have no idea. let's just lay our cards on the table. we don't know what is in that jury's mind. it's been a very fascinating debate. all of america is debating this, because it's about race. it's about guns. it's about culture. it's about american life, the right to self-defend, all of those things have collided into this, and the verdict, whatever it is, will be extremely contentious. thank you all on my panel, to my audience for joining me tonight. and we'll have the zimmerman verdict live on cnn the moment that we get it. you'll see it on cnn all through the weekend. there will be live updates and deliberation and debate. anderson cooper cnn special "self-defense or murder, the george zimmerman trial" starts right now. the arguments in, the deliberations begin. good evening, everyone. welcome to another special report, "murder or self-defense,

the george zimmerman trial." this is it, six women now hold his fate in their hands, after deliberating 3 hours, 33 minute with three choices, second degree murder, manslaughter or not guilty. those six members of the zimmerman jury reached a decision. they decided to sleep on it. >> the jury would like to adjourn tonight at 6:00 p.m. and begin tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. if possible. anybody have any objections? >> no, your honor. >> thank you, your honor. >> the jurors got the case about 2:30 eastern time. two hours later they asked for and got a list of evidence in this case. tonight we want to look at what they will be weighing, who the jurors are and what goes on during the deliberations. we'll get allegations that mark o'hara made to martin savidge. o'mara says this case never would have made it to court had it not been for what he called a racially loaded smear campaign by the martin legal team. first though martin savidge on the closing day of closing arguments.

>> reporter: defense attorney mark o'mara began his closing argument by reminding jurors the prosecution had to prove its case against george zimmerman. and pointed out the prosecutor's own words lacked conviction. >> how many could have beens from the state in this case? how many what ifs? >> reporter: then mark o'hara said he would do what he was not obligated to do, prove his client innocent. what followed was a three-hour summation soft spoken matter of fact style. but not without some courtroom these risks his own. >> if i were to talk in today, and just as an example, walked in, like this. just walked in the courtroom as a lawyer, you would just have an impression, what in god's name is he doing with his sunglasses on and what does he think he is? you might have an impression of george zimmerman.

you might have an impression of him because he's sitting at the defense table, and that may be as we talked about, he's not just a citizen accused, but maybe he is a defendant or he has something to defend. >> reporter: o'mara asked the jury not to judge zimmerman by their first impression but to use common sense. >> if it hasn't been proven, as the instruction tells you, it's just not there. you can't connect the dots for the state attorney's office. >> reporter: it may have taken three hours for o'mara to deliver his argument to the jury, but part of those three hours was just pure silence. >> we're going to sit tight and we're not going to talk. >> reporter: four minutes of silence ticking by to show the jury the length of time he said martin had to escape after he spotted george zimmerman watching him. >> that's how long trayvon martin had to run, about four minutes. >> reporter: instead of running,

o'mara said martin decided to confront martin that night and he used a 3-d animation that showed martin punching zimmerman in the nose. >> there's the shot in the nose we contend. >> reporter: a repeated tactic by o'mara in the courtroom, outright disbelief at the prosecution's case. >> seriously? really? really? come on. really? i almost wish that the verdict had guilty, not guilty, and completely innocent. because i would ask you to check that one. >> reporter: the prosecution delivered a strongly worded rebuttal, saying trayvon martin's blood is on george zimmerman's hands. >> that child had every right to be afraid of a strange man following him. first in his car, and then on foot. and did that child not have the right to defend himself from

that strange man? >> reporter: that child, according to the prosecution, but a dangerous teenager according to the defense. >> that's cement. that is a sidewalk. and that is not an unarmed teenager with nothing but skittles trying to get home, and the suggestion by the state that that's not a weapon, that that can't hurt somebody, that that can't cause great bodily injury is disgusting. >> reporter: martin savidge, cnn, sanford, florida. >> let's bring in sunny hostin, jeffrey toobin, danny cevallos and mark geragos. mark's latest book is "mistrial, an inside look at how the criminal justice system and sometimes doesn't." what's your assessment of oerm are a's closing today?

>> sunny has her mcdreamy. to me, o'mara is mcawesome. i thought the prosecutors did a good job. their style was a little more fiery. what i admire is somebody who can -- as an attorney who tries cases, i see someone do that measured calm way of delivering a closing summation after he's lived this case for so long. it's hard to keep emotion out of it. i admire someone who methodically goes through the case and challenges every piece of the prosecution's evidence. i thought it was a terrific closing. >> it was such an extraordinary contrast to the prosecutors, >> just on volume alone. >> volume of voice. >> yes. yesterday it was so much yelling in that courtroom. today, i don't think o'mara even raised his voice at any point. i think to a fault. i thought he was almost too sedate. but it was a conversational discussion of the evidence. >> which works better? one makes the jury lean forward and listen. the other can risk alienating a jury.

