Jan. 22, 2026
Au Pair Affair Murders Trial: Legal Analyst Says Au Pair Isn’t Likable, BUT She’s Believable
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed Criminal defense attorney Alison Triessl has been closely following the Brendan Banfield BDSM trial for the past two weeks. Triessl relies on her 3 decades of trial experience to talk about the prosecution’s case and what the defense needs to do to overcome the damning testimony of the au pair. If the jury believes her testimony, Triessl believes it will be an impossible road for the defense, but they have a potential ace up their sleeve, and it involves a Fairfax County police detective.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Welcome everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ Presents. We have been obsessed with this awe pair affair murders trial, that's what it's been dubbed. But to catch up. Brendan Banfield, a former IRS agent, is on trial now and he is accused of conspiring with his awe pair who he was having an affair with, to not only kill his wife, but to pin it on someone else. And in order to do that, according to the prosecution, he and the a pair went onto a fetish website to find someone who unknowingly agreed to be a part of their plan. He thought that he was going to have a sexual encounter with Brendan Banfield's wife, Christine, in which he was to She wanted to simulate a rape scene, and the idea, according to prosecutors, was that Brendan would walk in on this and kill Joseph Ryan and then stab his wife to death, but make it look as though Joseph Ryan was stabbing his wife to death, so that he is the hero, not the murderer. That is basically the essence of the prosecution's case. And TJ we have not been able to stop watching this.
00:01:32
Speaker 2: I mean, this is and Look, it's a little cute. I guess ou perh affair is what is being called. But these are the types of stories that even in Hollywood, they have a difficult time scripting. So let's bring in Alison Triesel, our expert, our legal expert, defense attorney who has been helping us through a number of high profile cases. And Alison, you're never shy as a defense attorney about telling us in some of these cases. Man, that defense attorney, he really took a stinker of a case. Now tell me how much of an uphill climb is it for a defense attorney, for the defense attorney who took this case.
00:02:06
Speaker 3: Okay, first of all, I'm just going to geek out for one second, because you know, I've been practicing criminal defense forever and I talk about cases all the time, and then I watch criminal cases, so, like you know, true crime Junkie, But cessted is an understatement. Amy, my goodness, this one is. You're right. I mean, no one could script a story like this and for us to watch it and believe it if it wasn't in fact happening in front of our eyes as we watch witness after witness. I mean, my house could have been on fire. And I was not going to turn away from Julianne's testimony, right, I mean I was. I was going to watch gabble to gabble because I wanted to know who the prosecution who, in my opinion, to deal with the devil, to hear what she had to say, because she may be walking out of here scott free, which is incredible because in her testimony she admits to shooting a man and it was probably the fatal blow. But her testimony, in my opinion, is the lynchmark of the case. It is the most important thing that comes out of this entire case. And if she is to be believed by the jury, this man is going to get convicted and he's going to spend the rest of his life in prison. That's how I feel about the case.
00:03:36
Speaker 2: Do you think she came off as believable her story?
