McDonald’s restaurant near Banfield’s home, where he waited for a call from his lover, Juliana Magalhães, alerting him to the arrival of Joseph Ryan, whom he invited to his house to fulfill a rape fantasy against his wife.
  • Magalhães testified she and Banfield concocted ruses to leave the house that morning so Christine would be alone. Brendan went to a nearby McDonald’s while Magalhães pretended to take the couple’s 4-year-old daughter to the zoo, but instead waited in the car on the lookout for Ryan.
  • Once Ryan arrived, Magalhães said the plan was to call Brendan, who would come home in time to catch Ryan attacking his wife, kill him, then stage the scene to make it appear as though Ryan stabbed his wife to death when it was really Banfield, according to the au pair.
  • In text exchanges with Anastasia 9, the user Brendan allegedly created while posing as his wife on FetLife– Ryan indicated he expected to arrive at 7:30 AM and was bringing with him items he was planning to use in their sex play, including zip ties, a knife, chains, and lube. Police photos captured those items in Ryan’s backpack, and a Wal-Mart receipt for lube was found in Ryan’s wallet.
  • A call log from Banfield’s phone that morning reflected incoming calls from Magalhães at 7:37 and 7:38 AM, just minutes after Ryan said he’d be arriving at the house.
  • VIDEO: Surveillance Shows Brendan Banfield at McDonald’s Before Killings
• Crime scene detective Kenner Fortner photographed the house twice, the second time while executing a search warrant several months after the slayings. He noted that Magalhães’ closet had been emptied and her clothes, including red lingerie, were moved into the master bedroom, where a picture of the au pair and Banfield replaced a portrait of Christine and her husband.
  • Numerous items of evidence stained with blood were tested and compared with the DNA profiles of Banfield, Magalhães, Ryan and Christine.
  • The clothes Banfield was wearing that morning were tested for blood and DNA. Christine’s DNA was found on his jeans and on the knife that was recovered from the scene. Brendan’s DNA was not found on the knife believed used to kill Christine or in his wife’s fingernail clippings.

DAY 2 – 1/14/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 2 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Defense attorney John Carroll spent the better part of a day grilling codefendant Juliana Magalhães about a double murder plot she claimed her ex-lover concocted so the two could pursue a life together.
  • Magalhães said Brendan Banfield posed as his wife on a fetish dating website to lure a man to the house to carry out a rape fantasy. His plan was to kill the stranger in self-defense while framing him for his wife’s murder, which Magalhães said Banfield carried out himself by stabbing her multiple times with the knife he told Joseph Ryan, the role-playing ‘rapist’, to bring.
  • Carroll questioned Magalhães about letters she wrote from jail, where she repeatedly expressed her frustration and disappointment over legal representation, and the pace at which it was going.  Magalhães was distraught and upset at being separated from her family and was anxious to be tried, believing she would be acquitted.
  • In earlier letters, Magalhães was effusive about her love for the defendant and vowed she would stand by him no matter how appealing a plea bargain prosecutors offered.
  • WATCH: Juliana Magalhaes’ Letter to Brendan Banfield: ‘They Want Me to Cooperate’
  • In a letter to Banfield’s mother, Tess, who was paying for her defense, she said, “I would give up my life for his…I will take the blame for both of us.”
  • As the months wore on, she grew more despondent and anxious, complaining about delays in her trial and her lawyer’s lack of commitment and trial preparation. She grew distant from him, at one point writing, “I don’t expect much from Brendan, I’ll be deported back to Brazil.”
  • The defense suggested the threat of being cut off from her family in Brazil and a health crisis in October pushed her to testify against Banfield and point the finger at him for planning the attacks on Joseph Ryan and Christine.
  • Also, on cross, the defense suggested that Magalhães stood to benefit from telling her story as she was negotiating with TV producers for money in exchange for her participation in a documentary.
  • In messages, Magalhães discussed speaking with producers who approached her with an exclusivity contract, in exchange for which she would be paid at least 10K, but she did not commit to a producing team representing Netflix, in hopes of holding out for more money.
  • WATCH: Former Au Pair Juliana Magalhaes Reviews Emails of Selling Story to Netflix
  • The defense also pressed Magalhães for details regarding the alleged plan to create the FetLife account, as well as identifying the author of messages on the fetish dating website generated by the profile using Christine’s laptop.  Magalhães insisted that she could not recall exactly who wrote which message, because she and Brendan both participated in writing the posts using similar language. She also could not recall specific details about creating the user profile – only that Brendan created the profile.
  • The exchange got testy at times, forcing the judge to chastise the witness, telling her to ‘just answer the question.’
  • The defense suggested Magalhães cobbled together her testimony by studying the discovery materials she received from the Commonwealth.
  • On redirect – Magalhaes insisted that she was telling the truth.

