VA - Joseph Ryan shot, Christine Banfield stabbed, both deceased, in home - Herndon 24 Feb 2023

[Izzylizzy]

He has nothing to lose, but I wonder if this will hurt his appeals down the road.

When a defendant testifies' at their criminal trial it basically opens Pandora's Box on where the prosecution can go in asking questions.
If a defendant has a criminal background that can be asked about but IIRC: BB has a clear record.
I gather all questions about his relationship with the au-pair are good to go and maybe about his marriage relationship?
Does a defendant testifying give the prosecution the ability to call any new witnesses?
Anything that the defendant says can now be used against them by the appellate judges when during the trial those things may not have been permitted.
imo

 

[Luna20]

I'm just confused at this point. The defense seems to be just blatantly delaying. Or is he really this incompetent? His cross of the au pair was also pretty tedious. You can hear the frustration in the judge's voice today. She's cutting him off and clarifying things. She's also sighing.

Agree. She wants him to get in sync with a consistent narrative. I do think that the defense is trying to delay. Depending on the snow, it could be days before this would resume.

 

[Izzylizzy]

He has nothing to lose, but I wonder if this will hurt his appeals down the road.

I just found this.
Good read.

snip:

Cross-Examination Is Brutal​

Once the defendant takes the stand, his criminal defense lawyer will ask questions that allow him to explain his side of the story in a way that is most favorable to his case.

However, when the prosecution gets a crack at the defendant during cross-examination, even the most sympathetic and credible defendant can become a seething cauldron of rage or an unbelievable mess. Depending on the circumstances of the case, if the defendant testifies, they could be asked about any prior criminal record and prior bad acts which can potentially discredit them in front of the jury or judge.

Other Witnesses Can Testify​

Because of the risk of a defendant being discredited or vilified on the stand, it is often much more prudent to let other witnesses do the heavy lifting in a defendant's case.

Defense witnesses can also testify about a defendant's actions and even their perception of his state of mind without violating the rule against hearsay evidence.

5 Reasons Defendants Choose Not to Testify - FindLaw

Criminal defendants cannot be forced to testify in court. What are the typical reasons they choose not to testify? Let FindLaw lay it all out for you.

www.findlaw.com

 

[LifeIsAMystery]

The defense just said that the defendant is going to testify!

Wow! Curious how that will go for him?

 

[Weki]

Defense atty - Sir, is there anything additional you need to testify to about that slide?
Witness - No

Haha. You're supposed to ask the questions, defense atty. He's totally stalling!! Ugh

 

[Izzylizzy]

The Defense's numbering of exhibits feels like an extended round of 'Who's on First?'

Are they really this disorganized or are they trying to slide something in as evidence that shouldn't be?

The State just caught one that had been previously denied.

JMO

Glad this got in.

The selfie CB sent BB of her in a bathing suit.

Meanwhile soon after receiving it BB got caught through forensics of posting that same photo on the faux fetish account he made in her name.
imo

 

[Megnut]

Glad this got in.

The selfie CB sent BB of her in a bathing suit.

Meanwhile soon after receiving it BB got caught through forensics of posting that same photo on the faux fetish account he made in her name.
imo

However, the Defense is using this witness to suggest CB was in possession of her device, doing all of this.

If CB took a selfie for the purposes of hooking up with a violent lovah, why would she send the photo to her husband?

It is obvious that BB, using his own training, premediated these murders, intentionally manipulating digital data.

These maneuvers are exactly what a trained digital analyzer would do to mock up a cringe like this.

Who's to say BB wasn't responsible for all that activity in full possession of her accounts?

JMO

 

[Weki]

Well I think today is a wash. We won't see anything meaningful until after the snowstorm. I'm not listening to this nonsense testimony. It's unfortunate that the judge can't do anything about this and jurors have to sit there and suffer through this inanity (AGAIN) today. What a waste of time! JMO

 

[Megnut]

Are we seriously supposed to consider that CB decided to go full S&M, with no prior history and her fragile blood disorder, created a profile, then invited a stranger into the family home, while her children and their nanny was at home?

BB, by profession, has more education and training than many of the defendants we see across these threads. He would know that an investigation is going to seize on her phone.

He would have been proactively manipulating her phone IMO. Copying her typical usage. Logging in and out of accounts, etc. Not unlike suspects who send texts on their victims' phone after their murders.

There was nothing stopping BB from utilizing CB's own phone, prior to the crimes, to set her up, which was the whole point of his scheme.

JMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

Going with the defense that CB set up the encounter is a bridge too far to believe that she'd give a total stranger the address to her home so he could come there to carry out a fetish she had.

That is what motels are for.
imo

 

[Izzylizzy]

However, the Defense is using this witness to suggest CB was in possession of her device, doing all of this.

If CB took a selfie for the purposes of hooking up with a violent lovah, why would she send the photo to her husband?