00:03:39
Speaker 3: You know, I'm troubled by her testimony. I do believe her story to be true. I did not like her affect. I did not like her denials. I didn't I thought that she should have she already has the sweetheart deal owned up to her actual role and involvement in this, and I didn't think that she did that honestly enough. I think that in many ways this relationship speaks for itself in terms of the power dynamic. She is a young twenty one year old Brazilian gal who comes to this country not knowing anybody. He is a successful, uh you know, decades older man who she falls in love with, as we know from the the social media where she describes him, you know, as just sort of this godlike person who has swept her off her feet. And so I think there was a real power or dynamic there was. She was the inferior in this relationship, but she was all in. She was all in if this is if this is to be believed. She was all in on the plan, which she called what she called it a plan. She was very active in setting up those social media posts which she wrote. Are the exchanges on the fed life site that she wrote some of them. And she kept saying, Brandon made me this, and Brandon told me to do that, and and I didn't think that was necessary. I didn't think it was necessary, and I think that it did diminish her credibility because she was there step by step, and you know that picture of her a shooting range, you know, Brandon told me to get the gun. Brandon told me to do this, Brandon told me to do that. Well, she was all on board for it. And one of the things that I think the prosecution should have done better is walk through her rationale and had her They should have brought her to tears. They should have brought her to tears and showed that she actually had remorse. The only time I saw that she cried at all was when she was talking about the little girl, Victoria, the couple's daughter. But she brutally killed and not at Brandon's direction, because she said, apparently in her testimony she said, well, Brandon, he's still moving and Brandon didn't respond, and so she pulls out the weapon that's in her sweater and shoots him, and shoots the guy dead. And you know, at some point she says she covered her ears, she covered her eyes. But she walks upstairs, leaving the four year old with an iPad in the basement. Okay, which, by the way, doesn't make sense to anybody who would believe the story that this guy is in the house, and she doesn't stay with this with this toddler. While the law enforcement husband goes to figure out what's going on that doesn't make sense to me. So I wanted to see. I wanted to see a little bit more contrition and remorse and sadness from her, and I didn't see it. Now that said, is she to be disbelieved? Did the prosecution need her? Did they have to give her this kind of deal because she is, in fact the backbone of their case. And my answer is.
00:07:45
Speaker 1: Yes, Okay, so yes, we feel validated because we thought that same thing, like, if you don't have the O pair, you don't actually have a case. However, you mentioned her lack of attrition, I would also say what she did after the fact. She moved right into the master bedroom, put a picture of her and Brandon up where a picture of that used to be there with Christine and Brandon. She moved her clothes into what was Christine's closet, just she just moved in and became and assumed. Yeah, assumed the role.
00:08:25
Speaker 3: When I saw the Brazilian jersey move from the guest room into the master bedroom, and then I saw the picture of the two of them sitting on the nightstand right next to the part of the bed where Christine used to sleep.
00:08:45
Speaker 1: It is disgusting I have chills just thinking about that.
00:08:49
Speaker 4: So as a juror, and I am one the cutian, should have addressed it, should have addressed and said, do you feel badly now for that?
00:08:59
Speaker 3: Do you write?
00:09:00
Speaker 1: Because as a juror, I'm watching and seeing this woman do all say Brandon made me do it. Brandon made me do it, and yet move right in assume the role of mom and wife and start living this life that she basically took from or contributed to taking from Christine by her own admission. And now she turns the table and throws it all at Brendan. That puts credibility at issue, just for me, I think as a as a juror, I'm wondering.
00:09:27
Speaker 2: Wow.
00:09:28
Speaker 1: And then to know that she is going to walk away after this testimony, free living in Brazil, possibly with Netflix deals, making money and profiting off of this crime and saying that she deserves it that how much of an impact does that have?
00:09:44
Speaker 2: Alison simply put, does the jury have to believe her in order to convict him?
00:09:52
Speaker 3: So let me tell you an interesting thing, and this is this is where my lawyering comes in. Okay, because we're all having this wonderful fodder. But here's the interest same thing. Right, He's in a bad spot because even if he tries, and we really don't know, and I'm listening for it, I'm listening for it. I'm listening for it in the opening, I'm listening for it in the questioning by the defense attorney. We don't know what his defense is yet. We really don't. And I'm sort of befuddled by that because here's the legal problem they have. They can't point the finger at her and say, well, no, no, she was the mastermind, because in a crime like this, both of them can get convicted of murder. So even if she planned it, he participated in it. And even if she was the one that sent the majority of those fet life you know, email exchanges, that doesn't take away the fact that he participated in the killing of his wife. In the setup of this poorche lub coming there, going to their house, he's sitting at McDonald's. There's a lot of pre planning involved. He goes upstairs. How are they going, Even if they are able to turn the tables on Christine, are they going to say he had no idea this was happening. He had no idea that this is what she had planned. That's not believable to me either. Is their defense then going to be so even if that is, even if a juror says, well, you know what, she was more culpable than she led us to believe, he's still culpable. He's still culpable. So legally the prosecutions got him against the wall on that because just because Amy and I, they can prove that I was more involved or I was the mastermind of this crime, it doesn't mean that Amy is not guilty too. So legally they they've got a problem. And then t J, you're looking at me like kind of like that that I that I. But then defend's going to be that, No, it was mister Ryan. This she she actually was the one that engaged him in the fet life site. It was Christine. It was Christine that planned this, and and her husband is a hero. He did shoot him because this man was raping his wife.