>> what you learn in trial score and more experienced lawyers is you have to be yourself. people's personalities are what they are, and you can't fake it. there are good people in both categories. i think all these lawyers are good. but i think the jury was -- had to be startled by how quiet o'mara was today. >> mark, i want to play something that o'mara said about instructions to the jury. >> what happened that day is what happened that day, but what i don't think you should do is fill in any gaps at all. connect any dots, for any fact, for any witness. if the decision was made by the state not to present additional evidence to you, do not assume and do not give anybody the benefit of any doubt except for george zimmerman. >> mark, that's essential for the defense, because the prosecution, i mean, there are a lot of gaps in their version of

events, a lot of sort of possibilities. >> and this fits in completely with the theme we've been talking about several nights in a row. it's a reversal of the usual roles. usually that is kind of the prosecutor's argument. here you've got the defense saying look, all they're doing is poking holes in this, and you can't just poke holes. they really, i think, today were very effective, and they meaning the defense, in putting together a narrative and then backing it up with the re-creation and then going through the law. because ultimately, you know, the theatrics are great. but when the jury gets back there, and you saw that within a couple of minutes, they asked for that lives exhibits. what happens when they get back there is the jurors really start to take it seriously. no matter what the feeling was. when they start to deliberate, they want to look at the evidence and examine the law and they really focus like a laser on the law. >> sunny, were you surprised

oerm are a didn't address the lesser charge of manslaughter at all? >> i was. i thought that he would certainly do that. i actually thought that he would also, anderson, address all of the inconsistencies that the prosecution brought up because the prosecution's case is about who started this altercation, who was hunting, who was confronting, and also telling the jury you cannot believe the version that george zimmerman has given you because it's full of holes. it's full of lies about important things, and he didn't address, that and i thought that that was a mistake. >> let's talk about this because we talked a little bit about this in the 8:00 hour because jeff's point, his question to you, are the so-called lies that zimmerman told to -- to law enforcement, are they really significant? to you they are, because the -- the police testified these are the kinds of, you know, different stories you get the more you tell a story.

to you they are significant. what do you think are the most significant inconsistencies? >> yeah, and john guy and his terrific closing argument summed them up on the screen, and those jurors were writing them down. there were about 13 or 14 inconsistencies, one, he said that, you know, that the dispatcher told him to go get an address. well, you can listen to it, that is not it. he didn't tell him to get out of his car and get an address. he also told police he was going to meet them at his car. he didn't do that, so that goes to the following. he also talked about central arteryin' covering his mouth and nose, a lot of embellishment that went on that's important. he also said that he had the trayvon martin, you know, grabbed his gun and then was reaching for his gun and there was no evidence to support that. the reaching for the gun.

jeff, to you, that's the most significant. >> well, i think it's the weakest part of the defense case. the claim that trayvon martin reached for the gun, because it just doesn't seem possible that he would see it, that he had access to it. there was no evidence of fingerprint or any sort of -- there's no evidence that he got to the gun. that sounded to me like an embellishment on the part of zimmerman. >> and remember, jeff, what he said was he had to shoot him. george zimmerman told police and told his friend he had to shoot him, because he, trayvon martin, was reaching for his gun and was going to kill him. now, that would be -- you would feel like you were in imminent danger of death if that were true. and i've got to tell you, that appears not to be true. >> mark? >> well, look, i was going to say, the problem with this closing by the prosecution is they focused so much on the supposed inconsistencies of zimmerman, that there's only one

problem. it was a great closing argument if zimmerman had actually taken the stand. as i said a week ago, anderson, when you asked is he going to take the stand, i said no, and the reason is, because you don't want to put the defendant on the stand to be cross-examined because when the jurors get back there, all they're going to talk about is what did the defendant say? in this case, he didn't testify. he had his statement in there. >> he testified like five, six times. >> hold on, hold on. sunny, hold your horses. the problem with this is, they didn't see him under cross-examination. they didn't see him waffle on the stand. they didn't see a cross-examination do any damage to him. so the prosecutor gave this closing argument as if he did some kind of damage on the stand and he didn't. in fact it was the opposite. they had five or six people who were saying he was credible. that's why this was not effective. >> watch the style points. watch how o'mara does address these inconsistencies. he says that zimmerman talks to the police, not once, not twice,