DAY 1 – 1/13/26

• LIVE STREAM: VA v. Brendan Banfield – Day 1 | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• Prosecutor Jenna Sands accused the defendant of masterminding the plot that ended the lives of Christine Banfield and Joseph Ryan. She said Brendan Banfield began an affair with his au pair that became more serious and intimate. She told jurors that Banfield schemed to lure a man to his house to execute a rape fantasy so that he would have a reason for killing a man whom he set up to take the blame for his wife’s murder. Sands told jurors that the defendant is responsible for both murders and urged jurors to find him guilty.
• WATCH: Au Pair Affair Murder Trial: Opening Statements
• Defense attorney John F. Carroll suggested the government was fixated on his client and focused on ‘flipping’ Juliana Magalhães when she was feeling most vulnerable – thousands of miles from home and in custody. The delays in her trial wore her down until she was ready to accept the government’s deal that would require her to testify against his client.
  • Carroll suggested that the correspondence she wrote while she was in jail reveals that prosecutors pressured her to lie against her ex in an effort to secure a conviction against him. He urged jurors to listen carefully to her testimony and claimed that it would not be supported by the evidence.
• WATCH: Jury Hears Brendan Banfield in 911 Call | Au Pair Affair Murder Trial
• WATCH: Bodycam Played in Court Reveals Chaotic Crime Scene in Banfield Home
• Codefendant Juliana Magalhães took the stand and detailed the defendant’s alleged plot to kill his wife to avoid a divorce and the potential of having to share assets and custody of their 4-year-old daughter.
  • Magalhães said she and Brendan Banfield began a sexual affair in August of 2022 less than a year after she started working as his au pair. By October of 2022, Magalhães said he shared a plan to get rid of his wife by creating a profile on FetLife, a fetish dating website.
  • Magalhães said she and Banfield used his wife’s laptop to create a user profile – Anastasia 9. Banfield, posing as Christine, looked for users willing to come to his house to fulfill a rape fantasy that included gagging, bondage and spanking. Magalhães said Banfield requested that candidates bring restraints and excluded those users who wanted to meet in public before engaging in the ‘rapist’ role.
  • Magalhães testified that Banfield selected the date (2/24/23), a day when Christine would be home.  The plan was for Banfield to wait at a nearby McDonald’s and for Magalhães to pretend to take the child to the zoo to be out of the house when Ryan arrived. Magalhães said she was to call Banfield to tell him Ryan was at the house. She and Banfield returned to the home while Ryan was upstairs in the master bedroom with Christine. She said she saw Ryan on top of Christine, and heard her tell her husband, ‘He has a knife.’
  • The former au pair then described how Banfield allegedly shot Ryan in the head and then used the knife Ryan brought to stab his wife multiple times in the neck.
  • Magalhães said she noticed Ryan still moving and shot Ryan in the chest. Her testimony in court varies from her bodycam statement to police on the day of the shooting – in the bodycam, she claimed Banfield told her to shoot Ryan.
  • MORE: Au Pair testifies Brendan Banfield had a plan to ‘get rid of’ wife
  • WATCH: Brendan Banfield’s Former Au Pair Takes the Stand in Double Murder Trial
• The medical examiner who autopsied both victims concluded they were both ‘rapid fatalities,’ and would have died within seconds to minutes after sustaining the injuries they suffered. Dr. Meghan Kessler testified about numerous bruises and abrasions on Christine’s legs and arms. She said most of the bruises did not appear to be more than 48 hours old, and it was not clear to her if they happened peri (at or close to the time of death) or post mortem.

