Watching his client's case tank, defense attorney in Ferrer case takes an unprofessional swipe at the prosecution in an outburst in court

DDA Roger Rees continued to build a successful case on the third day in the jury trial where Juan Ferrer is charged with the murder of Arcata chef Douglas Anderson-Jordet.

This morning, Anderson-Jordet's ex-girlfriend Virginia Jimenez, Everett's bartender Damien Hofsted and Sarah Brody, a witness who over heard yelling and a key phrase in the altercation between the parties testified.

DDA Roger Rees prosecution has been exemplary so far. While it is early in the trial, Public Defender Marek Reavis has failed to impeach the credibility of any prosecution witness. Not only have the witnesses who have testified so far supported the prosecution's opening argument, they have disproved claims made by the defense.

Sensing it isn't looking good to support the self-defense theory or the sexual orientation hate crime theory or some of the character smears made about the victim, Mr. Reavis started his cross of Brody by saying, "I lost count of 25 repetitions of fuck you and your fat girlfriend."

This coming from someone who rambled on and was repetitive during jury selection and tends to rehash the witnesses testimony with no significant challenge on cross is the pot calling the kettle black.

I like Mr. Reavis, he is a professional and intelligent attorney. In this case, however, it seems he is too personally invested and perhaps the stress of defending a client in a well-publicized case is getting to him. Mr. Reavis used to talk to me until I posted the email from Douglas Anderson-Jordet's family. Since that day, I am persona non grata to Mr. Reavis, who told me that he was "not too pleased." I told him, both sides deserve to be heard. I hope after this case is over, Mr. Reavis and I can chat like we used to because I realize he is doing his best to defend his client. I just want him to extend me the same courtesy of doing my job.

Mr. Reavis' cross of the witnesses hasn't raised anything significant so far.

 Jimenez said that Anderson-Jordet liked to drink two, three times a week, and that he did say mean things and sometimes became angry when he was drunk, however, none of the witnesses have confirmed the defense claim that the victim was heavily intoxicated, that he was hostile with anyone that night in the bar or that he was homophobic or racist. In fact, he was described as likeable, friendly and that he was respectful. Brody described two distinct male voices that night raising doubt who started the altercation.

There were three people against 1, in Mr. Reavis' own opening argument he mentioned Anderson-Jordet was unarmed and Ferrer knew that and still held out his knife. We have no idea why Anderson-Jordet who was walking on one side of the street crossed over to the other side where Ferrer and his two friends were walking. There is some video but no audio. It could just as well as have been Ferrer and his companions that initially provoked Anderson-Jordet into yelling and eventually crossing the street.

Mr. Reavis may  indeed, when he presents his side of the case, be able to prove self-defense or a justified killing.

Right now, the prosecution is presenting it's case. The evidence presented so far is in line with Mr. Rees' opening argument.

Mr. Rees is respectful and his witnesses are credible and he is in control of the courtroom with the evidence he is presenting. He is pre-emptive in his direct questioning and covers possibilities that would be raised in cross.

I noticed Mr. Reavis' outburst, the jury did too. That is not a sign of someone confident about their case.