Dateline NBC - Husband testifies about affair with au pair. Alleged killer of UGA student on trial. Plus, no body murders.

Episode Date: January 29, 2026

In Virginia, Brendan Banfield, the man accused of murdering his wife and a complete stranger, says the prosecution's theory is "absolutely crazy." In Georgia, law student Tara Baker's murder went unsolved for two decades, until the family teamed up with a podcaster to try and solve her murder. Her alleged killer is now heading to trial. Updates in the case of Utah mom, Kouri Richins, and the trial of the New Jersey businessman accused of a quadruple murder. Plus, what clues to look for when investigating a murder without a body Find out more about the cases covered each week here: www.datelinetruecrimeweekly.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Hey, Jim, who's there? Anybody? You're listening to the Dateline story meeting. Yeah, we've got a lot of people here. Winter storms close courthouses around the country earlier this week, but our producers still have plenty to talk about. The family was in full force at this hearing. They get the police to reopen the case. There might be more here.

Welcome to Dateline True Crime Weekly. I'm Lester Holt. It's January 29th, and here's what's on our docket. In Athens, Georgia, after a law student was murdered 25 years ago, her grieving family teamed up with a podcaster to try and solve her murder. This week, her alleged killer finally heads to trial. He does have a long rap sheet, including assault and multiple probation offenses. In Dateline Roundup, the Crystal Rogers case is back in the news and allegations of witness intimidation in the case of Utah mom and murder suspect Corey Richens. She alleges the prosecution threatened not just a witness, but the witness is dog as well. Plus, how to solve a murder when there's no body?

We talk to a veteran cold case detective. We're not giving them a pass just because they've been better at disposing of a body. But before all that, we're heading back to Northern Virginia and the trial of the former IRS agent accused of masterminding a double murder so he could run off with the family O'Pair. Over the past two and a half weeks, a jury in Fairfax County has heard dueling accounts of what happened inside the home of Brendan Banfield on the morning of February 24, 2023, and the violent encounter which ended up with two people dead, Brendan's wife, Christine, and a man by the name of Joseph Ryan. The prosecution alleges that Brendan, who has pleaded not guilty, lure Joseph Ryan, a complete stranger to the Banfield home. and shot him. Then they say Brendan fatally stabbed his wife. Prosecutors allege it was all part of an elaborate plot to frame Ryan for his wife's murder. Brendan would be the hero of the day. He would show up, kill the guy, kill his wife, pretending that it had been that guy. The defense says that's not true

at all. They insist there's no evidence Brendan lowered Ryan to the home that in fact it was Christine, who invited Ryan over for his sexual liaison. And when he got there, Ryan attacked her with a knife. They say Brendan was heroically trying to defend her when he shot Ryan dead. And this week, the jury got to hear from Brendan Banfield himself as he took the stand to tell his story. I think that it's an absurd line of questioning that a plan was made to get rid of my wife. We're joined now by Dateline producer Brad Davis, who has been working on this story. Brad, good to have you here. Great to be here, Lester.

Okay, so let's talk about the family opair. How does she fit into all this? Yeah, Lester, she was the prosecution star witness and testified on day one of the trial, which was sort of a surprise to have her testify so soon. Her name is Juliana Perez Magalhays. She's a young Brazilian woman who took care of the Bannfield's daughter, Valerie. And prosecutors say she and Brendan were lovers, that they wanted to be. wanted to be together and, according to prosecutors, that's why Brendan came up with this elaborate

plan to murder his wife. And she told the jury that she helped Brendan lure Joseph Ryan to the home. Explain how all that went down. That's correct. According to Giuliana, she and Brendan did something called catfishing, which is where you pretend to be someone you're not online. The au pair, Juliana, said that they went on a fetish website called FetLife and posed as Christine, using her pictures to invite Ryan over for a sexual liaison. Then when he got to the house,

Brendan and Giuliana shot him. The defense said her testimony is not credible, and she's selling the prosecution in just what they want to hear in exchange for a more lenient sentence for her own role in the murders. She's pleaded guilty to manslaughter for shooting Joseph Ryan,

and she's not supposed to be sentenced until after this trial is over. Okay, so let's talk about the defense. Over the past week, they've said that there just isn't enough evidence for the catfishing theory, and they called a man named Brendan Miller to the stand to talk about.

that. Who is he? Brendan Miller was the Fairfax County detective who originally analyzed the electronic devices in this case. He concluded that he couldn't rule out the possibility that Christine was in control of her device when the FetLife account was created, that she, according to him, could have been the one who actually created that profile on the website. How did the prosecution push back on Miller's testimony, given that their whole case hinges on this catfishing theory? Well, when they cross-examine Miller, they got him to admit that there's a but he doesn't know. Miller said that without a witness or photographic evidence of someone using a device, you can never know 100% who's using a device at a particular point in time.