not thrice, but way more than that. he talks to them several times. we heard many of those. then he says if this was some conspiracy or plan of his, some mastermind plan and if he is a guy that learned about law enforcement and criminal justice, why didn't he know about one of the fundamental bed rocks which is miranda? don't talk to the police. that made him credible. >> because he was too smart for them. >> that's part of the master plan. >> >> oh, gosh, sunny. one minute he's not smart. >> the master plan to go hunt down a kid in your neighborhood included being on the phone with 911 while you do it. that's part of the master plan and then talking to the police five times with your substantial education of criminal justice. >> i don't know about that, sunny. >> it just doesn't work, sunny. >> we've got a lot more to talk about. ahead of a decisive weekend.

we'll big deeper, the women on the jury, who they are, how their backgrounds may factor into their decision. and martin savidge's interview with mark o'hara. and o'mara's racially smear campaign is why he said george zimmerman was arrested in the first place. follow me on twitte twitter @andersoncooper. we'll be right back. that goes to work in secondsf and freshens breath. tums freshers. ♪ tum...tum...tum...tum... tums! ♪ fast heartburn relief and minty fresh breath. [ slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast zimmerman was arrested in the you had heartburn. t ♪ tum tum tum tum tums to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again.

and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap. these chevys are moving fast. i'll take that malibu. yeah excuse me, the equinox in atlantis blue is mine! i was here first, it's mine. i called about that one, it's mine. mine! mine. it's mine. it's mine. mine. mine. mine. mine. it's mine! no it's not, it's mine! better get going, it's chevy model year-end event. [ male announcer ] the chevy model year-end event. the 13s are going fast, time to get yours. right now, get this great lease on a 2013 chevy cruse ls for around $149 a month.

checking out of the hilton shouldn't be a pity party. your next trip is calling. saying, "deb, find a view for two at a conrad." or "make room for more at an embassy suites, deb." or "deb, lead a victory dance at a hampton." so chin up, love, and never stop vacationing. book during the great getaway for great rates at our ten top hotel brands. travel is calling you to hiltongreatgetaways.com. six women jurors have a lot to think about as they prepare for the weekend of deliberations. think about but apparently not

a long list. >> do not discuss the case amongst yourselves or anybody else overnight. do not read or listen to any radio, television or news reports about the case. do not use any type of electronic device to get on the internet to do any independent research about the case and do not read or create any e-mails, tweets, blogs, social network about this case. >> in addition, while they spend the night at a hotel, their notes are in the jury room. these six women are carrying around plenty in their head. >> reporter: for weeks, the jury of six women has been a captive audience as prosecutors and defense lawyers try to sway them. from the moment it started, pure drama. prosecutor john guy's opening statement. >> good morning. [ bleep ] punks. these [ bleep ]s, they always get away.

those were the words in that grown man's mouth as he followed in the dark a 17-year-old boy who he didn't know. >> reporter: cnn legal analyst sunny hostin has been in court every day. >> the inference is yeah, these are shocking, ugly, hateful words. and that wasn't lost upon the jury. i looked at them very, very closely, and some of them did seem shocked and offended almost by the words. >> reporter: at other times, the jury seemed to be captivated by the defense, especially when defense attorneys pulled out a dummy in court to help illustrate the confrontation. >> i was impressed when they stood up to get a bird's-eye view when the actors or lawyers were atop the dummies and they were trying to replicate or

reproduce what was going on between trayvon martin and george zimmerman. it was very telling. it showed how into this they were, how they were watching a tennis match. >> reporter: jurors were especially engaged when the mothers of both trayvon martin and george zimmerman testified. five out of six jurors are married and almost all of them have children. prosecutor john guy keyed into that here. >> was that child not in fear when he was running from that defendant? isn't that every child's worst nightmare, to be followed on the way home in the dark by a stranger? isn't that every child's worst fear. that was trayvon martin's last emotion. >> i looked directly at the jury

when he said those words, and their eyes didn't leave his face. and so i think that it couldn't have been more powerful for the makeup of that jury. >> reporter: juror e-6, a blonde with two children, put down her pen during that moment and stared intently at the prosecutor. her children are 11 and 13. she's a proud member of her church. her husband is an engineer. other specifics on the women deciding zimmerman's fate. juror b-29 is originally from chicago. she's been married ten years, the only minority on the jury, either black or hispanic. show has eight children, only one older than 18. juror b-76 has a son who is an attorney. she is unemployed now but used to run a construction company with her husband. she loves animals. juror b-37 is the daughter of an air force captain. one of her children is a pet groomer. another a student at the university of central florida.

