good evening. welcome once again to ac 360 special report, self-defense or murder. every night, all the key moments from court today. today day six, jurors heard the defendant's recorded version of what happened the night he killed trayvon martin and heard from two police officers including the lead investigator. the prosecutor seeking to highlight inconsistencies in zimmerman's story and bolstered their claim that he profiled martin from the moment he spotted him. another very full hour. we begin with martin savidge. >> and sanford police officer doris singleton was the first to interview zimmerman the night he shot trayvon martin and said he seemed surprised to learn the teen had died. >> yes, at some point, i had said that we weren't able to identify the victim. and he said, well, what do you mean you haven't been able to identify him? i said we don't know who he is. and he said, he's dead?

and i said, i thought you knew that. i thought you knew he was dead. and he kind of slung his head and just shook it. >> in a recording in that interview, zimmerman again repetitious the line prosecutors say went his state of mind. >> there's been a few times where i've seen a suspicious person in the neighborhood. we call the police a nonemergency line and these guys always get away. >> the state could be tends zimmerman instantly profiled martin that night pointing to his written statement in which he repeatedly described martin as the suspect. and prosecutors attempted to show how zimmerman's account changed with each retelling. in his first interview, he said martin attacked him after jumping out of the bushes. >> so i was walking back through to where my car was and he jumped out from the bushes. and he said, what the [ bleep ] is the problem, homey?

in the re-enactment he makes no mention of martin jumping out from bushes. >> that's right about here. he yelled from behind me. he said, yo, you got a problem? i turned around. i don't have a problem, man. >> where was he at? >> he was about there, but he was walking towards me. >> coming this direction here. >> yes, sir, like i said, i was already past that. so i didn't see exactly where he came from. >> the state entered into evidence another police interview from days later in which investigators challenge zimmerman's account of events. >> what your account is that you don't see him at this point. here's the pavement. directly looking down that way. that passage? where are you at? >> told me not to follow him, and i wasn't following him. i was just going in the same direction he was. >> but each time on cross-examination, defense

attorney mark o'mara always came back to the same point, that both investigators found zimmerman credible. >> were there any questions that you asked him or any changes in his story along the way that caused you concern? >> not significantly, no. >> do you think he was telling the ruth? >> yes. >> martin savidge, sanford, florida. >> those were prosecution's witnesses. the legal panel, former federal prosecutor jeffrey toobin, legal analyst sunny hostin. on defense side, daenny cevallos and mark geragos. mark, you think today was a big win for the defense? >> well, clearly. i don't think there's anybody who can see it or objectively look at what happened today and not understand that this was about as good a day as the

defense is going to have. it also was the police's way of paying back the prosecution. you know, he was not arrested. >> do you think that's true? >> i think this was police payback, their way to kind of stick it to the prosecution because if you remember originally, the state's attorney did throw the police under the bus on this case. and so the police i think today paid them back. >> jeff, do you think that's true. >> i do think it's possible. the answers were so enthusiastically pro-zimmerman. these cops could have answered these questions in a more neutral way but they really did seem to be going out of their way to say zimmerman was a great guy, that he was honest, that they tried all their tricks, that he didn't ask for a lawyer, that he acted like a stand-up guy, that he was truthful. i've never seen cops testify that way about a defendant -- >> really? >> certainly not about a case, not about a defendant in the case where they're trying, absolutely not, never. >> sunny, you did spend a lot of time in the court the last

couple days. did you see any bright spots for the prosecution or do you agree this was all the defense day? >> well, i will agree with mark and jeff that think there may have been a bit of payback. remember these officers are the same one, chris serino was demoted and the sanford police department really the investigation was taken from them. i think we saw some payback. i was in the courtroom today. i think i saw a lot of positives for the prosecution in terms of pushing their story farther along. we heard testimony from a voice recognition expert that said you know what? the technology's not there for voice recognition yet but if a family member or somebody member or somebody familiar with the voice can testify, that's pretty reliable. check. that's a win for the prosecution. in terms of all of zimmerman's statements while consistent in terms of the struggle, we know there was a struggle, okay. but when you talk about what's really important in this case which is who started this fight, who started this struggle, he was all over the place. it was clear that he told singleton that he was getting

