Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, January fourteenth, and the O Pair at the center of the so called O Pair affair murder trial continues. Her testimony cross examination has gotten underway. A lawyer had some questions for her, and now a lot of us are going to have some questions with that. Welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes. Can I start with first of all, of course, the good defense attorney is going to do his job. He's
going to put some holes in the story. She seems to be pretty steady and hasn't necessarily seemed to be shaken just yet by the lawyer.
I've been impressed by her composure.
She started off on the stand first yesterday, a little shaky, a little emotional.
She seems composed.
She doesn't seem to rattle, which is good in terms of her ability to keep her emotional level steady, which I think must be a pretty difficult thing to do given what she's admitted to and what she's accusing someone who she once loved deeply, according to her, and he's just a few feet from her.
That cannot be easy.
I mean, she seemed annoyed at times, but never combative. She never took it that far, and I'll give the attorney credit as well. He has been very steady and respectful with her.
You know what it's interesting, it's defense attorneys are known oftentimes to be sharks, and you know they are going to go to bat for their client no matter what. He has a like a fatherly, grandfatherly warmth about him that is unusual in a defense attorney. But I find it to be very effective because you're almost he's very likable, which is an unusual quality.
And a defense attorney.
And he's not being a showboat like what you would expect for some larger than life defense attorne.
He actually just seems like a genuine, good human being.
That's it. That's been my takeaway is his voice, his demeanor, how he's even asking tough.
Questions, a slow talker even so, yes, give everybody credit for at least doing their job so far. But yes, it's the Brendan Banfield trial on trial with double murder killing his wife and also a stranger, someone that, according to prosecutors, he lured to the house as a part of some the BDSM what do you call it.
Yeah, he basically tried to make it look like his wife was into some sort of deviant sex with the stranger who was carrying out a rape fantasy that he walked in on and read the wrong way and thought someone was attacking his wife with a knife shot him, but he didn't make it in time before that said sex sexual deviance was stabbing his wife to death.
Is what he wants jurors to believe.
We are going to have to come up with a shorter way to explain this case because we're gonna have to cover for the next several weeks. I kind of come up with it just a simple way. You could just say, yes, it's the old pair affair murder trial, and maybe a decent enough A number of people are familiar. But to just explain this thing is tricky.
It is because it's a murder case like we've never seen or heard before.
This is this is a new one.
So yes, she got on the stand yesterday. Juliana Perez Miguelas is the name the old pair. Twenty five years old now, but twenty one when this affair started, as she was working for the family. But yeah, she dealt with direct yesterday. Cross examination started this morning and it started grow. She had to explain herself first of all, which was about this plea deal, like why are you here?
It's a big deal because for many, many months, and we'll get into the letters that the defense was able to produce, she was professing her love for Brent in Banfield, to him, to his mother, saying that she did nothing wrong, She didn't do anything untoward. She stayed with what Brendan has been saying all along. They were a united force in terms of their story as to what happened. And then suddenly she takes this plea deal and now she
has a completely different version of what happened. And so rightfully so the defense attorney is going to say, Okay, so you weren't telling the truth now, but now you're telling the truth. That's definitely going to be a huge hurdle for prosecutors because she is their case. I mean, she pretty much is. The case is built around her narrative of what happened.
You know, in opening did they say? What did they say they're going to offer? In terms of physical evidence.
The only thing I heard in opening arguments from the prosecutor beyond getting Juliana's testimony, direct testimony and version of events, was blood evidence and she said, there will be blood evidence we will be able to show you that will prove that Brendan was on top of his wife stabbing her with that knife in the neck. So that is the other evidence we're expecting to hear beyond Juliana's story.
But clearly, if you don't believe Juliani Juliana, then you're gonna have a hard time with the rest of the case.
I'm gonna say, we always put ourselves in that jury box, and they're giving enough, they are setting up enough that you would have doubts about the story and the reason there are doubts that are coming because yes, this plea deal is here, but they have set up now robes the timing of this thing where they're asking her, why did you decide to come forward when you did, because there is how much time between her making the plea deal and her initial arrest. We're talking about a year.
It was almost a year.
