Skip to main content

tv   The Cycle  MSNBC  July 12, 2013 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT

12:00 pm
florida, throughout the nation. to be the example to talk about issues, to put things on the table, to see the duration that we can do better. we can do more. as a community, it becomes our responsibility to work together to talk about what the issues and things that are out there. it's our community. when this trial passes, it will still be our community. when everyone is gone and the cameras are gone and the light is no longer shining on sanford, it will still remain our community. an example of how a community can come together in a crisis to work together, to resolve issues, to be peaceful, to put their things it on the table, to talk about what is out there and how we can move together. as the sheriff has indicated, we have worked together diligently
12:01 pm
for the past months to put together a plan to ensure the safety of sanford and our surrounding communities. ladies and gentlemen, it's a trying time for all of us. we're not sure what the verdict is going to bring out. but at the same time, it's a great opportunity for evolution within the sanford community and showing how we as a community can evolve to do better and be better. to ensure that we have an opportunity to speak our peace peacefully. to come together peacefully. and when you leave here, you leave here peacefully. there's nothing on the horizon for us other than to move forward. the family has also asked the judicial system to run its course, and that's exactly what we're asking other people to do. allow the judicial system to run
12:02 pm
its course. and we will move forward from here. thank you and have a great afternoon. >> thank you very much. >> you've been listening to local law enforcement in sanford, florida, assuring the public they are prepared for whatever reaction comes to the verdict in the george zimmerman trial. so we are now on verdict watch. after 24 days in court, 12 days of testimony, 56 witnesses, george zimmerman's fate is in the hands of six female jurors. with me today for it all, jonathan capehart, steve kornacki, lisa bloom, and patrick murphy, seema ayer, and paul henderson. of course, we have kerry sanders live in florida. let's start down there. kerry, riveting stuff in the defense's final arguments and the prosecution's rebuttal. you were inside the court for it all. how did it play out in the courtroom, kerry? >> reporter: well, it was fascinating to watch it unfold. you know, it's a different view than when you see it on those
12:03 pm
cameras. perhaps the most interesting thing was to look at the jurors. i could concentrate on them. i found them to be somewhat stone faced. it's not as if you can read where they are. they're looking both at the defense attorney mark o'mara and looking at john guy, who did the rebuttal for the state with the same intensity. taking few notes. in fact, during john guy's rebuttal, i only saw one juror jot down twice for less than 25 seconds twice. so it appeared they had heard what they needed to hear. as you know, what those closing arguments are all about is sort of the summation of all of the evidence. they used two different styles yesterday when we heard bernie de la rionda, he was forceful, dramatic. it should be noted he's an effective prosecutor. since 2004 to 2012 he's won 48 of his 49 cases.
12:04 pm
so he was using what has worked for him before. then we saw today the way defense attorney mark o'mara presented his defense using visual aids, using powerpoint, using the pictures many people had been watching on tv to put still images up and go through each individual witness with a little cheat sheet, a quote or two of what they had said to remind the jurors of who they were and how that fit to the story that the defense said. the one thing i think that i noted most here is that what i heard from john guy was in addition to calling trayvon martin a child -- and i think i counted that nine times. there's probably more. he kept referring to him as a child. he used the term common sense repeatedly. that he wanted the jurors to use their common sense. when we heard mark o'mara r t, defense attorney in his closing argument, the refrain that kept coming back was reasonable. is there reasonable doubt?
12:05 pm
if there's two themes those jurors my be going back with right now, it may be common sense, reasonable doubt. we're outside the courthouse. it's overcast, slightly rainy. there haven't been a whole lot of people who have shown up out here during this trial to protest. there's a small area not too far from where i am that has been set aside. some of those who said they might be willing to come out and protest said they didn't because while it's a little hot out here, it's rainy, they're not allowed to have megaphones. it just didn't seem to fit. then we just heard the police department say they have used these past 15 months to make sure they had connections with the community. he seemed to recognize that there were parts of the community that the police department did not have a relationship with, that they've worked on creating that relationship. one thing i should note, remember trayvon martin was here visiting his father at his girlfriend's condo. he is from miami gardens. that's in south florida. so there is another component. while we just heard law enforcement talking about the
12:06 pm
sense that things are going to be fine here and urging people to accept this, because that's what people asked for. they asked for an investigation, an arrest, a trial, and put the hands now and the system working with the jury. there is also a component with law enforcement in south florida that is monitoring that community. while the police have said that they're working closely with the community saying they want people to raise their voices, not their arms, making psas with members of the miami heat, trying to get the message out, it's fair to say from the law enforcement sources that i've spoken with that they are watching extremely close ly. they're certainly watching this very closely. when they find out that there is going to be a jury verdict, they are going to be making sure that they are in the right places if there is a right place to go. of course, everybody is hoping that this is a verdict, whatever it is, that is accepted by the community because as we heard the police chief and the sheriff say and others have said, that's
12:07 pm
the way the system works in the united states. you give it to a jury. then we wait to see what happens. >> all right. thanks, kerry. i think you're absolutely right. we saw three different styles of lawyering in this summation phase. bernie de la rionda was more forceful. john guy was more poetic, r many of a sermon, very passionate. then there's mark o'mara, who was very calm and thoughtful. lots of visual aids. let's take a look at what he did. >> you can't help but have a first impression. if i were to walk in today, let's say, and i just, as an example, walked in like this. just walked in the courtroom as a lawyer. you would have an impression. what in god's name is he doing with sunglasses on, and who does he think he is? that's how long trayvon martin had to run.
