>> fox news alert out of florida, we are less than 30 minutes from the restart of the george zimmerman murder trial after a dramatic morning of watching the prosecution trying to undo the damage to their side by two of their own big witness. welcome to america live, i am megyn kelly; the day started in sanford, florida. testifying the night george zimmerman shot an unarmed trayvon martin. and yfd he testified he did not believe zimmerman at first and he later changed his mind, believing that zimmerman was credible. the prosecution argued that the detective's comment was improper. remember that defense attorney asked him. did you believe that zimmerman was telling you the truth, he

testified yeah, i believed that but having a night to sleep on it, the prosecution thought, we probably should have objected to that and so today, they went in and asked successfully to have the judge strike that part of this man's testimony, listen. >> the fact that george zimmerman said to you, thank god, i hope someone videotaped the whole event, his statement, what did that indicate to you? >> either he was telling the truth, or he was going to be a path logical liar one of the twochlt >> and overall, was there anything else in this case where you got the insight that he might be a pathological liar. >> no. >> if we take the path logical liar off of the table for the next question, do you think he was telling the truth?

>> yes. >> whoopsie, forgot to object. and amazingly, the judge did what the prosecution wanted and she struck that testimony from the record. phil keating in sanford, florida following the case for us, phil. >> the attorneys doouling with renewed vigor in court this morning. the prosecution trying to get the lead detective to testify several minutes that in his opinion, george zimmerman profiled trayvon martin, despite repeated objections the state got this in. if i were to believe that somebody was committing a crime would that not be profiling that person.

to deflate point, zimmerman's usage of cuss words to describe the previous criminals did not indicate ill will or spite or hatred to zim merman to martin. >> if i can, and i am hitting you, correct? that's what the defense claimed and i am suffocating you and not putting your hand in my mouth. would you have your hands like this or would you be fighting me? >> i would be fighting you. >> you got that? >> did you find any blood on the defendant's hands? >> no, sir. >> they focused why no blood was found on martin's hands. is blood susceptible to gravitiy

and he's smashed in the nose which way is the blood going. >> back down his throat and toward the ground. >> in the courtroom martin's parents more dressed up than usual, reading the tea leaves and could mean that the testimony will come this afternoon. >> we'll continue to watch it, phil, thank you. >> the prosecution tried to portray zimmerman as trigger happy. because he was filled with spite and opening day. (bleep) punks. they always get away. those were the words in that grown man's mouth as he followed in the dark a 17-year-old by, who he didn't know. >> they have to prove that if they want a second-degree murder

conviction. oh, scary background. and did the -- we decided to do a dramatic affect during the anchor reads. ooh. 0, moving o. and the question is whether the prosecutor over stated zimmerman's tone when he said the words to the jury and did his colleague overstate them on direct examination. it is interesting to see how marco omaratried to talk about the overzealous prosecutions. we'll tell you what happened in court and judge alex will weigh in, in just a couple of minutes here. >> in washington, new poll numbers on the supreme court showing the public's opinion of the justices plunged to an all- time low. lower than ever. this following the high court

decision on voting rights and affirmative action and same- sex marriage. bill o'rielly weighed in on his return to the factor last night. >> the supreme court is morphed in a political sxoergz not a body that seeks to uphold the constitution. they are deciding decisions on political lines and that is changing this nation for the worse. >> its something that the high court's rating is lower than ever. they have issued a lot of controversial decisions in the past. what does that tell you and what dow think of bill's assessment. >> two things, megyn, the opinion of governmental institutions across the board are down. they are all doing pourly. congress is doing worse and no surprise that the supreme court has lost a lot of its

favorability and approval. and if you look at these polls, and compare and go back a few years, you find that the loss of favor with the court is among the conservatives and independents and that's -- liberals like the court better. after the obama care rowelling and gay right's rulings, that is probably not surprising. and so the court looks liberal to people. and the polling shows that many more people think that the court is too liberal than too conservative. what bill said is concerned, i would say that people have felt that the supreme court was political for a very long time. famous mr. cooley and comic character said the supreme court reads the election returns and it does and always has and they

are political implications to a great many of the court's decisions and so the court and politics have never been far apart. >> and there is a split on the court on whether they believe the constitution is a living, or breathing document and we should be following the original intent. depending on the way we feel, it leads to the 5- 4 decision. you can point out the liberals are more happy with the court an the conservatives right now. and not all. one thing many on the left were unhappy about last week was the voting right's case. we will uphold the voting acts. and we'll not enforce the nine states that have a history of discrimination in the 60s to get approval from eric holder. they are saying congress, you will have to take another look

at. that in the mississippi, seven percent of whites voting and sen percent blacks and i can't say you are once racist and you are always racist. you need eric holder. and in response to the ruling. many on the left got upset including michael eric dyson, who said and i quote. this is about justice clarence thomas. a symbolic jew invited a metaphoric hitler to commit holocaust and genocide on his own people. >> it is a rule of the public discourse you don't compare someone to be like hitler. it doesn't work. that particular commentator is excitable and said extreme things and it is not clear to me