00:12:42
Speaker 2: But then, Allison, you got to prove that this twenty one year old Brazilian has now made up this whole story and lie to get herself back to Brazil and free. Is that what we're talking about. I would have a hard time believing that it's as well. The change signed thing is.
00:13:00
Speaker 3: The defense needed to much better than it did, in my opinion. In my opinion, hammer home the sweetheart, unbelievable, unheard of deal that this girl, who admittedly kills somebody is lands the fatal gunshot, is going to go home. That she would have said anything.
00:13:23
Speaker 4: She's how rare if they told her that that this, that she was purple, and that the sky was yellow, and she would have said any single thing on the planet to go home.
00:13:39
Speaker 3: And and I would have I would have really gone after the fact that this don't I mean not only not only is she envisioning a sweet life after the fact, but but I that that she's getting her commissary and her phone calls paid by a movie and TV producers. Oh my, would I have gone after that?
00:14:05
Speaker 1: Yeah? I mean it definitely obviously affects her credibility. I was curious about what impact do you think it had for her not to remember almost anything in terms of the planning. She got combative even at times with the defense attorney saying she didn't know something that significant, something that important to what she was testifying to, and she couldn't remember where she was, where the computer was, who wrote the email. She couldn't remember any of the details, but on.
00:14:35
Speaker 3: Direct she said, Brandon, Brandon, Brandon, Brandon did this. Oh that was Brandon. That was Brandon. But the weird part about that is her deal's already done, so there really was no reason for her to be so evasive. There was really no reason for her to be so combative because her deal is already done and the only thing that's predicated on is her telling the truth. So why not own some of it? Why not own some of it? I think it would have made her more credible if she would have owned it. But at the end of the day, the jury says to itself, were well, does do the pieces fit? Does the story that she has told us make more sense than whatever whatever story the defense is going to present. Okay, here is this compassionate, devoted mother and nurse, no history of having these odd sexual fetishes. Okay, all of a sudden, were to believe that she's super into this fetish lifestyle that she is arranged and I'm going to find it because it's such an unbelievable quote, what mother? What mother? And what nurse is going to ask that? Look, I'll be asleep in bed come straight upstairs, cut off the clothing, timey, rape me, simple and fun?
00:16:15
Speaker 2: What what?
00:16:17
Speaker 1: And the more I cry if I cry, if I tell you to stop, keep going?
00:16:20
Speaker 3: I mean, what.
00:16:30
Speaker 4: And what do you?
00:16:31
Speaker 1: I was actually shocked to hear, in terms of the O Pairs testimony, her talking about how they had to go through several different potential men to come over because shockingly, they wanted.
00:16:43
Speaker 4: To meet ahead of time.
00:16:44
Speaker 1: If you're going to do something this dramatic and this, you know, I'm saying that is credible. I'm shocked that someone was willing to agree to do this without having met the person first to say, let's just establish trust here that this is something that we both are okay with.
