(NEW YORK) — A Virginia man found guilty of killing his wife and a stranger lured to their home in an elaborate plot to get rid of his spouse so he could be with his au pair is set to be sentenced on Friday.

Brendan Banfield was convicted in the 2023 murders of his wife and a man prosecutors said he “catfished” on a fetish website. Prosecutors said Brendan Banfield pretended to be his wife to lure the man to their Fairfax County home for what was believed to be a consensual fake rape scenario in order to frame that stranger for his wife’s murder.

A jury found him guilty of two counts of aggravated murder in February. He faces a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

The former IRS agent was charged with two counts of aggravated murder in 2024 following a monthslong investigation into the deaths of his wife, 37-year-old nurse Christine Banfield, and the stranger, 39-year-old Joseph Ryan.

Prosecutors said Brendan Banfield plotted the murders with the family’s au pair, Juliana Peres Magalhães, with whom he was having an affair.

Police responded to a 911 call from the home in Reston on Feb. 24, 2023, and found Ryan dead in an upstairs bedroom with gunshot wounds to his head and chest. Christine Banfield had been stabbed seven times in the neck, prosecutors said.

At the time, Magalhães and Banfield told police they came home to find Ryan stabbing Christine Banfield to death. Banfield and Magalhães each shot Ryan, they said in their 911 call and to responding officers at the scene.  

Magalhães was arrested first and initially charged with second-degree murder for the death of Ryan. She pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 2024 and was sentenced to 10 years in prison, the maximum, in February. Prosecutors said she admitted to shooting Ryan at Brendan Banfield’s direction.

Brendan Banfield was arrested several months after Magalhães and charged with two counts of aggravated murder for the deaths of his wife and Ryan.

Prosecutors said Brendan Banfield stabbed his wife with a kitchen knife that Ryan had been instructed to bring, and, before calling 911, altered the crime scene to make it look as though Ryan stabbed her — including by transferring some of his wife’s blood onto Ryan’s hands.

Magalhães testified against Brendan Banfield during his trial, telling the court that he expressed his desire to “get rid of” his wife in October 2022. She said he told her he wanted to marry her and have children with her, and that he didn’t want to divorce his wife because “she would have more money than he would” and because he wanted custody of the couple’s daughter.

She prayed for forgiveness from the victims’ families during her sentencing hearing.

“There is nothing I could possibly do to make it up to you, for your loss. There are so many regrets, this is my biggest. It’s a tragedy I have been carrying with me, and I know I can never take back the devastation of what I have done,” she said.

Following Magalhães’ sentencing, Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano said the au pair’s testimony was “invaluable in helping the jury understand the convoluted double-murder plot orchestrated by Brendan Banfield.”

During his three-week-long trial, Brendan Banfield testified in his own defense. He admitted to the affair though maintained his innocence.

He said he came home on Feb. 24, 2023, after the au pair called to alert him about a stranger in the home. He said he went up to his bedroom with his gun drawn and found his wife naked with Ryan and that she called out, “Brendan, he has a knife!”

“I was extremely terrified,” Brendan Banfield told the jury. “I don’t think I’ve ever been more panicked in my life.”

He said he fired his government-issued firearm, striking Ryan in the head, after he said the man appeared to stab his wife.

The couple’s then-4-year-old daughter was in the basement of the house at the time of the killings. Brendan Banfield was additionally found guilty of child endangerment, as well as using a firearm while committing or attempting to commit murder.

ABC News’ Sophie Sonnenfeld contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s plans to build a White House ballroom are in the hands of three appellate judges who will hear oral arguments Friday over whether construction should be allowed to continue.

The panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will weigh the Trump administration’s request to throw out a lower court judge’s order halting the construction, in a lawsuit brought by historic preservationists.  

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled in late March that Trump has gone beyond his authority in building the ballroom, given that it has not been authorized by Congress. 
Leon’s order was administratively stayed by the appellate panel on April 17, a move that has allowed construction to continue since then.

The Trump administration has argued in court papers that beyond the president’s desire to build a large, permanent event space to host future inaugurations and state dinners, the ballroom — part of a broader “East Wing Modernization Project” — is essential to national security.

The Justice Department points to recent shootings that have occurred in relatively close proximity to the president, including at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in April and on Pennsylvania Avenue in May, as examples of why the ballroom is needed for security reasons. Both of those incidents had gunmen allegedly exchanging fire with Secret Service police officers.

The government’s filings in the case have described the ballroom project as a fortification of the entire White House complex, saying that with its “deeply ensconced bunker, and its attendant bomb shelters, hospitals, medical facilities, and other National Security functions, to the highly sophisticated Drone Port and Sniper Nests atop the Ballroom, the complex is a highly knitted, unified whole.”

The administration also argues that the group that has sued, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, lacks the standing necessary to bring a case.

Lawyers for the National Trust say that it’s Congress, not the president, that controls the grounds of the White House, and that Leon was correct to determine in his ruling that no statute “comes close” to giving Trump the authority he claims to construct a large edifice next to the executive mansion.

“The public’s interest in its government following the law, and the maintenance of the President’s proper role in our system of separated powers, underscore that the district court did not abuse its discretion,” they write in a brief, urging the appeals court judges to let Judge Leon’s injunction stand.

Prior to beginning consideration this week of an immigration enforcement funding bill, Senate Republicans removed a $1 billion provision, drafted in response to a request from the Secret Service, that officials said a portion of which would have gone toward security-related aspects of the ballroom project.

Arguments in the case will be heard by Obama-appointee Patricia Millett, Trump-appointee Neomi Rao and Biden-appointee Brad Garcia.

ABC News’ Peter Charalambous contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.