if we should pay a great deal of attention to him. >> i will jump in. it is one comment and one guy. i agree with you. as someone who covered clarence thomas hearings, he's tock a heat for a long time from the left. we just saw last week someone called him uncle tom and this guy is saying like a jew who invits hitler n. the vitriol for the only african-american justice. when he does anything that the left doesn't like is unseemly. >> there is a special level of antipathy that the left extends to blacks that are not liberals and clarence thomas is a leading figure in that regard. he's a member of the supreme court for goodness sake and has been there for a while and had real affect there and has a picturesque story and he gets

demonized in the same way other african-americans are demonized and if they were traitors to the cause and these people think they should all believe in, in order to be authtentically black. it is certainly racial and it leads to statements like the one you heard from that flame- throwing professor there. >> excitable. i like the way you put it. brit, thank you. >> thank you, megyn. >> we are seeing passion and raised voices in the texas state house in a fight over late term abortion. just a head. why this particular battle is getting so much attention and why there is debate about the woman who is called a heroine in this fight. trace tells how one group of school children are recruited to

carry the message to their families and neighbors and a terrifying close call for a spirit airline jet packed with passengers. see how the pilot pulled a mid- air maneuver and like something out of a horror film. i help support bones... [ ding! ] ...the immune system... [ ding! ] ...heart health... [ ding! ] ...and muscles. [ ding! ] that can only be ensure complete! [ female announcer ] the four-in-one nutrition of ensure complete. a simple choice to help u eat right. [ major nutrition ] nutrition in charge.

>> in your opinion calling and referencing them (bleep) punks. >> that is ill will and spite. >> it is? >> yes. >> that was the prosecution in the george zimmerman murder trial questioning the lead detective in the case. since the opening day, the prosecution tried to portray george zimmerman as someone who fought trayvon martin because he was filled with spite. listen to the defense and same witness, this is from yesterday?

. all right from today. lead detective again. >> when mr. zimmerman said the words (bleep) punks. did he say it in a stretching loud a aggressive way the way it was recounted to you? >> no, sir. >> yesterday they asked him if he believed that mr. zimmerman was evidenting ill will and hatred and he said no. the prosecution tried to rehabilitate that today. judge alex is with me now. they are going back and forth because the prosecution heard damaging testimony from the detective when they tried to say he did nothing, and zimmerman was filled with ill will or hate based on what he saw. and they always get away with it and trying to get him to reverse himself. did they score a victory, the prosecution? >> i can't say they scored

a victory. they scored some points. up until now they had 0 comments on ill will and spite. and today, they finally got him to say, if those words and f- punks and other words were categorized ill will. but the defense said not the way he said them and the other prosecutor said it in the opening statement. he basically yelled the words. and where he yelled the curse words. it is the way you heard george zimmerman say it on the phone to the police, did you take that to be ill will or hatred or spite and the detective said no. different ways to use the words. the prosecution got that they were not ill will. >> and the defense tried to discredit the lawyers and basically saying to the jury. they are overstating the case.

when the first words out of his mouth. f- (bleep) punks get away with it. o'maragot the witness to testify that is not the way it happen and not the way zimmerman it said and you can't believe the prosecution's case and you can't believe the prosecutors. >> he went further than that. he said why did did the lawyers say it that way? the witness say for emotional impact. they don't have a lot and so they are trying to maximize it and amplifying it. second-degree murder i think is dead in the water here and hoping for medicals which is bad for zimmerman. >> i want to talk to you about. that second-degree murder they have to she hate and ill will and spite. >> there is one more connection. i hate to interrupt you. it is not he cursed the words, but you have to do an act that

results in the death of trayvon martin and the act itself has to be motivated by hatred and spite. it is not enough to use curse words. he had to shot him because of ill will and hatred and spite. >> would it be a different store tore if zimmerman was stalking trayvon martin in the neighborhood that night. and this case, something else happen which was a confrontation and a beat down ensued and the jury deliberations will be who started that and would zimmerman be afraid. there are many layers to the case. it is fascinating to me. second-degree, it is going to be tough if not impossible for the prosecution to she ill will in his heard and he shot them because of ill will. medicals requires cull pullable

negligence. it is cullpullability negligent killing you are in trouble. 25- 30 years. >> the medicals is typically is 15 years and it was medicals of a child. so the element of age is in the information. and so when the charge becomes aggravated medicals and maximum is 30 years and they could aggravated because of a fire arm. it goes from 15 to 30 in those scenarios. zimmerman could win the battle and lose the war. >> what do they have to show to meet that? >> it is a higher degree of negligence. if i am paying attention to my radio and run a red light i didn't have criminal intent. i was negligent. culpable negligent is like

getting behind the whole of that car drunk. the theory can be, you were culpable negligent and went after a teenage by at night and resulted in the teenage by's death. they could sell that to the jury. that doesn't get them around the self defense. but the jury may say it is not second-degree murder and he was trying to do the right thing, but we can't let him walk. we'll settle for the lessor. >> and they go through the self defense analysis and decide if he gets off. i have 30 seconds to a hard break. >> today, the prosecution had a objection to the lead detective saying he is not a path logic alliar. they slept on it and finally realized it was time to be object. >> he made the argument.

they made a choice. they waited for the answer and said yeah. and now the cop believes zimmerman told the truth. they go back and object. >> and the judge granted the motion. >> but the jury heard it. we'll be right back. dad. how did you get here? i don't know. [ speaking in russian ] look, look, look... you probably want to get away as much as we do. with priceline express deals, you can get a fabulous hotel without bidding. think of the rubles you'll save. with one touch, fun in the sun. i like fun. well, that went exactly as i planned.. really? now save up to 60% during summer hotel sale. use code "summer" on priceline's.