00:17:03
Speaker 3: Well, by the way, that's one of the things that if I'm the defense, I'm gonna I'm going to attack him. I mean, what kind of person is like, yeah, I'm all the ways, I'm totally down with like this, this like rape fantasy and bringing a knife and bringing zip ties and break I mean, this is something I'm going after him. I mean, if you're going to talk about whatever defense they have, you're going after someone like that. And and let me say something about the BDIA that BDSM lifestyle. I you know, I've had cases involving involving that, and it is there's a code. I mean, there's an actual code where you do establish a relationship and you do have safe words, and you do meet in public and in person. And so it was unusual that this person was automatically willing. Either it shows some real depravity on his part or that he wasn't really familiar with the the code and lifestyle of people that do this, because it is not unusual that they build a rapport that they meet in person, that they meet in public, that they establish.
00:18:13
Speaker 1: That would make total sense.
00:18:14
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, ah TJ. Look at that.
00:18:18
Speaker 2: I learned something.
00:18:19
Speaker 3: I've been any of your listeners to say, well, how does she know so much about it? No? No, no, no no.
00:18:25
Speaker 2: No wait talking about you were talking about robot.
00:18:30
Speaker 4: I don't know anything, both of us talking about.
00:18:33
Speaker 2: All right, Alison, my last thing here. You tell me. Obviously, normally, naturally you do not want your client, a defense client, to get up on the stand, but in this case, just give me any ways. He could possibly help himself if he were to testify in his own defense.
00:18:53
Speaker 3: So he's got to own up the affair. He's got to own the affair he has. He's got to deny, deny, deny. He's got to deny that he plotted to kill his wife. He's got to deny that he went on these fetish websites and set up those accounts. He's got to deny, deny, deny, and a jury has to believe him over Juliana. And he's got to say, Look, the only time that she turned against me because they were communicating and she was saying to his mother, I will never testify against him. I'll take the blame for both of us. Okay, I mean that that came out, that came out, I'll take the blame for both of us. I will never turn against him. He has to say that the only reason that she has turned on me and has blamed me for this is because she was looking at spending the rest of her life in prison if she didn't get up on the stand and lie and say I did this.
00:20:12
Speaker 1: Yep, that makes total sense. And Alison, I have one last question for you, because the other part of this case are the detectives, or at least specifically one who said and when it was peer reviewed at the University of Alabama, they agreed that they from a digital forensic standpoint, do not believe that Brendan and Juliana were behind the fet life account. They don't believe that you can tie it to them forensically, right.
00:20:45
Speaker 3: So, and then there's also the thing about the knife that didn't have Brandon's DNA on it. So yes, that's right, okay, So how big is that going to be? It is and that's not something you get through Brendan anyway. So to answer both of your questions, TJ, you're not putting them on for that. You're not putting them on for those things, but you are going after I absolutely would call those officers that said we didn't think there was enough, we didn't think that it was them, and have them walk through it to prove some reasonable doubt. I want to say something about that that I found to be really interesting, and that was, you know, it took a long time. So you know, Juliana has charged October nineteenth, in twenty twenty three, and then he's not charged till September sixteenth, twenty twenty four. That's a long time that goes by. And what changed there? What changed? I mean, it took them a long time to arrest him. I would. I would focus in on that, and I would tie in that veteran law enforcement officers did not believe that they were behind that account. Veteran law enforcement officers. It took them, meant, it took him a really long time to figure out a way to connect him to this murder. That's what I would go after at the end of the day, because I'm gonna finish. I'm gonna finish strong here strong. I didn't love her on the stand, but I believed her.
00:22:18
Speaker 1: Yeah, it would be hard to imagine, just from a logical standpoint, that this young Brazilian girl could come up with all of this. And I guess the argument from the defense is that the prosecution told her what to say. But it does seem so far fetched that we all know truth is stranger than fiction, and this is kind of exactly a case in point.
00:22:40
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, that's that's where we are, is that this is a crazy story we all should be watching obvious obviously, I mean, you know, take take sickly if I don't know from work. But it's that good and I can't wait to see how it turns out.
00:22:59
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's appointment television for us. For sure.