juror b-51 is the only juror who isn't married. she's a retired real estate agent and a transplant from atlanta. and juror e-40 is married to a chemical engineer. she has one son. in her spare time she watches football, reads and likes to travel. this jury took lots of notes. copious mounts while george zimmerman's re-enactment at the scene was being played in court and also when the medical examiner and dna expert testified. it seemed as if they wanted to be sure they understood what was being said. they didn't want to miss a thing. ashley merriman is an expert on jury behavior. she predicts this all-woman jury will exhaust every alternative and look at every piece of evidence. >> telling that best friend all of your secrets and having no hierarchy. everyone has agreement and avoids conflict. they really continue to apply that even in that group setting.

>> reporter: she says don't expect any yelling in this jury room but don't expect a quick verdict, either. randi kaye, cnn, new york. >> as you saw in randi's report sunny hostin has been in the courtroom and is back along with jeffrey toobin, danny cevallos and-maker geragos. sunny, you've been observing them every day. we've seen them ask for a list of all the evidence. what do you think is going on? how do you see their deliberations going, how methodical based on the behavior and the trial that you've watched? >> based on their behavior and first question two minutes into the deliberations, they're asking for an inventory list of all of the evidence. this is going to be a jury that is going to methodically look through all of the evidence. i don't know that i've ever seen a jury take notes the way this jury took notes. and it's also clear to me that they've gelled. they have been sequestered together. remember, there was no jury, no

courtroom on july 4. they were able to go out together. they eat together. i've recently seen some of them offer mints to each other. one of them put a shawl on the shoulder of another. this is a group of women who are getting together and getting along quite well. and so in that kind of situation i think you do have a collaborative type of deliberations as opposed to some where you see everyone is butting heads. i do not get that sense from this jury. >> in terms of sequester, what exactly does that mean? they're staying in a hotel room, ten jurors, four are alternates? are they allowed to stay in contact with their family, their friends? they can't watch reports like this on the news. but they can watch old tv? >> normally what happened when there were newspapers they would cut out articles and give them the newspaper. they sometimes will tape record or give them movies and things like that. i think today the reason that they wanted to be recessed at

6:00 is so they could go back to the hotel and break open a couple of nice bottles of wine after watching this trial and doing everything. it would not surprise me if they get into a couple of cups tonight or a couple of glasses tonight. i think the fact that they were sequestered is one of the reasons you don't see a friday verdict. a lot of times in my experience, in doing hundreds of these cases, if you have your closing arguments on a friday and you finish in the morning, you can expect the verdict by 3:30 or 4:00 on a friday afternoon. in a case like this, they're aware that the country is looking at this case. even if they had a verdict, and i had this happen in the susan macdougal's first trial, the jury told me they had a verdict on friday but they didn't want to be seen as an o.j. jury, so they waited to monday and came back and delivered the verdict

on the monday. >> this is a real thing mark is talking about, the legacy of the o.j. simpson jury, which as many people remember, came back with a not guilty after just one day of deliberations. a lot of people criticized them given the complexity and length of the case. >> how do you possibly decide a case that quickly? ever since then, i think i've covered most if not all of the high profile cases since then, none of them have come back that quickly, even when there was a lot of agreement on the jury. here, i think given this first note, they are going to be much more meticulous. i expect tomorrow we'll hear some of the exhibits that they want to see. they will check off the ones they want to see. >> you don't think there will be a verdict tomorrow? >> i would be very surprised. >> for this reason or because there's so much stuff to go through? >> if you get a list of all the evidence, that means you're going to see some of the evidence. that becomes time consuming. once you get into readbacks of testimony, that's really time consuming. the lawyers have to agree what's

responsive to the note. i just don't see a verdict tomorrow. sunday, monday, we'll see. the notes will give us a hint of how they're doing. >> during his closing arguments, mark oerm rah, the defense attorney, asked the jury to consider only the facts while deciding the case. >> what i don't think you should do is fill in any gaps at all. connect any dots for him either, for any fact, for any witness. if the decision was made by the state not to present additional evidence to you, do not presume, do not assume and do not give anybody the benefit of the doubt except for george zimmerman. >> danny, for the defense, that's owe sensing to make that point. >> i love it, it's very important. this case is inverted. the prosecution is asking the jury to fill in gaps, asking them to use common sense and make assumptions and fill in where they failed to really create a narrative, a concrete narrative.