>> fox news alert in the fort hood trial. major nadal has an, the defendant in the case went before the judge and extra e expected to enter a plea on charge was murdering 13 people and injuring three dozen others in the fort hood shooting in 2009. he was supposed to enter a plea and refused and asked for a three- day delay to consult with a possible new attorneys and the judge refused that

request, rejecting the delay and entered a plea of not guilty to hassan's behalf. there are court appointed attorneys consulting with him and he's but theed heads with them before the trial has begun. it is expected to start next week. >> and a story out of california right now, we are hearing that the los angeles unified school district is expected to receive a million in government grants to train the students on ways to promote obama care. trace is live in la, trace? >> unified is the second largest school district in the country and so it raised eyebrows when we learned that the teenagers in the school district will be trained to go home and promote obama care to dult friends and family members and get them to enroll. the school district told

heartlander.org, teens are part of a pilot program to test whether young people would be messenger and limited information to family and friends. we called the direct to get more information about the statement and they would not confirm or call us back. the key phrase is pilot program. if it works, the teens will be trained to push other government programs at home. here is the catch for the school. the program is funded in the end. in other words, it is all performance based. if the result, bad, money is lower and to make sure the results are good. the state will send monitors to the school and paid staff will call the student's homes and hold in class presentation and meetings. and the administration as we know is trying to hook up with professional sports leagues and the goal here is to try to gain the attention of young people,

megyn. the bottom line is in the young and healthy doesn't sign up it is not much good. they have to offset the cost of the not so old people in the program. >> it doesn't work with them. >> the texas capitol is the scone of a fierce battle over late term abortion. we'll she you why the fight in texas is getting national attention and the debate over the woman who is trying to stop the bill that would prevent abortions past 20 weeks, she is labelled by someone as a heroine. and there are questions whether that is appropriate. a terrifying near miss in the sky and why a pilot of a passenger jet is not the plane in a nose dive on purpose. >> it is a near coalition that was thankfully avoided. and move over michael phelps. this baby can swim. look at this. look at this.

viral video sparking controversy. the day dad goes on the defense. ( bell rings ) they remind me so much of my grandkids.

wish i saw mine more often, but they live so far away. i've been thinking about moving in with my daughter and her family. it's been pretty tough since jack passed away. it's a good thing you had life insurance through the colonial penn program. you're right. it was affordable, and we were guaranteed acceptance. guaranteed acceptance? it means you can't be turned down because of your health. you don't have to take a physical or answer any health questions. they don't care about your aches and pains. well, how do you know? did you speak to alex trebek? because i have a policy myself. it costs just $9.95 a month per unit. it's perfect for my budget. my rate will never go up. and my coverage will never go down because of my age. affordable coverage and guaranteed acceptance? we should give them a call. do you want to help protect your loved ones

from the burden of final expenses? if you're between 50 and 85, you can get quality insurance that does not require any health questions or a medical exam. your rate of $9.95 a month per unit will never increase, and your coverage will never decrease -- that's guaranteed. so join the six million people who have already called about this insurance. whether you're getting new insurance or supplementing what you already have, call now and ask one of their representatives about a plan that meets your needs. so, what are you waiting for? go call now! we'll finish up here.

>> it is just after one time time 30 in the east. the update for the george zimmerman murder trial. the lunch recess ends at 1:30 and so they will be bringing the jury back in. a man called george zimmerman the best friend he had. and what he had thought about shooting trayvon on the night of the incident. it is unclear what was on the stand next. there is still major players that have yet to testify. you heard phil keating pointing out that trayvon's parents were especially dressed up today and speculation because that was told by the prosecution they might get called and we'll see.

we'll take you there live as soon as it resumes. >> it made it possible for me to stand the 13 hours. >> that's the scene in texas. a house committee is expected to hear testimony on a bill that puts greater restrictions on late term abortions. there is a series of protest and a filibuster by a state law maker that is now a heroine to those on the left. and passions are running high on both sides of this. and this is just a sample. and so i want to make sure that i do my part to keep her right. >> and it was when i was 21 and i am 50 and i am still suffering. >> it is important that we support women in our state and there is a minimal amount i can

do. >> the children are okay. and the choice to have a child is a beautiful choice, you know. but not impossible to get over and around the career. >> we don't want to see house clinigs shut down. people died as a result of it. >> as a single mother i faced the fear and chose abortion. that day he really did feel pain. >> wow, emotions are running high down in texas and a question of what it will do to the national debate over abortion. >> joining me is george marshal. and chris plant host of the chris plant show. since the beginning it is a issue on which folks are very divided and good people can have strong differences on the issue. but it is interesting to see this state law maker, wendy davis hailed as a heroine. i will ask you about it leslie.