00:23:01
Speaker 2: Alison. We love you girl, Thank you so much, We appreciate you, We are obsessed as well. We know we'll be talking to you again because there are several high profile cases ongoing and coming up. Thank you, Allison. So good to see you, my pleasure.
00:23:15
Speaker 3: Nice to see the both of you.
Speaker 1: Welcome everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ Presents. We have been obsessed with this awe pair affair murders trial, that's what it's been dubbed. But to catch up. Brendan Banfield, a former IRS agent, is on trial now and he is accused of conspiring with his awe pair who he was having an affair with, to not only kill his wife, but to pin it on someone else. And in order to do that, according to the prosecution, he and the a pair went onto a fetish website to find someone who unknowingly agreed to be a part of their plan. He thought that he was going to have a sexual encounter with Brendan Banfield's wife, Christine, in which he was to She wanted to simulate a rape scene, and the idea, according to prosecutors, was that Brendan would walk in on this and kill Joseph Ryan and then stab his wife to death, but make it look as though Joseph Ryan was stabbing his wife to death, so that he is the hero, not the murderer. That is basically the essence of the prosecution's case. And TJ we have not been able to stop watching this.
00:01:32
Speaker 2: I mean, this is and Look, it's a little cute. I guess ou perh affair is what is being called. But these are the types of stories that even in Hollywood, they have a difficult time scripting. So let's bring in Alison Triesel, our expert, our legal expert, defense attorney who has been helping us through a number of high profile cases. And Alison, you're never shy as a defense attorney about telling us in some of these cases. Man, that defense attorney, he really took a stinker of a case. Now tell me how much of an uphill climb is it for a defense attorney, for the defense attorney who took this case.
00:02:06
Speaker 3: Okay, first of all, I'm just going to geek out for one second, because you know, I've been practicing criminal defense forever and I talk about cases all the time, and then I watch criminal cases, so, like you know, true crime Junkie, But cessted is an understatement. Amy, my goodness, this one is. You're right. I mean, no one could script a story like this and for us to watch it and believe it if it wasn't in fact happening in front of our eyes as we watch witness after witness. I mean, my house could have been on fire. And I was not going to turn away from Julianne's testimony, right, I mean I was. I was going to watch gabble to gabble because I wanted to know who the prosecution who, in my opinion, to deal with the devil, to hear what she had to say, because she may be walking out of here scott free, which is incredible because in her testimony she admits to shooting a man and it was probably the fatal blow. But her testimony, in my opinion, is the lynchmark of the case. It is the most important thing that comes out of this entire case. And if she is to be believed by the jury, this man is going to get convicted and he's going to spend the rest of his life in prison. That's how I feel about the case.
00:03:36
Speaker 2: Do you think she came off as believable her story?
00:03:39
Speaker 3: You know, I'm troubled by her testimony. I do believe her story to be true. I did not like her affect. I did not like her denials. I didn't I thought that she should have she already has the sweetheart deal owned up to her actual role and involvement in this, and I didn't think that she did that honestly enough. I think that in many ways this relationship speaks for itself in terms of the power dynamic. She is a young twenty one year old Brazilian gal who comes to this country not knowing anybody. He is a successful, uh you know, decades older man who she falls in love with, as we know from the the social media where she describes him, you know, as just sort of this godlike person who has swept her off her feet. And so I think there was a real power or dynamic there was. She was the inferior in this relationship, but she was all in. She was all in if this is if this is to be believed. She was all in on the plan, which she called what she called it a plan. She was very active in setting up those social media posts which she wrote. Are the exchanges on the fed life site that she wrote some of them. And she kept saying, Brandon made me this, and Brandon told me to do that, and and I didn't think that was necessary. I didn't think it was necessary, and I think that it did diminish her credibility because she was there step by step, and you know that picture of her a shooting range, you know, Brandon told me to get the gun. Brandon told me to do this, Brandon told me to do that. Well, she was all on board for it. And one of the things that I think the prosecution should have done better is walk through her rationale and had her They should have brought her to tears. They should have brought her to tears and showed that she actually had remorse. The only time I saw that she cried at all was when she was talking about the little girl, Victoria, the couple's daughter. But she brutally killed and not at Brandon's direction, because she said, apparently in her testimony she said, well, Brandon, he's still moving and Brandon didn't respond, and so she pulls out the weapon that's in her sweater and shoots him, and shoots the guy dead. And you know, at some point she says she covered her ears, she covered her eyes. But she walks upstairs, leaving the four year old with an iPad in the basement. Okay, which, by the way, doesn't make sense to anybody who would believe the story that this guy is in the house, and she doesn't stay with this with this toddler. While the law enforcement husband goes to figure out what's going on that doesn't make sense to me. So I wanted to see. I wanted to see a little bit more contrition and remorse and sadness from her, and I didn't see it. Now that said, is she to be disbelieved? Did the prosecution need her? Did they have to give her this kind of deal because she is, in fact the backbone of their case. And my answer is.