12:08 pm
about four minutes. the state told you that he had no decisions. they dared to tell you that trayvon martin had no decisions, that my client planned this. really? four minutes. four minutes of planning. and they want you to ignore it. i guess it could be part of the mastermind criminal behavior he learned in community college. i guess it could have been, but let me tell you, if you have a doubt as to whether or not that's true, you need to tell the state don't ever come back before us again in a case like this. don't ever do this to us. because what we really have is what i said a while ago. we have fak shul innocence. where's that piece of evidence?
12:09 pm
where is one shred of evidence to support the absurdity that they're trying to have you buy? one. mr. guy can tell you about it when he closes, if it's there. it's an easy decision, and i don't say that out of hubris or ego. i'm saying it because of the facts of the case. you look at these facts, you look at all this evidence and you have to say, i have a reasonable doubt as to whether or not the state convinced me he didn't act in self-defense. >> let's bring in msnbc legal analyst lisa bloom. strong and compelling stuff from o'mara, right? >> he certainly hit on his strongest point, which is reasonable doubt. the jurors are now back there deliberating. they have the jury instructions. i have them here. he emphasized the one that's most important to him. if you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether george zimmerman was justified
12:10 pm
in the use of deadly force, you should find george zimmerman not guilty. that's what it's all about for the defense. i thought it interesting and a little risky that mark o'mara did not talk about george zimmerman's lies, the very heart of the prosecution case, the web of lies. he had just kind of a passing comment that, well, people tell stories over and over. there are inconsistencies. wow, he didn't address any of them squarely. he didn't provide explanations for why george zimmerman said sometimes he was following trayvon martin, other times he was not following, he was looking for an address, he was looking for a street sign. sometimes he described trayvon martin as running, walking, skipping. he never provided an explanation for why zimmerman said to hannity that the killing of trayvon martin was god's plan. utter silence on some of the key parts of the prosecution's case. >> there was one moment where i think he tried to deal with that where he talked about the movie "vantage point" and how different people see the same
12:11 pm
event in different ways. but that doesn't really explain these sort of situations where he says, you know, i've never heard of stand your ground, then you have the captain come in and say of course you did, you took my class. it also stood out to me when mark o'mara said, be careful with common sense. it seems he's almost afraid of the jurors using their common sense. >> yeah, and by the way, i haven't seen that movie. you have to be careful when you refer to movies an you're assuming everybody has seen it. i didn't know what he was talking about there. he also never responded to the prosecution's point that it would have been impossible for trayvon martin to have seen the gun, giving the way it was positioned and the inside holster in the back of george zimmerman's pants and that george zimmerman would not physically have been able lying on his back to have pulled that out and shot from that position. i mean, utter silence on some of those key prosecution points. one more quick thing. >> i want to get on that point. that is the big thing you've been pushing out. that the prosecution has not been pointing out that the gun
12:12 pm
was on his back. trayvon martin could not have possibly seen it. john guy started to touch on that. >> yeah, he started to. but he didn't really hit it. i would say bernie de la rionda in the initial closing argument did say for the first time in this trial that the gun was holstered behind george zimmerman. but he didn't drive it home in the way that i would have liked to have seen by showing the 30-second clip from the re-enactment video where george zimmerman, in my opinion, very clearly demonstrates that where he shows where it was, patting his back hip. he shows trayvon martin reaching across, he says, towards his back. i would have put it all together with the gun and holster. put it on his own pants in the back. laid down. i would have spent 20 minutes, 30 minutes. this is the point of the case. you want to give the jurors that visual. my god. the whole story trayvon martin saw the gun was reaching for the gun, that's why zimmerman had to pull it and shoot. the whole story is called into
12:13 pm
question. therefore, self-defense is called into question. you take self-defense out of this case, you have a murder or manslaughter conviction because there's no doubt that zimmerman pulled that gun intentionally and shot and killed trayvon martin. >> let's get patrick, seema, and paul into the conversation. the term reasonable doubt is coming up all the time. i'm a legal layman. i don't know a lot about legal strategy and philosophy. it always seems to be the greatest advantage for the defense is reasonable doubt. in baseball, the tie goes to it the runner. in a courtroom, tie goes to the defense. did you hear anything today from the defense that you think might stick with jurors and might plant that seed of doubt as they go into deliberate that will stick with them? >> what o'mara did that was masterful was that he continuously referred to the term reasonable doubt. that's in a way subliminal messaging. you keep putting it to the jury. set up a set of facts from the trial that are in your favor and