somebody who is pro-choice as you say you are. have her hailed as a heroine and one of the main pieces of the bill to, she wants to you be able to abort your baby between weeks 20 and 26. at that point, you should be able to abort a healthy fetus. they are sucking their thumbs at that point and kicking and yawning in uttero. and to come out and hail her as a hero for fighting for that, i don't know, your reaction to it? >> first of all, so everybody is clear. i am pro-choice. not a choice i would make. i am adopted child and i had len miscarriages and i wouldn't make that choice. but women, with the passage of the roe v wa d e. as a pro-choice, i don't view her as a heroine with regard to

that specific. the way women i heard from view her and even my republican and pro-choice in texas view her as fighting for women's rights. the texas governor and legislature is largely men making this kind of a decision. >> let me ask you to follow-up on that and i will give it to chris. the other piece is tighten the restrictions on abortion clinics which the pro-choice folks say narrow the woman's options if she will have an abortion. that may be less controversial. i want to stick with this piece now. woman's rights will be intactine if they lower the weeks from 26 to 20 in terms was being able to abort a healthy fetus. >> i have a real problem quite frankly as a woman with the government making a decision for

myself and chris when it came to health. >> we have seen a butcher. dr. gom mel. i believe when it comes to an individual's health and this choice included, it is between the doctor and patient. there are times where the wife or mother or fetus are in question. >> will this preserve that? >> this billy understand it, chris would reserve the abortion if the mother's health or life are in dangerine pass the 20 week mark. >> and a fetal abnormality. >> all of the exceptions that a reasonable person should ask for. women's health sounds like a great fall back. but 20 weeks and we're five months in and the child is fully formed and obviously a human being and looks like mohammed gandhi without a walking stick

and some people put together college funds for their child at that point as you may have done. it is along in the process. there are the rights of the women which are amply expected and the right of the life and child's life at 20 weeks tis ingesting and digesting and swallowing and chewing and it is fully formed and you let it alone and it is a lawyer and arguing on fox news 25 years from now. the question is where do you draw the line? that's where we are having a reasonable discussion in the united states right now. but the fall back is more and more absurd and so it is women's health and choice and rights. and science and public opinion are trending away from the more radical positions on pro-choice

and the kermit gosnell situation crystallized positions that are coming to the fore, too and how far you are willing to go. kristin powers said once they tighten in the wake of pennsylvania and the horrors and some had predicted all of the abortion clinics will close. some closed but it was not the disaster that was predicted. we'll see what happen in texas. thank you both. we have news breaking now in zimmerman. a fox news host finds himself front and center. sean hanity had a riveting interview with george zimmerman last july. the jury is about to hear part of the interviews and some parts were redakted and disregard those portions when making their decisions. we got started and we are going

to play it for you now. watch this. >> and tonight in an interview thaw will only see here on hanity. george zimmerman breaks his silence, earlier today i travelled to seminole county, florida. let's go back to the night of the shooting. take us back to that night. you were going to the store. start in the dpining. >> i was going to target to do my weekly grocery shopping and that was was the night, sunday after we mentor the kids, we would always go grocery shopping and do our cooking for the week. i wanted to go to target and i headed out and that's the last time i have been home since that. >> we heard the 911 call.

>> on that 911 call, you mentioned a number of break ins, in the community. why were you a community watch person and how were you involved in that? >> august 2011, there was a home invasion, a young lady was home with her nine month old baby and she barricaded herself in the upstairs bed room and my wife was home by herself, and she saw the people that burglarized her run through our backyard with their belongings and my wife was not certain what happened, that was enough to scare and shake her up. i promised her i would do what i could to keep her safe. >> and your gun was legal. you have a legal weapon in the state of florida? >> yes, sir.

>> why did you feel the need to carry a gun? a lot of people may have a weapon in the home and why did you think it was necessary to have a weapon with you and did you carry it at all times. >> i carried it at all times except for when i went to work. >> a lot of the cases has to do withstand your ground. we heard a lot about it and i was just curious, prior to this night and incident, had you heard stand your ground? >> no, sir. >> you never heard about it? >> no, sir. >> it was interesting in the 911 call that everyone has heard. all of the sudden, you found somebody who looked suspicious and he may be on drugs and that was an earlier comment. what made you think he was suspicious and might be on drugs? >> i felt he was suspicious because it was raining.

he was in between houses, cutting in between houses and he was walking leisurely for the weather. it didn't look like he was a resident that went to check their mail and got caught in the rain and hurrying back home and didn't look like a fitness fanatic that trained in the rain. >> weren't their overhangs. and he was walking and standing still. he was getting closer to the house back from the side walk? >> yes, sir. >> the overhangs are just in front of the front doors. >> you said he started from the beginning in the 911 call, that he came toward you and seemed to reach for something in his waist band, did you think it was a gun. >> i thought he was trying to intimidate me.