‘The Beast in Me’ Boss Breaks Down Ending: ‘Nobody Gets Away Scot-Free’

What To Know

• The Netflix series The Beast in Me explores themes of complicity, denial, and the persistence of evil, with characters confronting their own roles in a web of coverups and violence.
• Executive producer Howard Gordon explains the finale ending and shares if there were any others considered.
• Gordon also breaks down key moments throughout the season between Claire Danes and Matthew Rhys’ characters.

[Warning: The below contains MAJOR spoilers for The Beast in Me.]

“My hands are far from clean,” author Aggie (Claire Danes) writes in her book after the events of The Beast in Me. Such is the case for many of the characters of this thrilling new Netflix series.

Aggie’s still grieving the loss of her and Shelley’s (Natalie Morales) son, in a car accident she blames Teddy Fenig for — she’d been distracted doing an interview over the phone at the same time as Cooper was playing in the backseat — when Nile (Matthew Rhys) and his new wife Nina (Brittany Snow) move in next door. The world thinks Nile killed his first wife, and, as the all-flashback Episode 7 shows, he did, brutally. He also frames Aggie for Teddy’s death, putting his body in her son’s room. But it’s Nina who’s his ultimate downfall, having recorded his murder confession. Then, Nile’s uncle, Rick (Tim Guinee), has him killed in prison.

Below, executive producer Howard Gordon breaks down that finale ending. (Plus, read what he had to say about a potential Season 2 here.)

Why have it be Nina who is ultimately Nile’s downfall to his face and Aggie kind of off to the side?

Howard Gordon: I describe the end like landing planes at JFK on a snowy Christmas Eve. There were so many planes to land. It’s a question that can’t be answered just because it was like that’s where Aggie, who we thought at that moment was going to be just caught in the mouse trap — it just synced that way. We were like rhythmically, this is really this two-hander and we are missing it. And really only when we figured out the coda at the end did we say, OK, this is what works. And the truth is, when you look at it like, everybody slowly realizes what their complicity has been in this ongoing coverup that has been fueled by denial, privilege, everybody kind of saw what they wanted to or covered up and thought they had kept the evil at bay. But the resilience and the persistence of that kind of sociopathy is nobody gets away scot-free.

Courtesy of Netflix

Nina, what I really liked and hoped helped set us up for the fun reversals that these shows require narratively was her capitulation to her husband, even when she finally looks at it squarely, she’s a mother, here’s the consequence. And that was kind of based a little on a Stephen King story [A Good Marriage], not to go too deep in the weeds, where a woman realizes her husband and the father of her two now adult children is a serial killer, a long dormant serial killer. She had this calculus where she’s going to call the police and then she realized, oh my God, if I call the police, my entire family, my life, my daughter’s life is ruined. And so that gave me the confidence to go, I could really see Nina, who kind of was only looking at the situation with one eye anyway, when she finally recognizes that the father of her — not only her husband, but the father of her child is this monster, why she might just capitulate or finally go along with it. So that was a reversal that we needed to tee up our fun reversal. But at the same time, that’s where the reckoning was, and then the effect that Aggie is kind of there to sort of get the assist or we realize, oh my God, she’s in on it with Nina. So it was a bit of revenge of the women who have been abused.

When Aggie visits Nile in prison? Such a good scene. How worried is she that Nile might be right, that they are the same? Because being complicit, feeling the pull and her own blood lust as she says in her book, that’s one thing, but being like Nile is completely different from that.