12:14 pm
then you end that portion of your argument with the term reasonable doubt. that's what he did. it's really important, i think, for viewers to know that the statute says beyond a reasonable doubt. as a defense attorney, you implore to the jury, it's just one. i've got ten. i've got 20, i've got 30. that's exactly what o'mara did here. >> well, patrick, on that point, then, i know we had instructions that were given to the jury and the term is kind of explained to them, but from a practical standpoint, i've never served on a jury so i don't know how they think about this. how do you think the average juror thinks of the term reasonable doubt? what do you they this means to a juror? >> we all have -- we're playing monday morning quarterback here. at the end of the day, those jurors are human beings. they'll deliberate over tonight, tomorrow, probably into sunday, and they'll think. they'll be going with their gut, frankly. they're going to get instructions, as we all know they got. they're going to go with their gut. that's why i thought today, when
12:15 pm
you look at closing arguments, it's about themes and theories are of the case. i thought o'mara was very strong. i agree with lisa. he did not address -- o'mara, the defense attorney d not address, one, the ibt inconsistencies throughout this trial. two, the fact that gun was in the back of george zimmerman. that's a major key fact. also, the inconsistencies and the common sense of, if george zimmerman was so afraid, why did he get out of his car? that was never answered by the defense. comparison, though, john guy on the prosecution side did an outstanding job. he was strong. he was deliberate. he was thoughtful in his comments. his theme was very clear. it was this is not a case of stand your ground. it's about stay in your car. >> paul, listening to this back and forth to everybody dissecting what we've watched
12:16 pm
today, just makes me wonder, what do we know about the jury deliberation process? what goes on behind those doors? how much conversation like this is taking place behind those doors? how often does the 100% get the 75% guy to 100%? >> i think each jury is different. just coincidentally, i have served on a jury while being a prosecutor. i thought it was a very interesting process, being back in the room and listening all around to how those conversations took place, how people see evidence, how people hear evidence. i feel like to made me a better lawyer. i know what that process is. they are going around just trying to get comfortable to figure out who feels what about the evidence that they heard. one of the things i think is really interesting is in the process today in court, we didn't have a lot of people taking a whole lot of notes, right? they were just listening. they wanted to hear the ideas. they wanted to get the concepts from the lawyers and the two
12:17 pm
sides. i think that's really telling. it foreshadows what's going to go on in the jury room when they go in there to talk about those ideas that are tying together all of these things as they have to make a decision. so what's going on now is they're going through those 27 pages that they're poring through to figure out, how are they going to follow the directives and the directions that the judge has given them so that they can make a conclusion and give us an outcome. we'll see how long they're going to be in there and how long it's going to take. i expect it to be at least a few days, given all of the information they've been given, all of the witnesses they have to review, and that they have to come to a decision collectively, obviously. >> all right. stay with us, everyone. we've just gotten started. we're going to talk about the defense closing. it was the prosecution that got the final word. we're going to get into how it they did on rebuttal. next, full live coverage of the george zimmerman trial continues here on "the cycle." lmart, i know savings. and right now we've got everything you need for a great summer. this 5-piece dining set on clearance, save over $49!
12:18 pm
marco! polo! this metal frame pool on rollback, you save $80! woo! fire up the savings. this 4 burner grill on rollback, you save $11. how bout all these bikes on rollback? like this mongoose adult bike, you save over $20! get more summer for your money at walmart's super summer savings event going on right now at your local walmart. since aflac is helping with his expenses while he can't work, he can focus on his recovery. he doesn't have to worry so much about his mortgage, groceries, or even gas bills. kick! kick...
12:19 pm
feel it! feel it! feel it! nice work! ♪ you got it! you got it! yes! aflac's gonna help take care of his expenses. and us...we're gonna get him back in fighting shape. ♪ [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes at aflac.com. [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes resoft would be great, but we really just need "kid-proof." softsprings got both, let me show you. right over here. here, feel this. wow, that's nice. wow. the soft carpets have never been this durable. you know i think we'll take it. get kid-friendly toughness and feet-friendly softness, without walking all over your budget. he didn't tell us it would do this. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. right now, get whole-home installation for just 37 bucks.