>> to make you think there was a gun? >> possibly. >> and something is wrong with him and he's checking me out and i don't know what his deal was. it is almost like the very beginning. you felt, on the 911 tape that you felt threatened. >> not particularly. >> what dumean when you said i don't know what his deal is. and he's checking me out. >> the way he was coming back and i was on the phone and i could see him saying something to me and his demeanor and language was confrontational. >> do you remember what it was that you said specifically on the tape? >> you said and we get to the issue of the element on the 911 call that he's running. you said that to the dispatch. is there any chance in retrospect and what happened, trying to get in the mined set.

we learned that trayvon was speaking with his girlfriend supposedly at the time. that maybe he was afraid of you and didn't know who you were? >> no. >> why do you think he was running then? >> maybe running. >> you said running. >> it was like skipping going away quickly. he was not running out of fear. >> you could tell the difference. >> he was not actually running. >> that's what you said to the dispatcher you thought he was running. let me ask you this, you could hear the unbuckling of the seat belt and you are opening up the car door and the dispatch ask you ha at that moment and everyone focused on this in the media. the dispatcher said are you following him. and you said yes. explain that. >> i meant that i was going in

the same direction as him to keep an eye on him so i could tell the police where he was going. i didn't mean i was actually pursuing him. >> this moment where some suggested you were out of breath. you were not running? >> no, sir. >> you made a statement to the police that it was the wind as you were getting out of the car moving and that is the south that you were out of breath. >> we'll continue on more with my interview with george zimmerman and his attorney. >> what do you do with that movement forward. there is a minute gap in this case. what did you do from that minute forward and the dispatch said we don't need you to follow him? what did you do next? >> i walked across the side walk on to my street on the circle and i thought i would meet a police officer that i had called. >> so you did not continue to

follow him at that point? >> no, sir. >> so you continue from there and you sounded at that moment distracted, what was the distraction, that you were looking for him? >> i wanted to make sure, i believe they asked me for my address and i wanted to be sure no one was lingering and could hear my address and come back. and i was making sure that there was not anybody that would surprise me and just trying to give them an accurate location. >> they said you, you know, can we meet you at the scomploekz you said have them call me. why did you want them to call you? >> i hadn't given them a correct address. i gave them the clubhouse. and however, i was walking through to my street on the circle and i was going to give them the street number and name.

>> how long was it, george, after that that you saw trayvon again? you say you stopped and didn't continue to pursue him? when dunext see trayvon martin? >> less than 30 seconds. >> where is exactly were you at that point and how far away from your car were you at that moment? >> a hundred feet or more. >> you never went further how far approximately from your car. >> i would estimate 100 feet. >> you never went further? >> no, sir. >> and all of the sudden trayvon was there. >> yes, sir. >> what happened next? >> he asked my problem. . >> exmretative problem? >> yes. and i was wearing a rain jacket

and i had put my cell phone in my jacket pocket as opposed to the know and i went to grab my phone to call 911 instead of naup emergency and when i went in my pocket it was not there and it was shocked and i looked up and he punched me and broke my nose. >> one shot. he said to you. you have expletive, a problem. you remember those words. what is your problem. >> what is your problem. and you said to him, i don't have a ach for your phone. >> i reached for it and i was saying, no, i don't have a problem. >> and at that 30i7b9 you got hit? >> he novembers arm's length from me. >> was that the punch in the nose that broke your nose? >> yes, sir. >> you went to the ground.

>> i don't remember if i went immediately to the ground or he pushed me to the ground. i ended up on the ground. >> what happened there, police put forward the descriptions ob. at one point, you said that you wanted him -- you wanted -- to stop him from hitting your head on the cement. >> yes, sir. >> is that what you told the police? >> yes, sir. >> after that first hit, what happened next? >> he started bashing my head into the concrete side walk. i was -- as soon as he broke my nose, i started yelling for help. i was disoriented. he started slamming my head into the concrete. >> which is where the lacerations came from? >> yes, sir. >> you said, it was like your head was going to explode was a comment you had given to the police? >> yes, sir. he continued to punch me in the

head. >> how many times would you estimate that he punched you? >> several. more than a dozen. >> and hitting you hard. at what moment did you - you -- could -- you said you feared for your life. at what moment do you remember when you literally -- do you remember when you thought, i may die. is that -- because you said you thought -- you feared for your life. do you remember the exact moment when you thought that? >> in hindsight, i would say when he was slamming my head into the concrete and thought i would lose consciousness. i didn't know what would happen at that point. >> how close was the concrete to the grass? the big issue was also the grass stains you had on your clothes. you made a statement to the police that you wanted to get to the grass. was that to protect your head from banging into the cement again? >> yes, sir. >> how close was that in proximity? >> it bucks up to the concrete. >> were you able to get to the