And yes, and she is in these letters getting more and more desperate.
Yes, So in these letters that they had her read a bunch of she was raw, emotional and the letters you could hear her decline over time that she started getting worse, talking about wanting it to end. She sounded alluicidal, yes, and what is it? Not clear? And they made the point, but listening to it did not sound like the longer she was in there, the worst things were getting.
So the defense attorney was trying very much to get her to admit that as time went on, the longer she was in prison, the longer she was denied any sort of bond, or her hearings weren't going.
The way she wanted them to. She was getting more.
And more depressed, more and more desperate, and she was writing exactly where she was mentally to Brendan and his mother, and she did sound suicidal, and it was declining. Now she wouldn't admit that she was declining. She said she thought that she stayed the same. But you could see the defenser he's trying to establish. The longer you stayed in there, the worse you got, which would make sense.
And at a certain point, what he's trying to get her to admit is that she broke that eventually she couldn't take it anymore, and she was just at a point where she would sign anything, say anything to get out of jail.
So it was a year. I'm looking at the dates here because he hit her on this point. October thirteenth of two thousand and three, that's around the time she was arrested, twenty twenty three, twenty three, excuse me. And then October twenty eighth of twenty twenty four is when she signed the deal. Now, he pointed out, as she was saying, I'm here because I want to tell the truth.
I want the truth to get out, he asked, well, why didn't you want it to get out until the twenty eighth of October when you had a full year to get the truth out? And that's a fair question. He also pointed out Robes she read excerpts from letters in which her depressive state to anger, anger at her attorney, anger at the legal process, and this was around the time she all of a sudden she gets a deal. So he is setting up at least a timeline that makes you go, hmm, what change.
It shows seeds of doubt. And you have a quote from her and she said this, I withheld the truth.
For a long time.
Anyone who is going to say that on the stand will make you, as a juror, question whether or not you can believe she's telling the truth. Now, That is the problem for the prosecution, and that is the problem for any testimony this so pair gives because for a full year she was saying something completely different.
And yeah, I guess you could make an argument that she was scared, she was trying to protect him. I guess you can. But it is difficult to hear that she's here now doing the right thing when there was a long time when she had an oportus do the right thing. They also Robes didn't expect this to be a big deal, and it almost looked like it surprised the attorney a little bit. She couldn't remember some details
about the laptop. A big part of this has been that they set up this fetty what's the website?
Sorry it's now you just said fet life life dot com.
Yeah, met life, it's yes life again.
I think it's actually okay that you didn't remember the name of the website. It's just further, I didn't need to know that you didn't know this, But it's not on our radar, so it's not something that we can just go, oh, yeah, fet life, you know that website that we've never been to, would have.
Never heard of before.
So fet life a big part of the story, and a big part of the plot, was that they signed up for this account in the wife's name without her knowing, and they had to use her laptop and robes. He said, well, how did you do that with the wife in the house and she said, well, she usually leaves her bag by the door. He said, okay, so who got it? Don't know? Okay, then where did you go and sign up in the house? Don't know who did it? Brendan?
Where to do it? Don't know? She could remember nothing of signing up other than that.
That's glaring.
That's a big deal because this is again a huge part of the prosecution's theory here that yes, Brendan and Juliana, according to Juliana had to create this fake account using his wife's photos, pretending to be Christina, and that's a huge part of the story that has to be true for their theory to work, it has to be.
That's a good way that has It must be.
For her not to remember something that important in terms of how they started this plan and how they put the plan in place by creating this fake account to lure this person to their home to then pin the murder on. How could she not remember, because that is a thing to note that for them to get her computer while she was in the house and log onto her computer and pretend to be her. What is Christina doing at this time? How are they sneaking around doing?
You would remember that because you'd be nervous, because you'd be doing something that you wouldn't want to get caught at, so you would remember it. Those are the kinds of things you remember.
She only remembered that the wife was upstairs, was all she would say. He said, well, where were you? How do you know she was up where you were down? She had I mean, she could give zero details about how they took it physically out of the bag. You have had to put it back, and weren't you the one that did the deeper dive on it? But the groups of folks and digital forensic folks who actually say that the wife was the one using it.