12:20 pm
12:21 pm
we're back on this key day in the george zimmerman trial. the case is now with the jury. before the break we dissected the defense's final arguments this morning. then the state offered its rebuttal led by assistant state attorney john guy. take a listen. >> what does that say to you? was he just casually referring to a perfect stranger by saying "f'ing punks"? that doesn't evidence anything to you? that's normal language? or is that not what was in that defendant's heart?
12:22 pm
isn't that every child's worst nightmare? to be followed on the way home in the dark by a stranger. there's only two people on this earth who know what really happened, and one of them can't testify and the other one lied. the bottom line, think about this. if that defendant had done only what he was supposed to do, see and call, none of us would be here. none of us. but that's not who he was. that's not where he was that night in his heart. after months of these people getting away, not tonight.
12:23 pm
not this one. not that guy. but that's not what he had in his heart. trayvon martin may not have the defendant's blood on his hands, but george zimmerman will forever have trayvon martin's blood on his. what do we owe trayvon martin? 16 years and 21 days forever. the last thing he did on this earth was try to get home. this is the dead. >> lisa bloom, was it enough? >> he's certainly a riveting speaker. he really has command of the courtroom. he has that kind of slow, steady pace that i myself will never master. and he can really, i think, grab the attention of everyone. but in terms of this substance, you know, he ended on what i thought was a very strange note. i'd love to know what everybody else thinks. he said this case is not about race.
12:24 pm
then he made an analogy. he said, imagine the situation were reversed and trayvon martin was the shooter and he was on trial and george zimmerman were the victim and we all know what the verdict would be, implying it would be guilty. then he said this case is not about race. i was kind of scratching my head about that because i thought the point of that story was that it is about race. >> well, sooem eema, what do yoe of that? >> i agree with my friend lisa here. it was almost inappropriate and too soft to end on that point. >> it wasn't enough. >> yes, it wasn't enough. you have to hit hard. here's the deal. most cases we are waiting for the defense to pull a rabbit out, as we say. in this case tables turned and we were expecting john guy to pull the rabbit out. essentially, he did. he closed strong. he was thematic. he gave us a theory. he told us what happened. and the x-factor in all of this
12:25 pm
is, eye candy for the ladies. not so bad. >> wow. you went there, seema. >> that's the x-factor. >> i thought that was the rabbit out of the hat. >> honesty from seema. wow. >> the nonphysical x-factor i want to ask about, paul, it's interesting to me that in florida, you know, the procedure here is the prosecution gets sort of a second crack at the jury. right, there's a rebuttal to what the defense just said. i know that doesn't happen in every state. does getting the last word, is that an extra leg up for the prosecutor there is? do you think just being able to sort of be everything that the defense just said in terms of planting doubt, they can say once again, don't believe it. does that really help? >> is i don't know that it's an extra leg up. we have to remember the prosecution has the burden. that's why they're given a second opportunity to address whatever the defense brings up. then to put a big bow on their argument and to leave that lasting impression and the final
12:26 pm
word with the jury before they get the instructions from the judge and go into that room. then, you know, we were just talking a moment ago about him alluding to the race issue. if you're going to raise that flag, you need to wave it. you need a make a strong argument and make it clear what you think and what your opinion is. that's what the jury wants to hear. as a prosecutor in a homicide case, you are the voice for the victim. you are the voice for the family. you are the voice that needs -- you need to leave that impression with the jury so that they know when they walk out of that room that they need to seek justice for that family, for that victim, and go in the direction that you've told them exactly where to go. like i said, i think this prosecution, they did a really good job. he was engaging. he was focused. i liked his tone. i liked his delivery. i would have liked to hear a little bit more from him focused on an imperfection self-defense about what zimmerman did and
12:27 pm
been a little more judgmental about zimmerman's lies and stories about what he did and his belief and his false belief that he could defend himself in the manner in which he did. i would have liked to have heard a little more of that. overall, i feel like he did a more than competent job and was thorough and efficient. we'll see what the jury has to say. >> can i say one more thing on the race issue? you know, remember at the beginning of the trial the prosecution fought really hard to get in those prior nonemergency calls that george zimmerman had made. we all kind of wondered about why they were doing that. when they ultimately came n the prosecution won that battle to get the evidence in. well, it turned out that every time george zimmerman had called in the prior six months about a suspicious person in the neighborhood, it was about an african-american male. >> exactly. >> when he was asked by the dispatcher to describe them, what is the race, he answered it is an african-american male. that's the only reason i can think of why that came in and that did come in. you heard no mention of that in
12:28 pm
closing argument. radio silence. crickets on that point. i have to conclude that the prosecution changed their mind about talking about race in this trial, that it was a very sensitive subject. they probably went back and forth about how they wanted to handle it. perhaps ultimately they said with a mostly white jury, maybe they conclude doesn't want to think about race, doesn't want to inject race into the case, they're not going to go there. >> that's why with the flag, they raised it. i wanted them to connect those dots and talk about it. it's okay. say it. you can let that jury know we know what the history and the pattern has been. we know what he feels about black men. we know what he said about black men. here's an opportunity. what happens when he encounters a black man in his nakeighborho. this is what happened. this is a child with a bag of skittles. at the end of the night he's dead because zimmerman brought a gun and shot him. >> that's absolutely right. lisa, i agree with you.