Well, 100%. The real question, and I’ll have to leave it to the audience and to you to sort of decide whether she recognizes, Aggie, the complicity in her having wound up this — by telling a monster or presumed monster, her deepest id, her wish that Teddy Fenig paid the price that he did. It really is about a squaring with herself, a narrative that she’s told herself and the price of that, which she again says in her own book, confessionally, I’ll have to live with the fact that I have now been part of taking a son from another mother.

It goes back to a very deep philosophical question about, what is evil? Is evil doing evil or is it turning away from evil? Is it looking away? Is it complicity? And I think that that’s a real thing that is not — no, they’re not the same and she’s not a killer. But if I whisper to — remember that episode, not to keep on citing other shows, but remember when Dr. Melfi in The Sopranos, she’s been raped and we’re waiting for her to tell Tony that, but she doesn’t, which, David Chase is such a master at subverting expectations. But in this case, I think, yeah, Aggie has to live with that and I hope she feels — She’ll never not be the same.

Had you known from the start that Nile wouldn’t survive the season?

Well, the short answer is yes, then no, then yes again, and yes, in that we had some notion roughly speaking, the flags were planted, how are we going to get there? But I really knew I wanted to create a situation where she was in a bit of that mouse trap. And then I woke up once and I came into the writers’ room at the time, I was convinced, maybe let’s just go all in and this is how life is. I don’t know what cynical event and current events made me think that. But yeah, I think the audience would’ve been throwing their shoes at the TV or whatever they watch it on.

Are there any alternate endings you considered?

I think that the good part of an ending is that you feel like — yes, this went through many, many iterations. Like I said, landing all those planes is — just things that maybe we thought, maybe Nile doesn’t have to die. And just being in prison, is that worse than actually the mercy of being killed? But everything felt just right. And I guess ultimately looking back at it, I really couldn’t be happier with the way [it ended]. I wish I had one upgrade on the old trope of the recording because that was like a placeholder, but we never found anything that could make it to beat that.

Why have Episode 7 be the flashback one that reveals all about what happened to Madison? And then also how important was it for you to show that happy ending with Aggie and Shelley and Cooper in that?

Part of the problem was that when we got the green light, we had a window [to film] and Claire had committed to another project. And so we actually needed to find a way to flip the episode. We wound up not doing it, but we had that in our back pocket that if we didn’t hit all our things, we needed to open up Claire’s schedule and we could have shot [Episode] 8 in front of 7. But it turned out that it was creatively something that the story really required because part of this challenge has been prosecuting two simultaneous mysteries, one in the past, one in the present, and all those come together and it had everything to do with illuminating Jonathan Banks‘ story and the uncle and Tim Guinee’s story. And then at the end when Claire was available, to be perfectly honest with you, I said, she’s got to be in this. And I said, what was she doing around this time then? Oh, let’s put a nice little coda when things were happy.

Chris Saunders/Netflix

Could Nile have pushed Aggie off the ledge when he takes her up at Jarvis Yards in Episode 3? Or is he too intrigued by her at that point to truly consider doing so?

I think it would’ve pained him to do it. I think he’s a bully. And so I think the intimidation of the moment was really just a way to get her to get as close to the truth or what he in the moment felt was a betrayal. But it turns out, yeah, he could have. I love the way Claire plays [after] in the car with Abbott. That was just great. I really think you feel the emotion of that release, so the scene is really part of a sequence that I think works nicely.

Episode 5 really stands out for the Aggie and Nile scenes. Why did you want to have that at that point in the season? And what did you want to do that whole sequence? The two of them together are just fantastic on screen.