00:07:45
Speaker 1: Yes, Okay, so yes, we feel validated because we thought that same thing, like, if you don't have the O pair, you don't actually have a case. However, you mentioned her lack of attrition, I would also say what she did after the fact. She moved right into the master bedroom, put a picture of her and Brandon up where a picture of that used to be there with Christine and Brandon. She moved her clothes into what was Christine's closet, just she just moved in and became and assumed. Yeah, assumed the role.
00:08:25
Speaker 3: When I saw the Brazilian jersey move from the guest room into the master bedroom, and then I saw the picture of the two of them sitting on the nightstand right next to the part of the bed where Christine used to sleep.
00:08:45
Speaker 1: It is disgusting I have chills just thinking about that.
00:08:49
Speaker 4: So as a juror, and I am one the cutian, should have addressed it, should have addressed and said, do you feel badly now for that?
00:08:59
Speaker 3: Do you write?
00:09:00
Speaker 1: Because as a juror, I'm watching and seeing this woman do all say Brandon made me do it. Brandon made me do it, and yet move right in assume the role of mom and wife and start living this life that she basically took from or contributed to taking from Christine by her own admission. And now she turns the table and throws it all at Brendan. That puts credibility at issue, just for me, I think as a as a juror, I'm wondering.
00:09:27
Speaker 2: Wow.
00:09:28
Speaker 1: And then to know that she is going to walk away after this testimony, free living in Brazil, possibly with Netflix deals, making money and profiting off of this crime and saying that she deserves it that how much of an impact does that have?
00:09:44
Speaker 2: Alison simply put, does the jury have to believe her in order to convict him?
00:09:52
Speaker 3: So let me tell you an interesting thing, and this is this is where my lawyering comes in. Okay, because we're all having this wonderful fodder. But here's the interest same thing. Right, He's in a bad spot because even if he tries, and we really don't know, and I'm listening for it, I'm listening for it. I'm listening for it in the opening, I'm listening for it in the questioning by the defense attorney. We don't know what his defense is yet. We really don't. And I'm sort of befuddled by that because here's the legal problem they have. They can't point the finger at her and say, well, no, no, she was the mastermind, because in a crime like this, both of them can get convicted of murder. So even if she planned it, he participated in it. And even if she was the one that sent the majority of those fet life you know, email exchanges, that doesn't take away the fact that he participated in the killing of his wife. In the setup of this poorche lub coming there, going to their house, he's sitting at McDonald's. There's a lot of pre planning involved. He goes upstairs. How are they going, Even if they are able to turn the tables on Christine, are they going to say he had no idea this was happening. He had no idea that this is what she had planned. That's not believable to me either. Is their defense then going to be so even if that is, even if a juror says, well, you know what, she was more culpable than she led us to believe, he's still culpable. He's still culpable. So legally the prosecutions got him against the wall on that because just because Amy and I, they can prove that I was more involved or I was the mastermind of this crime, it doesn't mean that Amy is not guilty too. So legally they they've got a problem. And then t J, you're looking at me like kind of like that that I that I. But then defend's going to be that, No, it was mister Ryan. This she she actually was the one that engaged him in the fet life site. It was Christine. It was Christine that planned this, and and her husband is a hero. He did shoot him because this man was raping his wife.