i understand that the main person who would contribute to that narrative is no longer with us. however, unfortunately, for the prosecution, that doesn't lessen their burden. mark o'hara did a very good job very dispassionately without the fire and brimstone walking through where the state came up short and add monishing the jurors not to fill in those gaps, not jump in and fill in any gaps they forgot to fill in. >> up next, defense attorney mark o'mara beliefs that george zimmerman was charged due to what he calls a smear campaign. he blames that on ben crump, an attorney for trayvon martin's parents. we'll hear from mark o'hara about what he has to say and reaction from daryl parks, ben crump's law partner, who is also an attorney for the martin family. out there owning it.

the ones getting involved and staying engaged. they're not afraid to question the path they're on. because the one question they never want to ask is "how did i end up here?" i started schwab for those people. people who want to take ownership of their investments, like they do in every other aspect of their lives.

now that the zimmerman trial is winding down, defense attorney mark o'mara sat down for a wide-ranging interview with martin savidge who joins us now. you asked him whether he has any regrets about cross-examining trayvon martin's parents. i want to play that. >> reporter: you took what some might consider risks during the trial, one of them being that you cross-examined a grieving mother. >> yes. >> reporter: any regrets on that? >> no. i hope that people think or i think i handled it properly and respectfully. i have handled, i think, 40 or so murder case. and in every murder case, you're going to have some interaction with the victim's family. >> you certainly would hope that your son, trayvon martin, did nothing that could have led to his own death, correct? >> reporter: and you did tracy

martin, as well. and that one didn't seem to go so quite well. >> so your words were i can't tell? >> something to that effect, but i never said no, that wasn't my son's voice. >> well, i think that the state should have put tracy martin on. that's their witness. i think it was strange that they decided not to call the father of the victim. but they did so because of the very reason i had to call him, which was that tracy martin told two cops who testified that when he listened to the tape, that's not his son. >> reporter: that's not what he said on the stand. >> it is not. but it is what two cops said and two other cops who were available to say that he said, no, that's not my son's voice. now, it's got to be extraordinarily difficult to be in tracy martin's shoes and sabrina fulton's shoes. they have to be able to go through their life believing in their heart and in their soul that that is trayvon martin's

voice. >> reporter: is that what you meant when you asked, and i believe you asked of this trayvon martin's mother, that she hopes to hear his voice? >> how could she not? we know, being able to analyze it in the cold light of day, we know that one of two things were evident on that tape. trayvon martin was screaming for help and george zimmerman murdered him. two, george zimmerman was screaming for help because he was being battered by trayvon martin and he reacted to that battering by shooting trayvon martin. if you're the mother, the friend, the father, how could you not want that to be the first alternative rather than the second? >> it's interesting, martin, clearly in those cross-examinations, particularly with trayvon martin's mother, he doesn't want to be perceived as the bad guy during the trial. >> reporter: what he wanted to do, he's said he's interviewed

or cross-examined grieving mothers before, many people were just stunned that he would do that. normally he would let sabrina make her statement and then be done. i think that he wanted to push back. he had specific reasons why he asked what he did. does he mind being perceived as the bad guy? no, he says that is the price you pay to defend somebody that needs to be defended. >> fascinating interview. more of martin's interview ahead. i want to get some reaction from our panel. danny, i saw you shaking your head when i asked martin about if o'mara had any regreets about calling sabrina fulton. >> you know, i understand people seeing that as a risk. but as somebody who cross-examines witnesses, to me the real risk is not cross-examining a witness. this witness had valuable information and it's mark onlyia's -- >> what did he get out of her? >> he didn't get anything.