out to find out a street name. there were only three street names at this retreat at twin lakes. you mean to tell me he didn't know what the street name was? it comes out he was actually going in the same direction as trayvon martin, but not following him. and he was pressed on that. so i think when you talk about the day in totality, yes, the defense did very well, but so did the prosecution. >> danny, do you believe george zimmerman was all over the place in his statements to police? >> absolutely not. think about it. it's human nature. it's almost impossible to tell the same story three, four times exactly the same. none of us can do it. we're not robots i think was even phrase used today. we're not. so there's always going to be inconsistencies. the question is how big are the inconsistencies and are they something a jury can live with. i think in this case where you have a person who voluntarily gave a statement multiple statements, came back again and again, you're always going to have some inconsistencies, but wow, overall, the broad strokes

are there, the story is overall very consistent. and i think that's very compelling. remember george zimmerman got to essentially testify today even though he wasn't actually testifying and not subject to be cross-examination. a win. >> and mark, we heard again, he want to play a little bit more what we heard from one of the police officers on the stand. >> did he evidence that he was angry with trayvon martin? >> no. >> that he had hatred for him? >> no. >> spite or ill will? >> no. >> that he had anything that would suggest to you some type of bad attitude towards trayvon martin? >> no. >> rather, he seemed to be affected by the fact that he realized that trayvon martin had passed? >> he seemed affected by that. >> mark, all of that goes to intent, doesn't it? >> what this does is, when you have a dead body and trayvon was killed and the prosecution is trying to prove a murder, they

need to prove malice. malice is exactly what mark o'mara just went through, the ill will, the bad attitude, the trying to encapsulate. that police officer just gave them the closing argument and the closing argument is going to be, if there are two reasonable interpretations one that points toward innocent one towards guilt, you must find the defendant not guilty. that police officer just gave you one reasonable interpretation. there was no malice as of today, that second degree murder i don't think they can sustain a second degree murder conviction in this case. i think there is no malice in the jury follows the instructions. i know some people will be angry about this but you have to understand, this is where the evidence leaves you. you've got the officer who are assessed him on the scene. that officer gave those answers and i'll tell you, mark o'mara,

i give him props for not only the cross but having the cojones to ask the questions because that's a fearless kind of -- you have to know that cop is going to give you those answers to ask those kinds of questions because god for bid you get the answer that is no, i thought he wasn't credible or no, i thought he was lying. there's no way to overstate how important today was for the defense. >> jeff, i was going to ask you if you you agree park o'mara has cojones. >> what is all this spanish. >> jeff, what mark said which is -- it's pretty deb stating that they do not have the evidence for second degree murder. do you agree with that so far? >> i don't know. i think the jury could find circumstantial range. i think it's a long shot at ha point. the other thing that the officer did is he said he was actually asked about the contradictions in zimmerman's statements and he said, oh, people don't tell

things the same way twice. go to bat for zimmerman that way. >> singleton talked about zimmerman holstering his gun. i want to play what she said on the stand. >> did mr. zimmerman elaborate as to why he would hoster his gun back if he thought the victim was alive? >> he didn't put that the two terms together. >> that wasn't significant to you? >> i don't know if that's significant. >> well, tell me, how many times have you gone out to a scene where you were trying to apprehend a suspect, right, a person that you believe is committing a crime and you don't believe the person or you think the person is a threat. do you holster your gun if the person is moving around or still at large? >> no. >> what do you do? >> i wait till it's safe. >> right. you keep the gun on the person till he's either dead or apprehended, correct? >> yes. >> it's interesting to see the

prosecution arguing with police officers here. >> i genuinely forget whose witness is whose witness. too often the roles seem reversed. there is a sub text of sympathy by the -- everyone in law enforcement with george zimmerman. it's not overt. you have to admit just watching bernie de la rionda, he's asking questions like he's on cross-examination. it is his witness but there is something there. >> sunny, to that point, do you think it was a mistake for prosecutors to go for second degree murder, not manslaughter? >> well, you know, the case is far from over. for us to say they can't sustain a second degree murder charge at this point the beginning of the second week is ludicrous. there are two schools of thought i think when it comes to prosecutes. some upcharge a bit. some think i have just enough evidence to perhaps get second degree murder. but, if the jury gets instructed