12:29 pm
i scratched my head. maybe that was not the proper legal thing to do. of course, this case has been about race. you pointed it out several times in the past couple weeks. surely the idea of being able to get justifiable homicide in a situation when there are minor injuries has to be predicated if they can get it on this idea that these women might agree with the idea that fighting a black man in the dark would be very scary for any individual and the next blow could possibly be fatal. >> that was basically what the defense argument was in a sense. go back to the argument of primacy. john guy was very strong. it goes to it the point he should have wrapped it up a little bit better at the end. he was terrific in saying, look, george zimmerman called in 46 times. every time it was an african-american male but those jurors are every day people. they understand that the number one cause of death of african-american males ages 15
12:30 pm
to 19 is gunshots, gun violence. in fact, we have 30,000 americans killed every year by gun violence. majority are people of color. they understand it. they live it every day in our society. i don't think he had to tie it up exactly. the fact that john guy was so strong and frankly emotional talks about, look into the heart of that grown man and then into the heart of of that young boy. that was very powerful. those jurors are going to go back again -- the last thing they hear is about looking into their hearts. the evidence showed george zimmerman's heart was cold. >> that's absolutely right. we'll look ahead to what's coming up in the trial and some of the deepest moments we've seen throughout this trial. in d. vietnam in 1972. [ all ] fort benning, georgia in 1999. [ male announcer ] usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation.
12:31 pm
because it offers a superior level of protection and because usaa's commitment to serve military members, veterans, and their families is without equal. begin your legacy, get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve. what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'.
12:32 pm
these are sandra's "homemade" yummy, scrumptious bars. hmm? i just wanted you to eat more fiber. chewy, oatie, gooeyness... and fraudulence. i'm in deep, babe. you certainly are. [ male announcer ] fiber one.
12:33 pm
the george zimmerman case is now in the hands of the jury.
12:34 pm
earlier judge deborah nelson read 27 pages of jury instructions. the jury has three basic options. not guilty, manslaughter, or second-degree murder. zimmerman, of course, has pleaded not guilty, claiming self-defense. the jury has been instructed to presume he's innocent unless it's been overcome beyond a reasonable doubt. as the instructions read, it is to the evidence introduced in this trial and to that alone that you are to look for that proof. here's a sample of what the judge told the jurors. >> if you decide that the main accusation has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you'll next need to decide if george zimmerman is guilty of any lesser included crime. to prove the crime of manslaughter, the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, trayvon martin is dead. two, george zimmerman intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of trayvon martin. in order to convict of manslaughter by act, it is not
12:35 pm
necessary for the state to prove that george zimmerman had an intent to cause death, only an intent to commit an act that was not merely negligent, justified, or excusable and which caused death. if your consideration of the issue of self-defense, you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether george zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find george zimmerman not guilty. if, however, from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that george zimmerman was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find him guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. whatever verdict you render must be unanimous. take your notes with you and follow deputy jarvis back into the jury room. >> lisa bloom, jury instructions can make or break a case, right? >> yes. let me simplify. manslaughter is the easiest charge here. manslaughter is simply an intentional killing of another human being without justification. ie, no self-defense. you don't need premeditation. that's first-degree murder.