>> i thought he demonstrated to the jury that she was less than credible, and the second part is, even if you -- >> oh, please. >> hold on, hold on. the test is not ultimately what he got out of her. the test is ultimately what were his objectives? when he made that decision to stand up and ask her questions, the critical thing here is not so much what did he get out of her, but what would he have foregone if he didn't ask her questions? there's no fear to me worse than if you sit down and think about the questions that are left unanswered for a witness. look, cross-examination is -- >> look, he didn't gain anything. >> sunny, you're looking at the outcome. we can talk about whether the outcome was beneficial and disagree. but the decision -- hold on. >> he didn't gain anything. >> the decision to cross-examine, the decision to cross-examine was one that i think was the opposite. i think it would have been more risky to not cross-examine a witness. >> oh, come on. >> you have an obligation. it's an adversarial process. it's not a tea party, and it's not a popularity contest. >> mark? >> sunny, you keep saying he

didn't gain anything. i don't disagree, believe it or not, but do you really think he hurt himself? a lot of times it's a calculation when you're doing cross-examination. you figure what's the risk or reward. what's the burden versus the benefit? you have to make that decision every day when you're in a trial, and sometimes it's a miscalculation. >> it was a miscalculation, there's no question it was, because his questioning was blame the victim. he wanted sabrina fulton to somehow admit that her son's death was his own fault. and you're arguing -- >> i don't think so. >> you're asking that question in front of five mothers. you can play the tape. that was his question, and it was ridiculous. it was terrible. >> sunny, i don't think you -- >> let me finish. the way it's handled is the way that the state handled the cross-examination of george zimmerman's mother, with respect. he didn't ask any of those kinds of questions. he barely asked any questions.

and it didn't hurt him and it didn't help him. >> we can go back and forth on this because there's a bunch of other stuff i want to ask you about. o'mara had some very choice words for the lead prosecutor. i just want to play that for the viewers. >> i have concerns about the discovery perspective. my view of information we were supposed to get from prosecutors is at very least a much different definition than he is. >> so he's a snake, he's a liar? >> i think that he has a -- i think he's probably more used to running against public defenders in cases that he gets to cherry pick and that he has overwhelming evidence. and that some of the nuances of how he handles discovery don't come to light. i don't think that don and i have presented ourselves as a couple of young public defenders. >> mark, you've been critical of

the prosecution with how they handled discovery. you agree with what he's saying? >> i agree with him. when he talks about brady, he's talking about a u.s. supreme court case that says if there's exculpatory evidence, you have to turn it over, the prosecutor has the duty to turn it over to the defense. i think what mark has articulated there, which is a lot of prosecutors, when they're up against overworked and very young public defenders, because after all the public defenders are the unsung heros of the criminal justice system because they are overloaded, overworked and they get no respect. a lot of times prosecutors take advantage of that. when they get put up against the test of experienced criminal defense lawyers, it exposes a lot of times some of the fast and loose hide the ball tactics a lot of prosecutors engage in, which unfortunately happened all too often. i think in this case, mark did say for the first time in his 30-year career that he didn't do

one, two, three, but six motions for sanctions for playing hide the ball with discovery. i think in a case like this, that's unforgivable. >> the problem is, we don't know the nature of these discovery disputes. >> right. >> so for us to make a judgment about who's right and who's wrong. it is true prosecutors get used to a certain level, it's not passivity, but sort of overworked defense lawyers. when you run into guys like this, who will push everything to the max, you know, the prosecutors sometimes don't know how to react and sometimes they don't react well. >> when it comes to discovery disputes, this debate is old, it's the montagues and the caplets and the sharks and the jets. defense attorneys and prosecutors are always arguing, and the basic gist is the defense feels like they're entitled to see everything, and the prosecution feels like after a while you're asking for the sun, the moon and the stars.

it will never be resolved. >> with the sharks and the jets, we'll let you dance it out during the break. o'mara believes zimmerman was charged because of what he calls a publicity campaign to paint his client as a racist and murderer. we'll tell you who he blames for that. you'll hear it yourself and you'll hear from an attorney for the martin family. mine was earned in djibouti, africa. 2004. vietnam in 1972. [ all ] fort benning, georgia in 1999. [ male announcer ] usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. 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.

the physical damage was pretty bad. the emotional toll was even worse. our daughter had nightmares. what that robber really took from us was our peace of mind. with adt, we got it back. [ male announcer ] every 14.6 seconds, a burglary takes place in the united states. so rely on the fast alarm response of adt. a single adt system can help protect you from burglary, fire, and high levels of carbon monoxide.