And in this case, when you dug into Christine's phone, Christine's laptop, were you able to put someone concretely behind the screen? At times, yes. But throughout the context of all of the conversations that you saw occurring on Christine's phone, could you conclusively opine as to who was behind the screen? No. So we've all been on pins and needles for the last few days. At the end of last week, we heard that Brendan himself was planning to testify. We don't often see defendants take the stand in criminal trials.

How did that come about? There was a conference with the lawyers and the judge outside of the jury's presence, and Brendan's attorney confirmed that he wanted to testify. But Brendan didn't testify. jurors were set home for the weekend, which turned into a four-day weekend because of the massive snowstorm. And he finally took the stand Wednesday afternoon after a morning of technical testimony. Tell us more about what was said. Well, Brennan's attorney started by asking him questions about his life with Christine and their daughter, Valerie, you know, before all this happened.

How long were you and Christine together? We were together since we were 18. How did you meet? We met freshman year at college at Kudabak University. And he talked about, you know, she was a great mom and he loved her so much. You know, he was really talking about a very, you know, sort of happy family life. Christine loved Valerie very dearly. And Valerie was very attached to her mother.

This is, you know, it was tragic. Their separation. Did he address his relationship with Juliana, his au pair? Yes. He told the jury that initially it began as a professional relationship as she, you know, began working for the couple. But then it turned into something more. He said that Juliana took the initial steps, sort of flirting with him and texts.

And then it got to a point where they were home alone. We were sitting at the island in the kitchen. And she scooted her seat. closer to mine a couple times. At some point, I told her that I was going to go to bed. And when I went upstairs, I went to the left, and she also took a step towards the left with me. And then she came with me into my bedroom.

And they began a full, he said it was a full-blown affair. Yeah, and then Brendan dropped a pretty big bomb about his relationship. with Christine. Yes, he said that he had had various affairs before his affair with Giuliana. I have had affairs previously in that there's nothing that changes in mine and Christine's relationship. Now, was Christine aware of your previous affairs? She was aware of at least two previous affairs. Okay. And likewise, were you aware of her affairs?

Yes, I was also aware that she had affairs. He said to Christine didn't know about the affair with Giuliana. and that he didn't plan to leave Christine. This was just another affair to him. So unlike the prosecutors argued, he wasn't trying to get rid of his wife. Did you ever create any sort of a plan with Giuliana? No, there was no plan.

I think that it's an absurd line of questioning for something that is not serious, that a plan was made to get rid of my wife. That is absolutely crazy. And how did Brendan respond to some of the main evidence from the prosecution? The fact that Giuliana says they made the Fed Life account together. He said he didn't know anything about it until after Christine died. He said he never used Christine's devices, nor had Juliana, which contradicts what

Giuliana said in her testimony. So we'll have to see who the jury believes on that. And what's next at trial? Well, we're taping this Wednesday evening. Brendan will be back on the stand Thursday morning to answer more questions. and be on cross-examination, which is really always the test. If you're, you know, defendant testifying, it's how you, you know, work, how you handle your cross-examination. Okay, a lot at play there.

Brad, thanks very much for the updates. You bet. Coming up, the murder of a University of Georgia law student went unsolved for decades until a podcaster started getting calls from people who knew her. All right, now we're turning to Athens, Georgia. If you're a college football fan, you probably know. know it as the home of the Georgia Bulldogs. But 25 years ago, a crime there shattered the community and remained unsolved for decades. On the morning of January 19, 2001, firefighters rushed to the scene of a blaze at an off-campus apartment at the University of Georgia.

They made a horrifying discovery in a locked room. The body of 23-year-old law student Tara Louise Baker, she'd been raped, stabbed, and left to die. in the fire. Investigators chased down lead after lead, taking a close look at three people in her life, her boyfriend, an attorney at the law firm where she worked and a fellow law student. But the case hit a wall until 2020 when Tara's mother teamed up with a podcaster who began unearthing new leads and new theories. As the web grows, there are some who get caught in the truth, like a poor bug in a spider's web. And then, that, my friends, is the goal. To finally catch in the web of truth the person responsible for taking

Tara's life away from her dear mother and her family. In 2023, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation took a new look at the case. And this week, 25 years after her brutal death, a man by the name of Edric Lamont Faust is standing trial for Tara's murder. He's pleaded not guilty to multiple charges, including murder, arson, and sexual assault. Here to get us up to speed as the trial gets underway as Dateline producer Dorothy Newell, she's at the courthouse for us. And Dorothy, I normally wouldn't start an interview with this kind of question, but it's pertinent here. How's the weather down there?