on manslaughter i shot for the stars but if i land on the moon with my conviction, at least i get a conviction. others charge i know i have enough evidence for manslaughter and i may have enough for second degree so i'm going to going for second degree. obviously they thought had enough for second degree. if not, they wouldn't have brought it. again, everyone, we're still in the -- i'm not going to say the beginning of the case but it's the beginning of the second week of the case. >> i think sunny's clearly right that. >> thank you, jeff. >> you can't make up your mind about this before all the evidence is in but i think we are a lot closer to the end of the prosecution's case than the beginning. >> of course you are. >> there is not a lot more evidence to come in. you just think of it. it's a terrible crime but it's not the world's most complicated crime. who are the witnesses. >> you do you think we're close to the end of the prosecution? >> this case was estimated, at the beginning, when they were going to have the voice

recognition experts and there were going to be four, they cut off a week by elimination of those. we're now in week two. they've cut off the week with the elimination of those. by all accounts, they should be done but for the fourth of july holiday. this case is close to being over and sunny is aptly named. she is pollyanna if she can put a sunny face on this prosecution because this prosecution is dead in the water. >> of course you can. >> it's dead in the water. >> we haven't heard any forensics. we haven't heard from the medical examiner. we haven't heard from anybody identifying trayvon martin's voice. we've got a long way to go. >> the problem you've got is, they have now put on the videotape of zimmerman which i'm sure mark o'mara is there thanking the lord. he'll never have 0 put his client on. he got to testify as danny said, without cross-examination. the cops have come in and essentially eviscerated the prosecutor and you're at a point, you know, the emperor has no clothes. >> let's just save the tape. save the tape.

>> this case is dead. the case is dead. >> save the tape. >> we've got to take a break. we'll get to more of that coming up. we'll play a fuller portion of george zimmerman's taped interview with police that jurors heard today. you can decide for yourself what to make of it. we'll also talk more about the notion that some elements of the prosecution's case so far seem almost like gifts to the defense. we'll be right back. estigate it. ...prosecute it... and stop criminals. our senior medicare patrol volunteers... are teaching seniors across the country... ...to stop, spot, and report fraud. you can help. guard your medicare card. don't give out your card number over the phone. call to report any suspected fraud. we're cracking down on medicare fraud. let's make medicare stronger for all of us.

george zimmerman may never take the stand in his own defense, probably almost certainly he will not, but today his words did.

he spoke to police several times after the shooting. the prosecution wants to try to expose inconsistencies in what he told them. today prosecutors played a video of them questioning george zimmerman. here is some of what the jurors heard. >> did you ever say to him -- did it not occur to you? >> no, i don't have a problem and i started backing away from him. >> did it not occur to you? >> i was scared. >> you were scared to tell him you were -- you were afraid to tell him that? >> yes, sir. >> i'm not trying to put you on the spot. but these are the questions they're going to ask you. it seemed like the perfect opportunity to say i'm neighborhood watch. i don't recognize you. where are you staying here? >> he came up out of nowhere. i didn't see him. i was walking back to my car thinking i was going to meet a police officer there. so when he popped up, he just

caught me off guard. >> but can you see how that would have frightened him? >> what do you mean? >> yeah, you're watching him, okay? he sees you. making it clear i recognize you're following me? >> i didn't know if he was doing that or he was doubling back, what he was doing. >> and the prosecution entered that into evidence. some are saying the totality of his answers work just, as well for the defense. back with sunny hostin, jeffrey toobin, danny cevallos and mark geragos. sunny, what about that? he could have identified himself as a neighborhood watch. does it raise suspicions that he didn't? >> it does. he could have listened to the dispatcher and not gotten out of his car to follow trayvon martin. there were other inconsistencies. he initially said that trayvon kind of sucker punched him, came out of hiding from some bushes.