when an alarm is received, adt calls the local authorities for help. and you can get this monitored protection, plus great local service, starting at just over $1 a day. and only adt offers a theft protection guarantee. take it from me. the time to think about a security system isn't after something bad happens -- it's before. [ male announcer ] call now and get one of our best values -- adt's quick connect plus system installed for $99. hurry, and take advantage of these savings. adt. always there. we saw at the top of the program in his closing argument, defense attorney mark o'mara told jurors he wished they also had the option to find george zimmerman completely innocent. he believes zimmerman should have in been charged and his client was basically railroaded and for that he puts the blame squarely on benjamin crump, an

attorney for trayvon martin's parents. he made those comments during a sit-down interview with martin savidge. >> do you think george zimmerman would even have been charged had ben crump not been pulled into this? >> no. ben crump or someone like him, because ben crump not gotten involved in the case. maybe for some reasons to begin with. if he believed that there was something here that was being swept under the rug, then get on into it. i'm very okay with that. >> but you didn't quite say it that way. you made it sound like if not for ben crump george zimmerman would be free right now and we'd not be in this trial. >> correct. i think it was a made-up story for purposes nothing to do with george zimmerman and they victimized him. they complain about trayvon martin being victimized. george zimmerman was victimized by a publicity campaign to smear him and call him a racist when he wasn't and call him a murderer when he wasn't. >> and so angela curry and the governor and all those who had a hand in bringing about this prosecution, they were all

manipulated by ben crump? >> i don't know that it was ben crump doing all that manipulation but i'm very surprised that the prosecution team decided not to take this case to a grand jury when one was sitting and panelled ready to take on the case, state of florida versus george zimmerman and determine whether there was enough evidence or information to charge him with any crime. rather than do that, which was the default position that could have happened, they decided have a press conference, pray with the victim's family and announce second-degree murder charges. >> a very strong position on mark o'mara's part. i spoke to martin family attorney darryl parks, ben crump's law partner, also an attorney for trayvon martin's parents. >> i want to start off with this interview mark o'mara gave to martin savidge. he accuses him of smearing

zimmerman and without his actions zimmerman never would have been charged. how do you respond? >> let's take our time and go through. i think it's very important. remember, and i remember when ben first came back to our firm, this guy had killed trayvon martin and the sanford police department were getting ready to close their investigation, and they indicated that they were not going to arrest this guy. and we believe wholeheartedly that if you kill an unarmed teenager, you at a minimum ought to be arrested. now, mr. o'mara may have philosophical problems with that, but in our business we're civil rights lawyers, and when someone kills someone who is unarmed, that person should go into our justice system and go through that process. that is not a decision that should be made by one or two people. it's a decision that should be made by the process, and that's what we argued for, and so we have not done anything to talk about anyone but to make sure that this process box. >> now o'mara also says that the

smear campaign, the publicity campaign labeled george zimmerman a racist, labeled him a murderer but labeled him a racist and he used that word. do you think that is true at all? do you believe at the time that -- that you and ben crump were trying to introduce race as an element in this? >> well, let me say this. we don't know george zimmerman, and, you know, in fact i heard ben say today, let me ask that same question. we could never call that man a racist. now we believe that this case in its totality has a racial undertone to it and so that's a huge difference, anderson. >> i want to play something that you said back in march of last year for our viewers. >> whether or not trayvon was a perfect student is irrelevant to whether zimmerman's conduct that night was justified. trayvon was a kid. he was another unarmed black boy whose life was lost because of unfounded stereotypes, suspicions and fears.

>> during the trial the idea of racial profiling wasn't talked about, profiling was talked about but not racial profiling. do you think that -- that there is an underpinning of race throughout this that wasn't brought into the trial? >> no. what he was charged with, anderson, is very important. criminal profiling, and i think we heard it time and time again from the beginning of this case where george zimmerman talked about all these people who had committed kroims, and we then saw where mark o'mara put on the last witness to talk about the crime and the black youths that had been involved in this case. the problem with this case is trayvon was not one of those people. >> what happens next? i mean, if -- if george zimmerman is not found guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter, do you pursue a civil case against george zimmerman regardless of whether he is found guilty or not, do

you pursue a civil case against him? >> well, obviously we have the right to do so because he killed trayvon martin, and we know that that standard is a negligence standard and we have every right to do it if we choose to do it. we've not made that decision. obviously at some point my clients will make that decision but it's not a decision we'll make in the public light. >> how are you feeling now, and how are your clients feeling about -- about the case, about -- about the wait? >> well, we're feeling very strong. my clients had an opportunity to listen to the closing that the state did today. the state's closing was very powerful. they did an excellent job of bringing all of the evidence together and putting it before the jury and making that jury have a very, very deep thought about the whole concept of judging george zimmerman for a situation that he created, causing the death to trayvon and as much as they tried to portray

trayvon in a negative light, the truth of the matter is trayvon did nothing that night to cause his own death. >> thanks. >> up next, final thoughts from our panel. we'll be right back. my mantra? trust your instincts to make the call. to treat my low testosterone, my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant

and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron. mhandle more than 165 billionl letters and packages a year. that's about 34 million pounds of mail every day. ever wonder what this costs you as a taxpayer? millions? tens of millions? hundreds of millions? not a single cent. the united states postal service doesn't run on your tax dollars.