00:12:42
Speaker 2: But then, Allison, you got to prove that this twenty one year old Brazilian has now made up this whole story and lie to get herself back to Brazil and free. Is that what we're talking about. I would have a hard time believing that it's as well. The change signed thing is.
00:13:00
Speaker 3: The defense needed to much better than it did, in my opinion. In my opinion, hammer home the sweetheart, unbelievable, unheard of deal that this girl, who admittedly kills somebody is lands the fatal gunshot, is going to go home. That she would have said anything.
00:13:23
Speaker 4: She's how rare if they told her that that this, that she was purple, and that the sky was yellow, and she would have said any single thing on the planet to go home.
00:13:39
Speaker 3: And and I would have I would have really gone after the fact that this don't I mean not only not only is she envisioning a sweet life after the fact, but but I that that she's getting her commissary and her phone calls paid by a movie and TV producers. Oh my, would I have gone after that?
00:14:05
Speaker 1: Yeah? I mean it definitely obviously affects her credibility. I was curious about what impact do you think it had for her not to remember almost anything in terms of the planning. She got combative even at times with the defense attorney saying she didn't know something that significant, something that important to what she was testifying to, and she couldn't remember where she was, where the computer was, who wrote the email. She couldn't remember any of the details, but on.
00:14:35
Speaker 3: Direct she said, Brandon, Brandon, Brandon, Brandon did this. Oh that was Brandon. That was Brandon. But the weird part about that is her deal's already done, so there really was no reason for her to be so evasive. There was really no reason for her to be so combative because her deal is already done and the only thing that's predicated on is her telling the truth. So why not own some of it? Why not own some of it? I think it would have made her more credible if she would have owned it. But at the end of the day, the jury says to itself, were well, does do the pieces fit? Does the story that she has told us make more sense than whatever whatever story the defense is going to present. Okay, here is this compassionate, devoted mother and nurse, no history of having these odd sexual fetishes. Okay, all of a sudden, were to believe that she's super into this fetish lifestyle that she is arranged and I'm going to find it because it's such an unbelievable quote, what mother? What mother? And what nurse is going to ask that? Look, I'll be asleep in bed come straight upstairs, cut off the clothing, timey, rape me, simple and fun?
00:16:15
Speaker 2: What what?
00:16:17
Speaker 1: And the more I cry if I cry, if I tell you to stop, keep going?
00:16:20
Speaker 3: I mean, what.
00:16:30
Speaker 4: And what do you?
00:16:31
Speaker 1: I was actually shocked to hear, in terms of the O Pairs testimony, her talking about how they had to go through several different potential men to come over because shockingly, they wanted.
00:16:43
Speaker 4: To meet ahead of time.
00:16:44
Speaker 1: If you're going to do something this dramatic and this, you know, I'm saying that is credible. I'm shocked that someone was willing to agree to do this without having met the person first to say, let's just establish trust here that this is something that we both are okay with.
00:17:03
Speaker 3: Well, by the way, that's one of the things that if I'm the defense, I'm gonna I'm going to attack him. I mean, what kind of person is like, yeah, I'm all the ways, I'm totally down with like this, this like rape fantasy and bringing a knife and bringing zip ties and break I mean, this is something I'm going after him. I mean, if you're going to talk about whatever defense they have, you're going after someone like that. And and let me say something about the BDIA that BDSM lifestyle. I you know, I've had cases involving involving that, and it is there's a code. I mean, there's an actual code where you do establish a relationship and you do have safe words, and you do meet in public and in person. And so it was unusual that this person was automatically willing. Either it shows some real depravity on his part or that he wasn't really familiar with the the code and lifestyle of people that do this, because it is not unusual that they build a rapport that they meet in person, that they meet in public, that they establish.