when you look at his re-enactment, there are no bushes. instead, he talked about trayvon martin coming up on him on the path. really when you look at all of these statements. >> his hands, right? >> and his hands. he says that trayvon martin, that he placed his hands i guess sort of stretched out. but when the police officers came on to the scene, they found trayvon martin's hands under him. when you look at all those inconsistencies, while he may have been consistent about the fact that there was a struggle, we know all that. when it comes 0 down to the nitty gritty who started the pursuit, who followed, how did this altercation end, i still think his statements are all over the place and really help the prosecution. >> danny, the problem for the prosecution is nobody actually saw how the altercation began. george zimmerman is the only one. now jurors have gotten his testimony without him being cross-examined. >> here's the problem. let's go back to the law. who was following who. at the end of the day, the prosecution must prove depraved

mind. that is ill will evil intent. those words are relative, we can't really define them but the florida courts have. they say such things like, you can't form that kind of ill will in an instant. usually these are people ho know each other who have formlated this hatred. it just isn't there. forget even if you don't believe. >> really? >> if you disbelieve the self-defense. >> how about these f'ing punks always get away? >> that's a good point. >> how is that not ill will. >> because that kind of ill will is not sufficient. it may sound like ill will to you. but what's important is the law. florida courts have held the kind of evil hatred is more than just saying hey, i don't like what's going on in my neighborhood. if you read case law, it's full of cases with much more nasty language than this and it's clear they are not as a matter of law going to be able to prove prerequisite malice. >> i don't think that's right.

>> i think you're dead wrong. dead wrong. >> this is a jury issue. if the jury -- there is evidence here that a jury could find this is a guy george zimmerman who had it in for black people, who didn't like them in the neighborhood, who got involved in this neighborhood watch because he had these weird suspicions that he called people walking around suspects, and started this confrontation and wound up killing trayvon martin. i think a jury could find that. based on the evidence that's been put in, i think it's unlikely, but the idea that it is somehow impossible for the jury to find that i don't buy that. >> mark, these tapes were introduced by the prosecution. is that just because they're out there and they just think it's better to just get them in and move on? >> no, i don't -- i really don't think so because the defense more than likely would not have been able to get these tapes in. absent putting him on the stand. so the prosecution apparently

like sunny believes that this helps them. we'll see once that jury comes back because i don't see it. remember this is, if the defendant tried to put in his own statement, most judges are not going to allow that because it's a violation of the evidence code. so the only reason the prosecution would put this into evidence is because they think it helps their case. and i just, from sitting here and watching it, i can't imagine how they think in the totality of this, especially coming on the heels of their own officers saying that they weren't material inconsistencies and mind you, they're also going to get a jury instruction that says that everybody can make or has inconsistencies in their testimony and that unless it's material, you don't get bothered by it, and the officer, basically, echoed that, as well. so i don't know what everybody else is drinking down there in florida but i'm telling you, if you're watching this case and if you've ever been in a criminal

courtroom for more than five minutes, you would understand this case is over. >> it does seem like at the end of each day. >> you're wrong. >> it does seem like when we talk and analyze what went on that day, everybody on the panel sort of agrees, well today was a pretty good day for the defense. i have yet to hear, i mean does anybody here on the panel think the prosecution has had a day where they knocked it out of the park? >> no. >> that was a lot of silence especially for this group. >> so that bad, jeff? >> i think, look, you don't add up trials based on which day is a good day. >> this is cable tv. that's exactly what you will do. >> some evidence is more important than other. look, the 911 call where zimmerman calls the operator and the operator says stay away. don't confront him. that's an extremely damaging piece of evidence i think. it could be that the jury has that in their heads.