Well, they never got the big snow that so many places got hit with, but they did get rain and sub-freezing temperatures. So the ice on the roads and sidewalks is pretty treacherous. Yeah, and I point out, I'm asking that. question because some courts were closed because of this big storm that was coming. Yep, yep. Jury selection was delayed by a day. All right. Before we get into the trial, tell us what you've learned about Tara. Who was she? Her family and friends say that Tara was an exceptional student, always was. Her friends described her as incredibly sweet, warm, hardworking, and kind of wise beyond her years.

Her three younger siblings adored her and apparently called her their North. star. Okay, let's turn to the night of the murder. What do we know about Tara's final hours? Well, according to court records, on the evening of January 18th, 2001, Tara was studying at the University of Georgia Law Library with a friend. Around 7.30 p.m., that friend left and walked home. And later that night, Tara called to make sure she'd gotten home safely. That was kind of Tara's thing. That phone call with her friend, that appears to be the last time anyone close to to Tara talk to her. And early on, police believe this wasn't some kind of random attack.

Why? Well, first off, her friends have said that Tara was really safety conscious. They couldn't imagine she would have left her door unlocked. But according to court records, investigators found no signs of forced entry. So many people believe the killer was someone Tara knew or at least someone who had a key. And that's why police focused really hard on people who were close to her. But the early investigation kept hitting dead ends, partly because the killer apparently wiped the apartment clean and set fire to the home, destroying any telltale evidence. I've been following this case for about five years, and I remember someone in law enforcement telling me they probably wouldn't find the killer until he confessed.

Okay, so years have passed, decades, really. Tell us about this podcast and how that may have changed things. Okay, so here's this guy, Cameron J. Heraldson, who's lived in Afghanistan. Athens for many years. And he's at all kinds of jobs. Marketing consultant, wedding efficient. He was even an apprentice funeral director. But in 2020, he launched a podcast called Classic City Crime. As you may know, Classic City is Athens nickname. And he started with the Tara Baker case. He scored interviews with Tara's family and friends, many of whom had never spoken out publicly. And they were clearly frustrated that this case had gone unsolved for so long. You have had to relive Tara's death over and over again.

Yes, and it has warned me down. Cameron and Tara's mom didn't just focus their efforts on terrorist case. They ended up lobbying for a crucial piece of legislation to help other families. Tell us about that. That's right, Lester. Terror's family, Cameron, and another family, the Coleman's, whose daughter was also murdered, they pushed for legislation that would require law enforcement to review unsolved homicides if victims' families asked them to.

And so in 2023, they stood together as the governor signed the law into effect. The Coleman Baker Act set up and funded a cold case unit within the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. And Tara's mom said she hadn't expected it, but one of the first cases they looked into was terrorists. They worked the case with local police, the FBI, and other agencies. And in April 2024, they announced they'd made an arrest. Police arrested 48-year-old Edric Lamont Faust and charged him with felony murder. Police said there's no evidence that Baker and Faust were acquainted. Okay, so tell us what do we know about the defendant.

Well, for starters, he lived near Tara, but he had no known connection to her. He does have a long rap sheet, including assault, battery, public indecency, and multiple probation offenses. So if the defense says it's not their guy, do they have any alternate theory about who did it? The defense says that the crime was so brutal and drawn out that it suggests a crime, you know, driven by rage. They also pointed out that the killer took Tara's laptop and documents from a cabinet and did not take her valuable jewelry. And that raises the question. Why would Foss do that? So does the defense have anyone in mind as an alternate suspect? Yeah, well, they're pointing their finger at someone investigators looked at early on, Tara's boyfriend.

But he took a polygraph at the time and he passed. He also talked to Cameron Jay on the podcast and adamantly denied having anything to do with the murder. I was fed up with not getting answers and not being talked to like somebody who just lost somebody they absolutely loved. And you had a verified alibi for the night of terrorist murder and the morning not correct? Yes, sir. So as we're taping this, jury selection is not complete in the case. So where do things stand with that? So it started yesterday afternoon with a big crowd of people that has been winnowed down.