grass? >> yes, sir. >> how did you do that? >> i would i guess you would say shimmy. he was straddled on me with his full weight. i would try and sit up and push myself down. whenever i would sit up, he would take the opportunity to slam my head back down and punch me in the haead and continue to hit my nose. >> was he talking to you a lot during this fight? during this -- when he was beating you? because you're saying he's beating you and pounding your head into the cement. was he talking to you during that time? >> yes. >> and he was saying? >> cursing, telling me to shut up. and then finally telling me he was going to kill me. >> he said those words? and he said it -- when did he first see your gun? >> after we were on the ground, i shimmy ied, with him on top o me, and it made my jacket rise up and he'd be on top of me, saw

it on my right side. >> what happened after that? >> i felt him take -- he h had -- after he couldn't hit my head on the concrete anymore, he started to try to suffocate me. and i continued to take -- push his hands off my mouth and my nose, particularly because it was excruciating, having a broken nose, him putting his weight on it. that has the point in time when he started telling me to shut-up, shut-up. >> why did he tell you to shut-up? >> i don't know. >> we heard the screams on the one recording from a neighbor that was calling the police. there's been some dispute whose voices that is. was that your voice screaming or trayvon martin's? >> my voice, absolutely. >> that was your voice? >> yes, sir. >> the police even said at one time they heard 14 scream, you were screaming that loud?

>> yes, sir. >> you said to the police at one point he put his hand over your mouth. do you think that was to silence you from screaming? >> yes, sir. i believe he, from what the secrets told me -- the investigators told me, knew i was talking to the police and i was yelling so that -- i believed that the police officer was there and they just couldn't find me, so i was yelling in the hopes that they were in the vicinity and they would come when they heard me yelling. >> do you remember when you yourself reached for your weapon? do you remember that moment? >> yes, sir. >> tell us about that. >> at that point, i realized that it wasn't my gun, it wasn't his gun, it was the gun. >> did he say anything? because you said he was talking a lot about the gun.

did he say he noticed the gun? >> he said, you're going to die [ bleep ] tonight. and took one hand off of my mouth and i felt it going down my chest towards my belt, my holster. that's when i didn't have any more time. >> do you think you acted more out of a conscious thought? i know these events happened very quickly. do you remember consciously thi thinking i've got to grab my gun or did you just do it? was there a conscious thought that went through your head that you thought you were going to die and you had to get your weapon and fire? >> i'd love to give you an answer. >> you don't know? >> it just happened so quickly -- >> there was an eyewitness that was out from the very beginning that in fact did tell the police the night of the shooting that he saw trayvon on top of you and did see the beating. there is no witness to the actual shooting itself.

rig right? >> besides myself. >> besides yourself? >> yes, sir. >> when you think back, there was one report, police report that actually said, you didn't know after you fired, you didn't think -- you thought you missed? >> i didn't think i hit him, yes. >> so what happened immediately after the shooting, george? i understand one guy came out, said he had a flashlight, spoke to you. you said to call your wife, tell her what happened. i shot somebody. do you remember that conversation? >> the conversation i had with the gentleman? >> yeah. >> yes, sir. >> you do remember that conversation? he did talk about it and his suggestion was that you were very matter of fact about it. do you remember what you said to him? do you think you were in a state of shock? did you know trayvon -- when did you know trayvon had died? >> when i went -- probably about an hour after i got to the police station.

>> after the shooting, did you -- you saw he was laying there, and obviously injured, there was a moment where you realized he was shot? >> like i said, he sat up and he said something to the effect of, you got it or, you got me. i assumed he meant, okay, you got the gun, i didn't get it, i'm not going to fight anymore, at which point i got out from under him. >> is there anything you regret? do you regret getting out of the car to follow trayvon that night? >> no, sir. >> do you regret you had a gun that night? >> no, sir. >> do you feel you wouldn't be here for this interview if you didn't have that gun? >> no, sir. >> you feel you would not be here? >> i feel it was all god's plan and for me to second-guess it, judge it -- >> is there anything you might do differently in retrospect now that time has passed a little bit? >> no, sir.

>> you know, a detective said, you know, that you and detective singleton quoted you as saying the bad guys always get away. you also said the 911 tape, did you have a feeling there were lot of people that do get away with crimes? in other words, were you predisposed in your mind in some way to think criminals get away too often? >> not in general. i think in our neighborhood, this geographic advantages for burglaries. >> do you have any idea -- why do you think trayvon would have confronted you the way he did? i made a comment on the air one day and got beaten up pretty bad for saying this could have all just been a terrible misunderstanding or mistake. do you think maybe -- is there any possibility he thought you were after him and you thought he was after you and there was some misunderstanding in any way? >> i've wrestled with that for a

long time but i can't -- one of my biggest issues through this ordeal has been the media, conjecture, and i can't assume or make-believe. >> the one witness you first met, the guy with the cell phone i mentioned, said, asked about your demeanor right after the shooting, the first person on the scene. >> yes, sir. >> the first person you saw. >> he said you looked like you had been quote butt whooped, like you had had a fight and that you were asking, call my wife, just tell my wife. but, you know, he was acting like it was nothing. is that how you were feeling at the time? because you didn't find out, you said, until later, that trayvon had passed away. >> no. i knew i had discharged my firearm and i was scared, nervo nervous. i also thought the police were going to come and see me with