and all the rest of it, they're not so interested in. and remember, only one of these two people had a gun. and it was george zimmerman. and the idea that the guy with the gun is the one who's afraid has a certain implausibility i think. so yes, the evidence has not gone in very well for the prosecution, but the idea that this case is over as mark says, that the prosecution is dead, i just don't think that's true. >> i respectfully disagree with that. here's why. >> how do you expect them to recover? what are they going to do at this point to recover? who are they going to put on? >> they don't need to recover. >> they have a burden. they have a burden of proof. understand something. >> recovering many i applies -- >> this is not a fight. this is not a fight. this is, they've got a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. that's how the legal system, workings in america, which means the defense doesn't have to do anything. defense doesn't have to do a thing. you don't have to cross-examine

if you don't want to. how are you going say beyond a reasonable doubt the prosecution has proved this case? >> the case isn't over yet. the case isn't over yet. >> what are they going to put on? >> what evidence could we possibly be hearing at this point? go back to the law. law will set you free. if you go back to their burden, and their burden is not only to prove depraved mind which is very high standard, they must disprove the self-defense. even if the jury says we don't buy self-defense, the prosecution still has to meet the burden. we have george zimmerman's own statements now to the jury which have not been cross-examined and a number of police officers where mark oh mayor rare brilliantly laid out almost word for word the absence of depraved mind. >> look at george zimmerman's re-enactment of events from the february 27, the day after the shootings. let's listen to some of that. >> i tried to squirm thatso thai

could get -- because he only had a small portion of my head on the concrete. i tried to squirm off the concrete. and when i did that, somebody here opened the door and i said help me, help me. and they said i'll call 911. i said no, help me. i need help. and i don't know what they did. but that's my jacket moved up and i had my firearm on my right side hip. and my jacket moved up. and he saw i feel like he saw, he looked at it and he said you're going to die tonight [ bleep ]. and he reached for it but he reached like i felt his arm going down my side and i grabbed it and i just grabbed my firearm and i shot him one time. >> jeff, in order for him not to be found not guilty, the jury has to believe he is credible. and you now have two police officers on the stand today essentially saying, he's credible. >> that's correct. and that's a big problem.

but the jury doesn't have -- the jury can make up their own minds about credibility. that's an important fact to remember that the jury can say i believe this witness this witness, but not that one and that one. it is an unusual situation where the lead police officers vouch for the credibility of the defendant. i mean, as i say, i'd never seen that before but that doesn't mean that the jury has to believe the defendant and those cops. >> let's take another quick break, we've got a lot more to talk about in a moment. testimony from the lead investigator in the case who wanted to pursue a lesser charge than second degree murder. i'll ask whether the decision to aim higher was a good one.

some key testimony today came from chris serino the lead investigate in the case. earlier on he wanted to pursue manslaughter charges. he was expected to be a strong witness for the prosecution but he actually appeared to help the defense at times. here's just one example. >> tell me what concerns you had with what mr. zimmerman told you that night that did not comport to the evidence that you were now aware. >> i had none at that time. >> okay. did he seem to be cagey in his answering to you? dihe seem to be side stepping your answers in any form or way to get around answering your direct questions? >> no, sir. >> did he seem to do anything that based upon your training and experience, evidenced to you that he was being less than straightforward with you? >> no, he was -- he was being

straightforward in, my opinion. >> is there anything else in this case where you got the insight that he might be a path logical liar? >> no. >> matter of fact, everything that he told you to date had been corroborated by other evidence you were already aware of in the investigation that he was unaware of? >> correct. >> okay. so if we were to take pathological liar off the table as a possibility just for the purpose of this next question, do you think he was telling the truth? >> yes. >> our legal panelist back with me. sunny, jeff, mark. jeff, you're shaking your head. >> whoever heard of a prosecution witness talking about a defendant like that? it was like a character witness. >> it's unbelievable. >> jeff, an a prosecutor, when you're putting the person on the stand, do you know he's going to be that friendly to the defense? >> you should. the whole point is to know what the witness thinks and what the witness will say. as mark's conspiracy theory

which may be true may be that the relationship between the prosecutors and the -- and the cops is so poisonous that there was just nothing that the prosecution could do. but i have never heard a -- the lead investigator in a case talk about a defendant liking that. >> sunny, not everything worked to george's benefit here. mark o'mara asked serino about concerns had he with zimmerman. i want to play that. >> then there was this question about why he didn't simply acknowledge to trayvon martin who he was or what he was doing, correct? >> yes. >> and you questioned him a couple different ways on that, as well. >> yes. >> did his answer to you satisfy you? >> not necessarily. >> tell me what your concern was. >> he has made reference to