They just started, as we're speaking, they've just started a second panel, about a dozen people. So we're waiting. All right. Well, this is one we will definitely be keeping an eye on. Dorothy, thanks so much. Thank you, Lester. Up next, it's time for Dateline Roundup, a big update in the case of murdered Kentucky mom, Crystal Rogers, and prosecutors under-finding.

in the case of Utah mom, Corey Richens, plus an inside look at a murder investigation with nobody. Welcome back. Joining me for this week's roundup is Dateline producer Rachel White. Rachel, thanks for being with me. Thanks for having me. So our first story, we head to New Jersey for an update in the trial of Paul Canero. He's accused of killing his younger brother and business partner Keith,

along with Keith's wife and kids, then setting their house and his... own on fire in an attempt to cover up the crime. He's pleaded not guilty to all 16 charges against him. So Rachel, it's week three in the trial and prosecutors are still making their case. What's new here? Yeah, so Lester, recently they have turned their focus to physical evidence. And seeing that physical evidence that's been preserved for about seven years has made the case feel much more present. So the crime scene detective walked through the evidence recovered from Paul Canerner. Ocean Township Home and Paul's wife's Porsche after the murders.

Prosecutors allege that the Porsche was the vehicle Paul drove home from the murders. What did they find? The detective showed the jury a backpack that was found in the car, and he said that inside was a gun barrel, a silencer, and a knife. Though in his testimony, he made it clear the knife wasn't confirmed to be the murder weapon. outside the home, investigators found a gas can, and prosecutors allege this was the accelerant that Paul Canero used to set his own house on fire. Finally, they moved on to some bloody clothing found in Paul's basement, which has been a key piece of evidence for the prosecution's case. And prosecutors talked about that bloody clothing in their opening statement, specifically a pair of jeans, they say, belong to Paul Canero.

Let's take a listen. Those genes, as well as numerous other items, were sent out for DNA testing. And what you're going to learn is that DNA located on multiple areas of those bloody genes in the defendant's basement came from none other than his niece, Sophia Canero, and in one area from his nephew, Jesse Canaro. So, Rachel, the point the prosecution was making here is why would Paul Canero have the children's blood on his genes and why would those genes be in his basement? But the defense pushed back on whether the prosecution could even prove the genes belonged to him. That's right, Lester, and they got into whether the pair of genes were compared to other genes found at the Canaro home. This investigator said they were not compared. Okay, well, lots more to come in this trial.

Paul Canero, as we said, has denied all of this. Okay, for our next story, we're headed to Kentucky for an update in the case of Crystal Rogers, the mother of five who has been missing from Bardstown since July 2015. Her body has never been found. Last summer, 10 years after her disappearance, her former boyfriend, Brooks Halk, was convicted of her murder. Rachel, you've been covering this case for some time now. What's the latest on this one? So the news here is that Brooks Halk has filed an appeal with the Kentucky Supreme Court,

and his attorneys are asking for an acquittal or a new trial. What's their basis for an appeal? So Haukes attorneys are saying that prosecutors didn't present enough evidence at trial to lead to a conviction. And they're arguing that the prosecutors couldn't prove a murder even took place. They wrote, quote, with no body, no murder weapon, no idea of where the alleged murder occurred or how it allegedly occurred. The Commonwealth presented a case made up entirely of circumstantial evidence. Now, the jury would obviously disagree that there wasn't enough evidence to convict. So what's next in the appellate process?

Well, as we know here at Dateline, the wheels of justice turned slowly. So we don't know yet when the Kentucky Supreme Court will even review the appeal, but we'll report back once we know more. Okay, let's move on. For our final story, we're heading to Utah, where trial preparation is in full swing for Corey Richens. That's the mom of three who wrote a children's book about grief before being arrested for her husband Eric's murder.

Prosecutors say she laced his drink with a lethal dose of fentanyl because she wanted his life insurance payout. Jury selection is set to begin for Richens' trial on February 10th, and she's pleaded not guilty to aggravated murder among other charges. What's the latest on this one? Corey's defense filed a motion on Sunday accusing prosecutors of witness intimidation. They say lead detective Jeff O'Driscoll and lead investigator for the prosecution, Travis Hopper, harassed witnesses over text message to the point where one witness reached out to the defense team and asked them to, quote, protect her from the prosecution. Richon's attorney referenced one message in which she alleges the prosecution threatened not just a witness, but the witness's dog as well. We have some of that message which was cited in court filings.