Yes, So, so he is already setting up with Juliana the defense attorney here if she can't get specific or remember this story that she told to prosecutors.
And now you have members of.
The detective team who actually believe and they're going to get into this when the defense presents its evidence who believe that, yes, Christina is the one who set it up. They don't believe digital forensic experts. They had an outsource to the University of Alabama. Pere reviewed that that group. That team also believes that it was Christina who set up the account.
If that is something the jury believes.
There's case.
There is no case.
Wow, that is a very important detail. But stay with us here, folks. We'll get into a little more of what happened, including some of her bizarre behavior after the murders, also her relationship with a few reporters who have been slipping her money and might be trying to get her a TV deal. Stay here, all right. We continue here on Amy and TEJ with the so called O Pair affair murder trial going on. Brendan Banfield accused of killing his wife and another man he had lured to the house.
They went to a lunch break. As we're recording this, they are still they're still be coming, just coming back from lunch, and we do expect the old pair. Juliana say the name for me, It's not easy.
She is Brazilian, so this is Portuguese.
Juliana Perez Mahales is my best effort at saying her name correctly.
Yes, we will see her back on the stand today with ropes they did hit on. I mean, just looks weird or looks bad about her behavior after the murders, including moving back into the house where the murders had taken place. But her sleeping arrangements kind of changed while she was there. She was she said, well, she went back. She was staying in her own room when she went back.
Where then someone asked, were you staying in there by yourself? No, so the husband, Brendan was staying in there, But that arrangement didn't last long.
Yes, so they were originally staying in her room, which I understand because yeah, people were shot and killed in that bed and in that bedroom. But eventually Juliana moved into the master bedroom and she put up photos of her and Brendan in the nightstand.
She put her clothing in what was.
Once Christina's closet. She put a Brazilian flag up in the bedroom. I mean she she moved in and basically assumed wifely a wifely position in the house.
And yes, they were there living with the child who ended up.
Being four just before the time of the murders. So the and this isn't that long ago. We're talking what two years ago, a year and a half ago, So the little girl four five, six, yeah, little.
So these are some of the things that defense has been hitting on, but also Robes that it came out talking about her relationship with reporters. Some local reporters who were in touch with her while she was in jail used to well, she said, give her money for her phone calls, and give her money for the commissary for prison.
Those things just came out. But from that it came out Robes that she has talked to someone and named a production company and negotiations are currently ongoing about possibly getting her some money to tell her story and possibly a TV show.
Look, the problem is when you have the key witness in this case, where your entire case pretty much is hinging on her version of events, if you can make her look transactional, if you can see as a juror, wow, she got out of jail for free, basically, even though she's saying she pulled the trigger at least in one of the deaths. But because she's testifying and turning against her once lover, she's literally going to walk away and
head to Brazil. And on top of that, she was somebody who was giving information to reporters in exchange for money. She's somebody who might be profiting off of this story she is now telling and selling as the.
Truth for a movie deal.
Her credibility at that point now is shaken.
At the very least.
Everything you said you can't help, but that has to be a part of it, everything she has gone through. She might be telling one hundred percent the truth on everything, but if you're sitting there as a juror, you cannot help but think something is up, because we now we have several scenarios in which it looks like she has done something a little untoward or maybe even criminal for the sake of covern Own ass and she will throw anybody under the bus to do.
And look, hearing those letters and how and what she was saying not just a brenda but to his mom, you know you hear a completely different version, a completely different set of experiences emotions than what you're seeing here in court. That's hard. Which version of her do you believe her written word? What she said right after the murders, what she said six months after the murders what she said when she got a really big sweetheart deal. Which one is the truth?
How are you supposed to know who? Which version are you supposed to believe?
Well, she continues, folks, she'll continue to testify this afternoon. As always, top right corner your podcast Apple podcast app, we see our show page button says follow click that you can subscribe and get all the updates coming to you so you don't have to go hunting for them. We'll keep an eye on this this afternoon. We'll hop back on if anything comes to the surface. But as always, we appreciate you spending some time here on t J holmes On behalf of Amy Robot. We'll talk to you all soon.