mentoring children, specifically african-american children. why it didn't occur to him to go ahead and try to say something to somebody he was following? >> sure. in hindsight. >> of course. >> that might have resolved things? >> absolutely. >> that's something the prosecution would like to continue to hammer on, it could have all been avoided. >> sure. he threw the prosecution a bone there, but for the most part there, his testimony was remarkable. but i do agree that that's part of the prosecution's theme. had he not gotten out of the car, had he done what he had been instructed to do by the neighborhood watch folks by the dispatcher once he got out and dispatcher said we don't need you to follow him. had all of that not occurred, we wouldn't be talking about this case. i'm quite sure that that's something that the prosecutor is going to follow up on. >> mark, were there opportunities that you saw that

you think the prosecution missed with this investigator? >> yeah, they never should have put him on the stand. simple as that. >> really? >> there is absolutely no reason in the world if this prosecution really wanted to win this case that they would put this guy on the stand. it's mind boggling. i can't emphasize enough jeff's point. the idea that you've got the lead investigator up there as jeff said, actually vouching. it's character testimony for the defendant in a murder case. 30 years, i've never seen anything in the same universe like this. >> remarkable. >> it is remarkable and the amazing thing about it is unfortunately, people are going to think, this is how the criminal justice system operates every day. you can't cite me to a case that is this unbelievable in terms of what is happening to the prosecution. >> i want to play another part about concerns had he with zimmerman.

>> he appeared to be lacking in my opinion as far as what was going on, what he was in the middle of. it just seemed that something was going on with him. >> would you call that sort of in generic terms a flat affect as to what was happening? >> generic terms, yes. >> okay. >> did that cause you concern that he had, in fact gone through a traumatic event and his response was a flat affect about it? >> to some point, yes, it did. >> do you make anything of that, danny? people react in different ways to stress and being in the middle of i guess a shooting like this. >> i think that was terrific cross-examination because it brings out yes, indeed he did have a flat affect but we all respond to traumatic events differently. it develops the idea that a flat affect or maybe some other behavior is acceptable after an event like this. overall, it's just compellingly

good evidence for the defense. >> i want to play one other piece of cross-examination by mark o'mara today. let's listen. >> and in a situation like this where you have what you believe mr. zimmerman went through both parts of that trauma, and multiple interviews of him, would you expect that there were going to be some differences? >> absolutely. >> and why is that? >> because we're not robots as people. i mean, not knowing him personally, i don't think i've heard of somebody remembering step by step exactly how stuff occur thad they were involved in, unless they're looking from the outside in. >> as a matter of fact, if someone were to come to you and have the exact same story down

fact for fact and word for word sentence for sentence each time you talked to them, what would you think about that person's honesty for veracity? >> i'd either they're being completely honest or completely false to the extreme. >> so in your interviews continuing as they were with mr. zimmerman, you would expect that thing were going to change over time, correct? >> potentially, yes. >> you would -- and if they were to change in significant ways, if he were to add in some brand new fact or truly change direction, you would note that, correct? >> yes, sir. >> mark o'mara did a great job there. >> it was a brilliant cross-examination. and by the way, it also shows that you don't have to yell and scream and pound the table to do a good cross-examination. but think about the answers he was giving there. the whole prosecution's case is based on the idea that the contradictions in zimmerman's testimony prove that he's a liar. here you have lead investigators saying well i didn't think these

contradictions were any big deal. in fact people don't always tell things it same way. >> it would be unusual if there weren't contradictions. >> exactly. >> stunning stuff. stick around. there's a lot more to talk about. trayvon martin's mom is expected to take the stand possibly testimony. why her prosecution is so important for the prosecution, what she told me in the interview just a month after trayvon martin was killed.

trayvon martin's mom sybrina fulton is expected to take the stand possibly tomorrow to testify about a key piece of evidence, that wrenching 911 call where you can hear someone screaming for help. jurors heard it last week during the testimony of the witness who made the call. here it is again. >> does he look hurt to you.