the firearm and shoot me. i was terrified. >> did you look over at trayvon? you obviously at some point recognized he had been shot. you didn't know it at the beginning. did you look over at him at any time and realize he was in really bad shape? >> no, sir. >> how long was it between the time you shot him and the time the police actually got to the scene? >> it felt like forever. i'd say 15 to 30 seconds. >> it was that quick? >> yes, sir. >> so in other words, they had already been on their way and were there within 15, 30 seconds. what do you make of all the national media attention in this case. there are crime's that happen everyday. the nation is focused on your case. why do you think that is and what do you make of it and what does it mean to you? >> it's surreal. i don't like that they've rushed to judgment the way they have. i feel that any time they have a

story that's remotely positive, they interpret it negatively. >> you had called police on at least four prior occasions and had mentioned black male suspects. i want to give you a chance to respond why you called -- what were those instances about? >> they also stated that and i never volunteered that information. it was always at their request, that i describe them. even when i described them, i didn't volunteer their race until they asked me. there's also hispanic kids and white kids that were in the neighborhood. >> that you made calls about? >> yes, sir. >> let me ask you this. i want to go back to one specific in the case, if i can. it's the issue of you following him. i asked you earlier about the

dispatch call. you said, you stopped, you didn't follow him. there's one moment you were apparently, as you look at the grounds of where this took place, and the apartment and there's the overhangs and there's another street on the other side, you had gone to the other street, correct? >> yes, sir. >> at some point. how do you get to the other street if you're not following him? where were you going at that point? >> i was walking from where i had parked my car, towards my street. he went right down, in between the houses. i walked straight across. >> in that sense, were you following him? >> no, sir. >> you weren't following him? >> no, sir. >> this was after the 911 call? >> during. >> during the 911 call. >> they stated we don't need you to do that. >> why were you walk back to your street and not back to your car? i'm trying to get the chronology right. >> where i parked my car was the

back of townhouses. there wasn't a way to know what the street number was. i knew if i walked straight through it's a circle and if i walked straight through to there, that would be the circle and i could tell them exactly what 1, 2, 3, 4, not just a general area where my car was, like i had done previously. >> what an extraordinary thing you just witnessed there. what an extraordinary choice by the prosecution to play that interview of almost it's entire of our own sean hannity interviewing george zimmerman in that sitdown exchange that happened a year ago last july with his attorney mark omar ra present and not subject to cross-examination. the prosecution made this decision. that was the prosecution playing that tape. joining us, alex ferrer still with us and judge napolitano. and experts standing by.

judge napolitano, have you ever seen anything like this? >> no, i haven't. it really is a head scratcher. george ferrera knows more about florida law than i do. it seems the prosecution has made a point to demonize the defendant and try to demonstrate to the jury slight differences in the version of the same event he gave at different times before the trial so as to set him up for a major cross-examination when and if he testifies. he doesn't have to testify. there has been so much of him in front of this jury at the choice of the government, all of the explanations he gave are lucid. the differences between them are miniscule. i honestly think that the government has been shooting itself in the foot. and with what they did today they shot themselves in both feet. >> judge alex, i listened to that. i think that's the defense putting that on. >> that's pretty much how the whole case has gone, megyn.

frankly, everyday i listen to the evidence and listen to the testimony. it feels like the movie "groundhogs day." everything seems to keep repeating itself. >> i realize they're trying to find inconsistencies in zimmerman's story because there's at least five accounts. they will try to point, he said this here or there. they already had five others outside of hannity. that exchange, you tell me how did zimmerman come across, what did he say that was particularly helpful to the prosecution? why would they make the decision to play that? >> i think it shows how desperate the prosecution is right now. they're willing to take the little crumbs they can get out of impeachment. he said this instead of that. and they're willing to risk the jury hearing a sim ympathetic presentation of the self-defense story over and over again. what they got out of this, okay, it doesn't look good for george zimmerman to say, i think it was god's plan. really? it was god's plan you shoot an

unarmed 17-year-old boy. that might tick off the jury a little bit. >> according to our incourt producer, when that piece of the interview played, trayvon's mother known to be a regulation woman looked away and down from the screen and later looked at the jury. known to be a religious woman. >> i thank they got a hit on that. second, was there a conscious thought in your mind you were about to be killed. he said, i wish i could tell you. the prosecution will jump all over this. >> sorry to be so annoying. we actually cued that up and let me play that for the viewers and you finish your thought after. >> was there a conscious thought that went through your head that you thought you were going to die and you had to get your weapon and fire? >> i'd love to give you an answer. >> you don't know? >> it just happened so quickly. >> go ahead. >> i think the prosecution is going to jump all over that because the requirement for use of deadly force in a self-defense setting is you must be in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm and they will