12:36 pm
you don't need depraved mind. that's second-degree murder. we know george zimmerman intentionally took the gun out, pointed it at trayvon martin and pulled the trigger. so the prosecution wins on that unless george zimmerman wins on self-defense. self-defense is whether his actions were reasonable under the circumstances, that he was reasonably in fear of great bodily injury or death. i would have liked to have heard more from the prosecution that panic is not reasonable behavior. exaggerating what is going on is not reasonable behavior. essentially, mark o'mara in his defense closing argument admitted that george zimmerman was probably exaggerating his injuries, exaggerating how bad the incident was. boy, you know, i think the prosecution could have really taken that and run with it if they had really heard it. >> seema, it's a jury full of women. what do you think? if you were on the jury, what would you vote for? >> at this point, the just verdict, i believe, is manslaughter. the likely verdict, i'm warning
12:37 pm
everybody, could be a not guilty. the other possibility is we could have a mistrial. even though there's only six people on this jury, they may not all come to a unanimous verdict. it's not just because of the overwhelming amount of evidence in this case. it's because this case in this country has racial, cultural, political implications that every single person on that jury is carrying that weight. they are concerned their verdict is going to cause some type of uproar in this country. that's an incredible burden. >> i want to the get to patrick and paul. lisa, if this jury hangs, what then? >> then the prosecution will have a fundamental decision to make about whether they're going to retry the case or not. what would usually happen is they would poll the jury, if they can, and find out what the vote was. if, for example, it's 5-1 for acquittal, the prosecution's probably not going to try the case again. if it's 5-1 to convict, they probably would retry. in the middle, it getting to be a more difficult decision.
12:38 pm
>> patrick, what are we talking about in terms of getting a verdict? >> i think they're going to deliberate obviously tonight. they have the jury instructions. tomorrow. i would not be shocked if it comes out on sunday. they can work through the weekend. it is their decision. i wouldn't be surprised if it came out early monday morning. i agree with seema. you got to take second-degree murder off the table. there's an intent element there. frankly, the prosecution focused really on the manslaughter charge. it's really about self-defense. that's why the theme of the prosecution's closing argument, which i wish john guy gave the opening and closing the whole time, by the way, but this is not a stand your ground case. this is a stay in your car case. he was very compelling in making that point and really bringing it home at the end there. >> paul, what about this question of what we were talking about before, whether it's not guilty and whether the
12:39 pm
prosecution should retry? i mean, what would you advise the state to do if that were to happen? >> well, a lot of it goes into not just polling the jury but trying to figure out what their questions were. a lot of times they're going to come out two or three times with questions because they're unsure. what does this exact word mean? what does this jury instruction mean? and being able to glean from that the direction they're going in, it really is -- there's an art to it where you're trying to figure all of this stuff out. all of that goes into the decision you make at the end if and when you have to retry a case. this is a case that got national attention. all eyes are on the zimmerman trial. i know the prosecution is feeling a lot of pressure about what the outcomes of this case will be. a all of these things are factors when you're making a determination. if you get a mistrial, whether or not that case gets retried.
12:40 pm
>> surely the prosecution is feeling pressure. george zimmerman's feeling pressure. now the jurors feel a ton of pressure. lots of twists and turns in this trial. what moment stood out to us? we're going to stick with the jury as they head into deliberations and get into that next. it starts with something little, like taking a first step. and then another. and another. and if you do it. and your friends do it. and their friends do it... soon we'll be walking our way to awareness, support and an end to alzheimer's disease. and that? that would be big. grab your friends and family and start a team today. register at alz.org
12:41 pm
the last thing i want is to feel like someone is giving me a sales pitch, especially when it comes to my investments. you want a broker you can trust. a lot of guys at the other firms seemed more focused on selling than their clients. that's why i stopped working at my old brokerage and became a financial consultant with charles schwab. avo: what kind of financial consultant are you looking for? talk to us today.
12:42 pm
her long day of pick ups and drop offs begins with arthritis pain... and a choice. take up to 6 tylenol in a day or just 2 aleve for all day relief. all aboard. ♪ all aboard. wi drive a ford fusion. who is healthier, you or your car? i would say my car. probably the car. cause as you get older you start breaking down. i love my car. i want to take care of it. i have a bad wheel - i must say. my car is running quite well. keep your car healthy with the works. $29.95 or less after $10 mail-in rebate at your participating ford dealer. so you gotta take care of yourself? yes you do. you gotta take care of your baby? oh yeah!
12:43 pm
over the last three weeks we've heard 12 days of testimony in the george zimmerman murder trial, 56 witnesses have taken the stand, and zimmerman's fate is now being decided by six female jurors who were selected last month. zimmerman has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder, claiming self-defense. as jurors get their first opportunity to discuss the case among themselves, we want to run down the key moments jurors might be weighing right now.