>> i can't see him. i don't want to go out there. i don't know what's going on. >> you think he's yelling help? >> yes. >> what is your phone number? >> there's gunshots. >> now, the prosecution had some people who were described as audio experts lined up to testify that the voice on the recording was not george zimmerman's but the judge ruled they couldn't take the stand because the science they use, the techniques they used to analyze that basically wasn't sound. that's why her testimony has become important. i interviewed her a month after he was killed. here's what she said about the 911 call. >> the eyewitnesses have said they believe some of them believe it was your son calling out for help. no one saw him directly doing it. or saw, could say 100% for sure. you've heard the 911 call where you hear somebody calling out help. do you believe that is your son's voice. >> yes, i do.

i believe that's trayvon martin. i believe that's my baby's voice. every mother knows their child. and that's his voice. >> and the fact that if that's true and he called out for help, what does that tell you? >> he was afraid for his life. he saw his death coming. he saw his death coming. the screams got more franticer and at that second ta we heard the shot, the screams just completely stopped. he saw his death. he was pleading for his life. >> so you're saying if it was zimmerman screaming for help, that might have continued after the shot, but the fact that after the shot, there was no more screaming for help? >> no more screaming whatsoever. it went completely silent. >> now, the defense can just as easily put one of george zimmerman's relatives on the

stand to testify that it's his voice. sunny hostin, jeffrey toobin, danny cevallos, and mark geragos. sunny, ultimately it's up to the jury to decide who they're hearing on that tape. how effective do you think his mother could be in trying to convince them it's her son yelling for help? >> i think she could be very effective. we have all seen her. she's very elegant. she's very reserved. she's been in the courtroom every single day. the jury has seen her every single day. let's remember there are six women on the jury. five of them are mothers. i'm a mother. i know the sound of my child's voice from across a football field if he or he is in distress. i would imagine every single mother on that witness stand is going to connect with her if she gets on the stand and says i know the sound of my child's voice because every mother does know the sound of her child's voice. >> george zimmerman's family maintains it's their son on the tape. this is his father robert from june of last year. >> were you able to identify whose voice it was screaming for

help? >> yes, sir. >> whose was it? >> it was absolutely george's. >> so mark, would this just be a wash, if you have sabrina fulton on saying it's trayvon martin and robert zimmerman saying it's his son? >> i don't know. i think when you see the testimony when it was given by zimmerman's father, it's nowhere near as emotional and i know that the interview that you played was you on your daytime television show. maybe that's a little bit more dramatic. my guess is to some degree sunny is right when you have the mother who's there every day and she does carry herself extremely well and she is elegant, that's a perfect word for her, that will have an effect. and i think a lot of those mothers will understand that. whether that's going to be enough to overcome what has so far been a disaster for the

prosecution, i just don't think it is. >> it's also interesting, danny, because trayvon martin's parents have been in the courtroom every single day. sometimes they've had to get up and go out when the testimony is too graphic. so, in a sense, the jury has sort of developed some sort of impression with them which they haven't done for george zimmerman's family because his parents are not in the room because they may be called to testify. >> this is a fascinating piece of strategy. the prosecution originally wanted to introduce science that someone could recognize scientifically these voices. when that was excluded, it did not meet it the frey standard. it wasn't reliable. they fall back to another, i think this is a great piece of improve by the prosecution. they a in that case, we'll match-up george zimmerman's family, i mean george zimmerman's family will identify his voice, we'll let trayvon's family identify his voice and take our chances with probably trayvon's mother for exactly these reasons. in that sense, i agree with sunny and mark. it's probably the strongest