it's funded solely by stamps and postage. brought to you by the men and women of the american postal worker's union. uh-oguess what day it is!is?? huh...anybody? julie! hey...guess what day it is?? ah come on, i know you can hear me. mike mike mike mike mike... what day is it mike? ha ha ha ha ha ha! leslie, guess what today is? it's hump day. whoot whoot! ronny, how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? i'd say happier than a camel on wednesday. hump day!!! yay!! get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. your next trip is calling you. saying, "dan, schedule a 5 o'clock meeting at a hilton garden inn." or "dan"... hey, dad. ..."explore your family tree at a homewood suites." [ family ] hi, dan. or "put your feet in the sand at a waldorf astoria." never stop vacationing, dan.

book during the great getaway for great rates at our ten top hotel brands. travel is calling you to hiltongreatgetaways.com. ...and we inspected his brakes for free. -free is good. -free is very good. [ male announcer ] now get 50% off brake pads and shoes at meineke. big day in court today. closing arguments end. george zimmerman's fate is being decided by the six women on the jury. they will pick up at 9:00 tomorrow morning. want to get some closing thoughts from sunny hostin, jeffrey toobin, criminal defense attorneys danny cevallos and mark geragos. jeff, what do you expect? you're not expecting a verdict tomorrow? >> no, but i want to see the notes. what do you think, how the juries, leaning forward, taking notes. now we really get to find out

what are they thinking about? what evidence do they want to see? do they indicate what part of the law confuses them? ultimately do they indicate any sort of deadlock. we learn a lot from jury notes. >> they quickly asked to look at all the evidence. that's pretty standard stuff. >> doesn't surprise me, but as some commentators have observed it msnbc they will take it very seriously and go through all the evidence instead of closing the jury door, looking at each other and say they didn't make their case and let's move on, let's get out of here so i can expect that would add at least a day if they are going to go through all of that list but we don't know what it means. >> sunny, do you think it's going to be tomorrow or sunday? >> i'm not sure. i mean, i think after observing this jury this is a very methodical jury. this is a jury i think that's going to be very deliberative. i think they will be very cooperative as well though so i think to -- to expect a verdict very, very quickly, i'm not there, but i think it's anyone's guess. >> mark, same thing?

>> no, i'm in vegas tomorrow so i've already let the jury know i don't want to interrupt my vegas trip so they are not coming back until at least sunday at 2:00 when i land. >> okay. i'll keep that in mind. listen, to everybody on the panel. thanks so much. want to get caught up on some of the other stories we're following. randi kaye is here. >> a third victim from asiana flight 214 has guide. the girl had been in critical condition at san francisco jrngs according to a hospital spokeswoman. 304 others survived saturday's crash, and this evening the runway at san francisco's international airport reopened. cleveland kidnapping suspect ariel castro now faces 977 counts, including aggravated murder, related to allegations he intentionally caused the termination of a pregnancy. the new grand jury indictment nearly triples the amount of charges against him and covers a decade when michelle knight, aber and gina dejesus were raped in his cleveland home. homeland security secretary japtdno is resigning and plans

to leave her post in september. no word yet on a successor. >> i have no names to float, if you will. i would say that the president greatly appreciates secretary napolitano's, you know, four plus years of service, and if you think about it, those four and a half years account for almost half of the existence of the department of homeland security, and she's done a remarkable job. >> secretary napolitano's next stop, academia. she's been nominated to become president of the university of california system. and an anonymous bidder bought a rare vintage mercedes race car for $30 million, five time world champ i champion won two races in the mercedes benz which now has the distifngs being the most expensive car sold at public auction.

anderson? >> randi, thanks. that does it for this special edition of "360. " 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

they decided to sleep on it. >> the jury would like to adjourn at 6:00 p.m. the jury would like to begin tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. if possible. anybody have objections in. >> no your honor. >> no, your honor. >> they got the case about 2:00 eastern time, two hours and got evidence in the case and the judge says it's up to them to decide what to believe. tonight we'll look at what they will weigh, who they are and what goes on during deliberations. we'll look at the allegation of the defense counsel mark o'mara made to martin savidge.