Rachel, could you read that for us? Part of the message reads, quote, make your life easier and answer our calls so we can prep you on what you will be asked. Otherwise, the next time I knock on your door, I'll have a warrant and a catch pull for the dog. We asked prosecutors for comment. They told us, quote, we will be responding non-publicly with the court, as is appropriate this close to jury selection. All right, lots going on. Rachel, thanks for the updates. Thank you, Lester. Well, for our final story this week, we wanted to talk about something we've been seeing a lot of recently. No body cases. Take the case of missing Texas realtor Suzanne Simpson, which we talked about last week. Her husband is behind

bars awaiting trial for her alleged murder, even though her body has never been found. Or the case of Kentucky mom, Crystal Rogers, we just talked about in Roundup. It made us wonder what might be different about how investigators set out to build a nobody case. My next guest, Corporal Detective John Cappicelli, has investigated several no-body investigations during his 25. years as a detective with the Chesterfield County Police Department in Virginia. He now consults on nobody cases nationwide and instructs other detectives on how to solve them. Welcome to the show, Johnny. Thank you, Lester. So, Johnny, what exactly do we mean by a nobody case and how often do you come across it? Well, believe it or not, Lester, the nobody homicide investigations are very common. I would say

It is roughly 650 to 675 documented no body homicide investigations in the United States that have been successful dating back to around 2012. A nobody homicide investigation entails holding an individual accountable for murder. We're not giving them a pass just because they've been better at disposing of a body. This may seem self-explanatory, but what's different about a nobody case and a missing person's case? Sounds like they could look exactly the same, at least at some point. in the investigation. That's exactly right, Lester. Many seasoned investigators, when they go to a scene and it starts off as a missing

person's report, they're going to see certain anomalies, if you will, that's going to make the bells ring a little bit louder. What clues can point police toward a conclusion that a person didn't just run off on their own? So, simple answer is this. It's more of a scenario. Picture yourself going on a one weekend trip and what you would typically pack in your suitcase, your toothbrush, your phone, of course, your clothes,

Now, when you're going into a victim's residence that's missing and you see a toothbrush on the bathroom counter, you see makeup, you see all the things that typically a person uses on a daily routine and all those things are president and that's not part of what you would typically do if you were going on a trip. Think about that. You also have to dive into historical pattern of life matters, you know, looking at somebody's prior history and on this day, everything stops. And on this day, there's no more phone act. There's no more calling back and forth between the kids and mom. There's no more activity on the banking records.

Your life cease and desists at that point. It sounds like technology plays a huge role in a lot of these investigations. Without question, you know, cell site data, GPS data off of vehicles, social media mining, all those things play into it, providing footprints for law enforcement. I know you've called this really the hardest part, the most tough link in this whole process, but you've got to prove that the victim died, the person was murdered, the time of death, all that. Walk me through how you walk a jury through that process. There's essentially three prongs that we have to prove in a no-body homicide.

First, that there's proof of death. The second prong would be proof of a lethal event. You know, using forensics evidence that may be present at a crime scene if you find one, scene indicators where there's an attempt to clean or staged evidence. And the third prong would be proving. that the defendant is the only person that had all of the means and the wherewithal to commit this offense. And that a lot of times, that takes a lot of the cell data that shows that the suspect was not in a place he said he was, but was instead here. And then, you know,

a defendant's lies in the conduct, you know, how involved they may have been in the search for the missing person or if they even reported them at all. So based on everything we talked about, I assume that it is possible to get a conviction without a body, but is it likely to get that conviction out of those circumstances? It's actually more likely than a typical homicide. Statistically, roughly 86% of all cases that are prosecuted that are no bodies end in conviction. And if you use that statistic as compared to a typical homicide, roughly 65 to 70% nationwide is a conviction rate of a homicide.

So the conviction rate on those no body homicides are significantly higher. That's amazing. I wouldn't have thought you'd seen as many convictions under those circumstances. but it's a fascinating area of crime fighting and investigation. Johnny, thanks so much for spending some time with us. Thank you. That's all for this episode of Dateline True Crime Weekly. To get ad-free listening for all our podcasts,

subscribe to Dateline Premium. And coming up this Friday on Dateline, Blaine has an all-new episode for you to check out. It's about the disappearance of a young black gay man in Mississippi, his family's quest for answers, and the dogged detectives who changed the course of the investigation. We've been looking for Jayley's body for two years, and we're not going to stop until we find it.

I can guarantee you that. Watch Bringing Jay Home this Friday at 9-8 Central on NBC. Thanks for listening. Dateline True Crime Weekly is produced by Carson Cummins, Caroline Casey, and Keani Reed. Our associate producers are Ellery Glantstone, Joan Groff and Arya Young. Our senior producer is Liz Brown Kuriloff,

production and fact-checking help by Audrey Abrams. Veronica Mazeka is our digital producer. Rick Kwan is our sound designer. Original music by Jesse McGinty. Paul Ryan is executive producer. And Liz Cole is Senior Executive Producer of Dateline. Everyone, have a great time.