element of their case when trayvon martin's mom or some member of the family will go up and clearly identify trayvon martin's voice. >> tomorrow, sunny, you're going to be in court again. the investigator serino is back on the stand tomorrow. do we will know what we expect then? >> we don't know what to expect. i will be back in the courtroom tomorrow. we know he's going to be back. o'mara made it really clear he was done just for today, but would be back tomorrow. i suspect we'll see perhaps some more of those fireworks that we saw today. i hadn't heard that sybrina fulton was going to testify. we don't know the who's coming next, but definitely serino will be on the witness stand. >> jeff, if you were the defense i assume you would try to keep the investigator on the stand as long as you could? >> he's doing nothing but helping the defense. i assume there's more to bring out. i think o'mara could have another hour or two with no problem. >> how much of a defense does

o'mara have to actually put on? >> i don't think he has to put on any defense. he may back fill on a couple of points, put the father on to testify that he thinks it was zimmerman's voice. maybe potentially put on an expert although i'm not so sure that he's going to do that, as well. i think at this point, my guess is that there's not much for him to do other than get this thing to the jury and get his closing argument done. >> we often when we cover these trials, you know, the prosecution is on for three weeks or three days. and or the point i'm trying to make in my way is the prosecution's case is always a lot longer than the defense. and we shouldn't be surprised if the defense case is just a day or two. that's often the case and given the way the evidence has gone in here, i think it's very likely that there will be a very short defense case. >> danny, do you agree with that. >> i do. i think it's mark geragos in his book who describes the

prosecution is a standup comedian and the defense is improv, their job is to peck away at the prosecution. they don't need to put on the same show the prosecutor does. they've got a much higher burden. that's why their show is much longer. >> the title of the book is "mistrial," isn't it, mark? >> that's exactly what it is. thank you, jeff. i appreciate that. >> oh, man. >> available on amazon. thank you. >> all right. listen, fascinating discussion. sunny hostin, jeff toobin, danny cevallos. thanks very much. arizona is mourning the death of 19 firefighters. an elite squad of men trapped in an inferno. what led to the tragedy in a moment. to fight it... to investigate it... ...prosecute it... and stop criminals. our senior medicare patrol volunteers... are teaching seniors across the country... ...to stop, spot, and report fraud. you can help. guard your medicare card. don't give out your card number over the phone. call to report any suspected fraud.

we're cracking down on medicare fraud. let's make medicare stronger for all of us.

but for all these symptoms, you also take kaopectate. new kaopectate caplets -- soothing relief for all those symptoms. kaopectate. one and done. let's get caught up on some of the other stories we're

following. susan is here with the 360 bulletin. susan? >> anderson, the governor of arizona calls the loss of 19 firefighters unbearable. the men were part of an elite squad battling a giant wildfire northwest of phoenix when they were killed on sunday. they were trapped by flames which were fanned by shifting winds. >> oh, my goodness. he wanted to be a firefighter like his dad, like me. i come from a family of firefighters, and you know, we go to work, we know there's a risk. and you know, you spend your whole life protecting your children.

and then you know, knowingly letting him go into harm's way, i can only imagine how my parents felt when i became a firefighter. >> that was heartbreaking, the father of one of the fallen speaking earlier. the fire still raging out of control is now considered the deadliest in arizona state he's apparently in great shape but he's not a kid. he's 29 years old but now let me tell you, he's got bragging rights. >> that's incredible. please do not try this at home. susan. >> good advice.

>> thanks very much. that does it for us. thanks for watching. "early start" starts after the break. [ ship horn blows ] no, no, no! stop! humans. one day we're coming up with the theory of relativity, the next... not so much. but that's okay -- you're covered with great ideas like optional better car replacement from liberty mutual insurance. total your car and we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. learn about it at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? [ children laughing ] ♪ ...is the smell of salt in the air. ♪ it's the sound a seashell makes.

[ seagulls calling ] away...is a place that's beyond your imagination, yet well within your means. find your away. for a dealer and the rv that's right for you, visit gorving.com.

on the run with nowhere to go, the man who exposed america's secret surveillance program breaking his silence, denouncing the united states and asking more than one dozen countries to save him from prosecution. a 48 hour deadline. egypt's first democratically elected leader could be overthrown. the deadliest wildfire in arizona still growing. how the flames are continuing to move as the nation grieves 19 firefighters killed in that blaze. >> s