00:18:13
Speaker 1: That would make total sense.
00:18:14
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, ah TJ. Look at that.
00:18:18
Speaker 2: I learned something.
00:18:19
Speaker 3: I've been any of your listeners to say, well, how does she know so much about it? No? No, no, no no.
00:18:25
Speaker 2: No wait talking about you were talking about robot.
00:18:30
Speaker 4: I don't know anything, both of us talking about.
00:18:33
Speaker 2: All right, Alison, my last thing here. You tell me. Obviously, normally, naturally you do not want your client, a defense client, to get up on the stand, but in this case, just give me any ways. He could possibly help himself if he were to testify in his own defense.
00:18:53
Speaker 3: So he's got to own up the affair. He's got to own the affair he has. He's got to deny, deny, deny. He's got to deny that he plotted to kill his wife. He's got to deny that he went on these fetish websites and set up those accounts. He's got to deny, deny, deny, and a jury has to believe him over Juliana. And he's got to say, Look, the only time that she turned against me because they were communicating and she was saying to his mother, I will never testify against him. I'll take the blame for both of us. Okay, I mean that that came out, that came out, I'll take the blame for both of us. I will never turn against him. He has to say that the only reason that she has turned on me and has blamed me for this is because she was looking at spending the rest of her life in prison if she didn't get up on the stand and lie and say I did this.
00:20:12
Speaker 1: Yep, that makes total sense. And Alison, I have one last question for you, because the other part of this case are the detectives, or at least specifically one who said and when it was peer reviewed at the University of Alabama, they agreed that they from a digital forensic standpoint, do not believe that Brendan and Juliana were behind the fet life account. They don't believe that you can tie it to them forensically, right.
00:20:45
Speaker 3: So, and then there's also the thing about the knife that didn't have Brandon's DNA on it. So yes, that's right, okay, So how big is that going to be? It is and that's not something you get through Brendan anyway. So to answer both of your questions, TJ, you're not putting them on for that. You're not putting them on for those things, but you are going after I absolutely would call those officers that said we didn't think there was enough, we didn't think that it was them, and have them walk through it to prove some reasonable doubt. I want to say something about that that I found to be really interesting, and that was, you know, it took a long time. So you know, Juliana has charged October nineteenth, in twenty twenty three, and then he's not charged till September sixteenth, twenty twenty four. That's a long time that goes by. And what changed there? What changed? I mean, it took them a long time to arrest him. I would. I would focus in on that, and I would tie in that veteran law enforcement officers did not believe that they were behind that account. Veteran law enforcement officers. It took them, meant, it took him a really long time to figure out a way to connect him to this murder. That's what I would go after at the end of the day, because I'm gonna finish. I'm gonna finish strong here strong. I didn't love her on the stand, but I believed her.
00:22:18
Speaker 1: Yeah, it would be hard to imagine, just from a logical standpoint, that this young Brazilian girl could come up with all of this. And I guess the argument from the defense is that the prosecution told her what to say. But it does seem so far fetched that we all know truth is stranger than fiction, and this is kind of exactly a case in point.
00:22:40
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, that's that's where we are, is that this is a crazy story we all should be watching obvious obviously, I mean, you know, take take sickly if I don't know from work. But it's that good and I can't wait to see how it turns out.
00:22:59
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's appointment television for us. For sure.
00:23:01
Speaker 2: Alison. We love you girl, Thank you so much, We appreciate you, We are obsessed as well. We know we'll be talking to you again because there are several high profile cases ongoing and coming up. Thank you, Allison. So good to see you, my pleasure.
00:23:15
Speaker 3: Nice to see the both of you.