Unbelievable. This is one of the great treats, and you never know how it’s going to turn out. But in this case, Daniel Pearle — both he and I came onto the show after the show had been developed for a bit, and we knew that at some point in the season, we wanted her to feel like, oh my God, I was wrong. Shelley was right. I am projecting this story. And in that moment, because again, the perverse fun or subversive part of the show, it’s perverse, but it’s subversive, is that these two very lonely people find each other, and so showing that kind of moment was — Daniel, who is a playwright and who’s not afraid to write a long scene, wrote a brilliant scene when they have that lunch in the pilot by the seaside. But it’s a scene that really that’s not afraid of language and it’s the proverbial cat and mouse and these two actors are operatically excellent at squeezing every gesture, so, it was just a beautiful synthesis between that, and also our director, Lila Neugebauer, was terrific. It was very theater.

Yeah, I was going to say, in different circumstances, if Nile wasn’t a killer, that sequence made me think these two could maybe be friends.

Even when they get into like, Hey, aren’t you a little tempted? And she’s like, oh. It really goes into fun stuff that you could really look at it, if it wasn’t done, I think, well, one could say, oh, that’s offensive, or that’s this. But I think that’s the nature of their relationship. And I do like the fact that because she’s gay, it kind of does take off the table what I think could have been an encumbrance to their relationship. I think asexual sexuality or asexual sensuality is kind of what is the secret ingredient of that relationship.

Yeah, I was wondering about the vibe between Aggie and Nina a little bit at times.

Yeah, well, I’m so happy, Meredith, that you did because that is what was intended.

The moment in the woods, with the sprained ankle…

I love it. I’m so happy you saw it, you felt it because what the intention was.

Related

Claire Danes & Matthew Rhys Are ‘Playing With Fire’ in ‘The Beast in Me’

Watching the dawning realization come over Nile’s father, then he collapses, and then we see Rick continuing to protect his brother throughout to the point of what he does before he is arrested… Why was he so adamant to do that for his brother and protect him so hard?

I’ve worked with Tim Guinee on every show I’ve done. He did my first show that I created called Strange World, he was the star. I’ve worked with Tim now for 30 years, and he’s very much an actor’s actor. And in fact, I’m ashamed to say he didn’t cross my mind for the part, but he actually read, and then when I saw him read, he had also played in The Staircase for Antonio [Campos]. So we both were like, oh my God, what were we thinking? We know Tim, and we hadn’t thought of him. So he’s such, first of all, an amazing actor and an amazing person, and the difference between he and Jonathan too — Circumstances make you come up with a story. And so the idea of Jonathan being a good chunk older than Tim, so he was a much older brother, they were kind of Dickensian orphans, that loyalty…

Like you said, Aggie isn’t Nile. Uncle Rick isn’t him either. But they all have something broken, something is in them. And I think he recognizes his nephew and certainly doesn’t like him and doesn’t like what he’s done to his brother. And so I think it was very simple in that, oh, my older brother did everything to keep me out of trouble. Now, whatever, I don’t drink. I’m in program, I take care of the dogs and live over the garage. And he says something to Nina at one point when she goes, don’t you want [more], you’re the brother and you’re living there? And he goes, I have something my nephew and my brother will never have. And she goes, what’s that? And he means her, too. And he says, enough.

That was a line, by the way, a real line that I remember having heard between Joseph Heller and Kurt Vonnegut at some really ritzy Hamptons party. And one of them was saying to the other, look at that guy, he’s a banker. He is worth [this since he just] just sold his company for this. He goes to over all these people, do you know how many books would take to have that? And I don’t know whether it was Vonnegut or Joseph Heller who said that to the other, but he goes, I have something none of them will ever have. So short answer is his loyalty, which I think we set up in Episode 3, shows the deep love and debt that that younger brother has for his older brother who has tried to wish away, cover up, deny that the evil he recognizes is always there with that nephew, with his son.

How worried is Nina for her baby at the end there because the way she looks at a baby and looks at Aggie’s book on the floor… How worried is she about following in the father’s footsteps?

The look on her face. I think Aggie is narrating her deepest fear. And what the show is obviously about is the persistence and metastases of evil and its resilience across generation. So I would say it’s a little Omen-y, but it’s been fun to mix and match tones on the show.