12:44 pm
seema, why don't we start with you on that. >> overall, i've thought mark o'mara has done a masterful job in everything. what has stuck with me that's so disturbing is me is in the first half hour of his closing, he said this case presented itself like a bizarre-o case. i have a huge problem with that. when you're trying a case, it's crucial you show remorse for the victim. from jump, he didn't. >> i wonder if the jurors picked up on that. paul, what about you? if there's a key moment for you, what was it? >> you know, my big key moment was in watching the videotape re-enactment when they had zimmerman walking through the neighborhood. i don't know why this stuck out with me, but when he was describing it and talking about it with the bushes -- and i was leaned up into the television screen looking to see. you tell me a black person jumped out at the bushes at you, then i didn't see any bushes. from that moment on, i had my lip twisted up the whole entire
12:45 pm
time they were presenting any version of his story. that was a big moment for me looking for those bushes that did not exist, which means it could have not have happened that way. >> patrick, key moments from you. what do you think? >> i thought when it was rachel jeantel's testimony, seven hours over two days. first, she gave direct evidence that trayvon martin was profiled. she obviously testified to the comment he was being followed, as he said, you know, a cracker. two, the only witness to hear trayvon say get off. three, this was really a turning point because don west actually really acted like a bully. that's george zimmerman's defense attorney saying to her things like, do you understand english? he wasn't your boyfriend, was he? did you want him to be your boyfriend? so to an all-woman jury -- some of those, i think, were turned off by that. that's a comment i've heard from women watching this trial. >> lisa, what do you think?
12:46 pm
>> you know, i'm just thinking about this phrase, which i think i can say. the phrase creepy ass cracker, right? we haven't talked about that very much. whether that's offensive or not. i personally think it's almost funny. i mean, i just do. i think that's the kind of way you talk and get a smile. look at this creepy ass cracker. it's kind of an amusing way of describing somebody. the word creepy is really the operative part of that word, that he was concerned. this guy is creepy. but in a little light hearted way. if you can compare that with the way george zimmerman was talking about trayvon martin, which was not in the least bit funny. you know, calling him an f'ing punk and a-hole. clearly derogatory. no other way to interpret it. i think you have two versions of what's going on. one person who's slamming and insulting the other one and trayvon martin saying, you know, i'm a little concerned about this guy. still, he's keeping it kind of light hearted with rachel jeantel. there's no evidence at all that
12:47 pm
trayvon martin had any animous towards george zimmerman. i always thought it strange he was lurking behind bushes and is just going to haul off and sucker is punch him out of the blue. that doesn't make sense. >> how could he be following him then sneak up on him to get sucker punched? i think lisa's point is also correct. trayvon martin used both of the big sort of racial words. i think that cancels themselves out as opposed to george zimmerman who seems to be presenting this. i can't look back because i'm so fixated still on the verdict and what that will mean. and are we about to learn that once again a black man can be killed with no penalty because americans -- some americans will say it is justifiable to be afraid for your life when you are fighting with a black man. as john guy pointed out, if the races were switched, we'd be in an entirely different situation. >> black man, black child. remember, trayvon martin was a child. let's talk about john guy and this whole race is not a part of
12:48 pm
this case thing. because when i heard it, seema, for me it was a reverse matthew mcconaughey in "a time to kill" moment. remember, john guy said, if the races were reversed, if trayvon martin were white and george zimmerman were black and if you would convict george zimmerman under that scenario, then you must convict george zimmerman under the real life sscenario. that's why i think john guy said race is not a part of this and to the point that paul made earlier, that maybe they were afraid to go full force on race for fear of maybe making the jury uncomfortable or they were uncomfortable doing it. the jury knows that race is a part of this. i thought john guy was actually being a little subtle, probably more subtle than most -- than people are comfortable with, but subtle by making that point. you must convict george zimmerman if george zimmerman were black in this situation. >> it's interesting. the second film reference in this show. our point of reference. the core is what we see in the
12:49 pm
movies. anyway, we'll take a quick break. first, a programming note. craig melvin and lisa are hosting special coverage of the george zimmerman trial tonight. make sure to check that out. dave and neil launched warby parker in 2010 to shake up the world of prescription eyewear, starting with the price. what began as a purely online business was an instant success. so why are they focusing their energies on opening retail stores? for more, watch "your business" sunday mornings on msnbc. is like hammering. riding against the wind. uphill. every day. we make money on saddles and tubes. but not on bikes. my margins are thinner than these tires. anything that gives me some breathing room makes a difference.
12:50 pm
membership helps make the most of your cashflow. i'm nelson gutierrez of strictly bicycles and my money works as hard as i do. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. humans. even when we cross our t's and dot our i's, we still run into problems. namely, other humans. which is why at liberty mutual insurance, auto policies come with new car replacement and accident forgiveness if you qualify. see what else comes standard at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? all this produce from walmart and secretly served it up in the heart of peach country. it's a fresh-over. we want you to eat some peaches and tell us what you think. they're really juicy. it must have just come from the farm. this right here is ideal for me. walmart works directly with growers to get you the best quality produce they've ever had. what would you do if i told you all this produce
12:51 pm
is from walmart? wow! is it really? (laughter) find fresh peaches and all your quality produce. backed by our 100% money back guarantee. walmart. a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease
12:52 pm
or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions, or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion. the fate of george zimmerman is now in the hands of the jury. let's whip around to these lawyers and talk about when the verdict might come in.