It is obvious that BB, using his own training, premediated these murders, intentionally manipulating digital data.

These maneuvers are exactly what a trained digital analyzer would do to mock up a cringe like this.

Who's to say BB wasn't responsible for all that activity in full possession of her accounts?

JMO

Jurors have been known to discredit experts from both sides knowing both sides got what they paid for.
imo

 

[sunspun]

Are we seriously supposed to consider that CB decided to go full S&M, with no prior history and her fragile blood disorder, created a profile, then invited a stranger into the family home, while her children and their nanny was at home?

BB, by profession, has more education and training than many of the defendants we see across these threads. He would know that an investigation is going to seize on her phone.

He would have been proactively manipulating her phone IMO. Copying her typical usage. Logging in and out of accounts, etc. Not unlike suspects who send texts on their victims' phone after their murders.

There was nothing stopping BB from utilizing CB's own phone, prior to the crimes, to set her up, which was the whole point of his scheme.

JMO

I know CB worked. Was her job outside of the home? I would assume she took her phone with her to work. When did the online communications with Joe occur? Would it have been during her work hours sometimes? How did BB have access to her phone all these times during the online communication with Joe or the fetish site?

Or was he always using her laptop and not her phone when he was pretending to be her, and maybe she never took laptop with her away from the house? I know sometimes it was the nanny who he had pretending to be CB online too.

 

[Megnut]

I know CB worked. Was her job outside of the home? I would assume she took her phone with her to work. When did the online communications with Joe occur? Would it have been during her work hours sometimes? How did BB have access to her phone all these times during the online communication with Joe or the fetish site?

Or was he always using her laptop and not her phone when he was pretending to be her, and maybe she never took laptop with her away from the house? I know sometimes it was the nanny who he had pretending to be CB online too.

As a jury, I would want all the information, minus slant.

I wish I could ask this witness, if we assume BB is behind the fetish site, posing as CB, how would you reproduce that?

His point about gaps in time not being long enough is fairly sound, but IMO it falls apart if there is someone motivated to take advantage of micro gaps and/or someone who had full possession or access to a device or devices and was also effecting the bookends events.

BB would have reason to bury his involvement.

JMO

 

[Luna20]

Going with the defense that CB set up the encounter is a bridge too far to believe that she'd give a total stranger the address to her home so he could come there to carry out a fetish she had.

That is what motels are for.
imo

And with her young child at home right?

Are they at lunch now?

 

[Izzylizzy]

As a jury, I would want all the information, minus slant.

I wish I could ask this witness, if we assume BB is behind the fetish site, posing as CB, how would you reproduce that?

His point about gaps in time not being long enough is fairly sound, but IMO it falls apart if there is someone motivated to take advantage of micro gaps and/or someone who had full possession or access to a device or devices and was also effecting the bookends events.

BB would have reason to bury his involvement.

JMO

If BB does testify who knows what he'll be asked and what will be divulged.
He waives his right against pleading the 5th (self-incrimination )regarding the charges he'll be testifying about.
imo

 

[Izzylizzy]

And with her young child at home right?

Are they at lunch now?

Wasn't au-pair supposedly taking the child to the zoo but waited close by with the child in the car and saw JR arrive with a bag?

 

[Wishbone]

They look like two peas in a pod

 

[LifeIsAMystery]

I know CB worked. Was her job outside of the home? I would assume she took her phone with her to work. When did the online communications with Joe occur? Would it have been during her work hours sometimes? How did BB have access to her phone all these times during the online communication with Joe or the fetish site?

Or was he always using her laptop and not her phone when he was pretending to be her, and maybe she never took laptop with her away from the house? I know sometimes it was the nanny who he had pretending to be CB online too.

Christine was a NICU nurse. https://www.washingtonpost.com/crim...9.6Wj9BCgScK4HfUJoeuf80-_UGp0DoCDbyWvx5iFFKbs

 

[Yemelyan]

I know CB worked. Was her job outside of the home? I would assume she took her phone with her to work. When did the online communications with Joe occur? Would it have been during her work hours sometimes? How did BB have access to her phone all these times during the online communication with Joe or the fetish site?

Or was he always using her laptop and not her phone when he was pretending to be her, and maybe she never took laptop with her away from the house? I know sometimes it was the nanny who he had pretending to be CB online too.

From testimony it sounded like, in her job as a NICU nurse, she sometimes worked overnights or non 9-5 shifts and would often sleep at home during the day. While she was asleep in her bedroom, BB and JM would retrieve her phone and laptop to use for their purposes. JM testified the laptop that belonged to CB was usually kept in her work bag by the front door while CB was sleeping.

 

[Weki]

OMG he's been going with the same witness this whole time? I just popped onto the stream to see where things stood. That jury has to be BORED outta their minds. My God!