12:53 pm
lisa bloom, of course they are going to be working through the weekend as so many of us do. when do you think, lisa bloom, that this jury will come back? >> that's if they don't decide the case today. this is a sequestered jury. they've been away from their families for a long time. and there are only six of them. i think this would be a relatively quick verdict. it could even be today or tomorrow. >> when do you think they're going to come back, and is it appropriate to read into the verdict how soon they come back? >> absolutely. that's a great point. quick verdicts in my experience usually end in convictions. long deliberations more likely for a not guilty, or let's talk about the third possibility, the mistrial. it could be a hung jury. even though we have six people, they may not all agree. >> a hung jury would probably take a long time. the judge would probably send them back, go try to find a verdict again. do you agree that a quick
12:54 pm
verdict probably suggests conviction? >> i think that's generally true and with only six people on the panel, i think we'll get a decision fairly soon. i'm estimating saturday. i think they're going to wrap things up, because i think they've already got opinions going into that room. >> they haven't been able to talk, but probably as paul's saying they already have some opinions. they've been away from their families, what to you think, friday, saturday, monday? >> i'll be leaving mass with my kids and getting out at about 11:00. at 11:30 there will be an announcement of manslaughter. >> thattes an a pretty specific time estimate. >> i'm a military guy, precision. >> keep an eye on that. >> so with the jury made up of six people, how, i enmoo, what
12:55 pm
would a hung jury look like? is it just one person that can say -- >> exactly. >> with six people, it's a little easier to come to a decircumstance isn't it? >> it is. a lot of juries come back initially and say we're stuck. we can't get through it. the judge gives them a dynamite charge or an allen charge, which is a nice language get back in there, keep deliberating, we're not going to get another jury better than you. so they're going to be pushed to try to get to a verdict. >> all right. there's been a lot of talk this week about whether the prosecution has been god or bad, but i think all the lawyers that have been part of this team have done an outstanding job. thanks all you guys for sticking with us and giving us your legal minds. thanks for sitting in with the band once again. jonathan, glad to have you here with us. martin beshear's going to pick up our coverage of the george zimmerman trial right after this
12:56 pm
break. hey linda! what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. since aflac is helping with his expenses while he can't work, he can focus on his recovery. he doesn't have to worry so much about his mortgage, groceries, or even gas bills. kick! kick... feel it! feel it! feel it! nice work! ♪ you got it! you got it! yes! aflac's gonna help take care of his expenses. and us...we're gonna get him back in fighting shape. ♪ [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes at aflac.com. [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes i dbefore i dosearch any projects on my home. i love my contractor,
12:57 pm
and i am so thankful to angie's list for bringing us together. find out why more than two million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. [ herbie ] eh, hold on brent, what's this? mmmm, nice car. there's no doubt, that's definitely gonna throw him off. she's seen it too. oh this could be trouble. [ sentra lock noise ] oh man. gotta think fast, herbie. back pedal, back pedal. [ crowd cheering ] oh, he's down in flames and now the ice-cold shoulder. one last play... no, game over! gps take him to the dog house. [ male announcer ] make a powerful first impression. the all-new nissan sentra. ♪ if you have high cholesterol,
12:58 pm
here's some information that may be worth looking into. in a clinical trial versus lipitor, crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol to a goal of under 100. getting to goal is important, especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors because you could be at increased risk for plaque buildup in your arteries over time. and that's why when diet and exercise alone aren't enough to lower cholesterol i prescribe crestor. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol at goal? ask your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
12:59 pm
jts good afternoon, it's fridays, july the 12th. and the fate of george zimmerman now rests in the hands of six of his peers. >> state versus george zimmerman. mr. o'mara, whenever you're ready. >> how many could have beens have you heard from the state in this case? how many what ifs? just may have acted in self-defence. and if you reach that conclusion, you get to stop. you really do. why?
1:00 pm
because self-defense is a defense to everything. >> the defendant didn't shoot trayvon martin because he had to. he shot him because he wanted to. this case is not about standing your ground. it's about staying in your car. >> if it was trayvon martin who had shot and killed george zimmerman, what would your verdict be. >> your verdict finding george zimmerman either guilty or not guilty must be unanimous. >> at 2:28 this afternoon, judge debra nelson sent out the jury to begin their deliberations in the trial of george zimmerman, this coming after 12 days of testimony, 56 witnesses and several hours of passionate closing arguments earlier today. the options for the jury, a guilty charge of second degree murder, a

81 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on