say he's admitting, he can't even say he was in fear for his life right then. they will use that. however, forever you take it in context o'mara under the rule of completeness will argue -- it's already in evidence, he will argue the rest of the statement, before that, he said, when were you in fear for your life? he said, when he was smashing my head on the concrete. clearly you can't quite p arks rrparse it out. clearly the prosecution is desperate. i don't think you will see george zimmerman on the stand. he doesn't have to. the self-defense claim has been put before the jury and now the state's burden to overcome it before a reasonable doubt. >> the state's burden not the defense's burden. the prosecution did that for them. >> they have given so much evidence helpful to the defense

and not all, some to the prosecution, so much to the defense. is there any way you put zimmerman on the stand now? the jury has heard his version and the man has not been subject to cross? >> i can't imagine putting zimmerman on the stand unless something comes in between now and resting and i believe they're close to resting which compels a show iing they can ge something out of another witness. this is a dangerous intersection of racial politics and law. the prosecutor should be free to say this is not a second degree murder case. our witnesses are weak. they will help the defense as well as they help us, we should charge him with a much lesser crime and have a better chance of convicting or not charge him with anything. they're not stupid. they know they have a weak case and putting it on anyway because of the public pressure to prosecute this guy. >> that's how we got here.

>> this is not the way these things are supposed to work. >> the attorney general and state sat down and decided this needed to be pursued and how we got to trial. thank you so much. appreciate your insights. i want to tell you now for the audience, they've now put on the medical examiner. stand by. they put on the state medical examiner. first, they were doing her background when we were talking to the judges and now exchange her how she determines how victims get injuries? i want to tell you we're on a delay, but the delay has been difficult. hard to do live. we're worried a little bit about -- i don't know if we will get autopsy photos, i don't know what we will get. we will do our best to shield that from you, daytime tv. bear with us if we're not perfect. let's listen in with that in min mind. >> the photograph included the medical examiner report, body diagram, autopsy photograph. 26 autopsy photographs were taken, the toxicology report.

and then a report that states two individuals were involved in a physical altkangs the er and oand -- physical altercation in the yard and one fired a handgun and the other fell to the ground and the medical autopsy report toxicology report. this is what i received. >> did you also receive two photographs of the defendant at the scene the night of the event? >> yes. >> when you said reenactment. when you referred to the reenactment, was that an interview where he conducted a walk through and led investigat investigators through the scene and explained to them what happened? >> yes. >> after reviewing all those it item, in terms of severity, how would you classify the injuries to the defendant's head? >> they were not life-threatening. they were very insignificant. they did not require any sutures to be applied to mr. zimmerman.

as i refer to them insignificant injurie injuries. >> did you observe any lacerations to the back of the defendant's head? >> yes. >> how many? >> two. >> were those lacerations depicted in the photographs that you reviewed? >> yes. they were bleeding so i was not able to look at them after they were cleaned because subsequently when he went to the altamonte clinic, they were covered by band-aids. >> were you also provided the reports from the altamonte family springs clinic describing the injuries as they were viewed by physician's assistant the next morning? >> yes. >> your honor, would you assist me with the lights? doctor, let me show you first state's 79. was that one of the photographs from the scene you were

provided? >> yes. >> state 76, was that a photograph from the scene you were provided? >> yes. >> let me show you state's 57. were you also provided that photograph? >> yes. >> your honor, may i approach the witness? >> yes, you may. >> doctor, let me give you this. press that button. if you will explain for the members of the jury where the lacerations are located that you observed and that were referred to in the family clinic report? >> okay. we have one small injury right there and one injury right there, where the blood is streaming from. these were the two lacerations. >> in the altamonte family clinic report, were you also provided with the measurements of each of those lacerations? >> yes. >> are either of those lacerations life-threatening? >> no. >> why not? >> it was so minor that the

individual who examined and treated mr. zimmerman told him that the sutures were not required, so she put a band-aid on each of them and that was the extent of the treatment. >> are there also some contusions or a contusion on the back of the defendant's head? >> yes. >> can you show the members of the jury where that is in the photograph? >> right there. >> is that a life-threatening injury? >> no. >> why not? >> the reason i asked for everything was i then looked at the entire case file and when he wa walked from the police car to the police department to be booked, he was not incap pass tated in any way. he was very alert and walking, you snknow, with the officers. >> are the injuries that you observed to the back of the defendant's head consistent with his head having made contact

with a concrete surface? >> yes. >> why do you say that? >> you know, i looked at the other areas that were photographed. and we have a pattern that punk tated, meaning there were other areas that came into contact with a rough surface. looking at the concrete area, i gen, the reenactment i was given, it's consistent with his head having come into contact with that rough surface. >> are the injuries on the back of the defendant's head consistent with one strike against a concrete surface? >> yes. >> why do you say that? >> because if you hit the head one time, it is consistent with having gotten those two injuries at that one time, because it is an area where it is protruding -- >> area where -- >> protruding, because the head

is round surface and that could result in two lacerations. >> are the injuries you observed to the back of the defendant's head consistent with his head having been slammed repeatedly into a concrete surface? >> okay. so, i'm going to give you my -- what i think, based on e thedictio thedictions -- the dictionary definition of slammed is and there are two different definitions from the dictionary. >> excuse me, if she's going to define it a dictionary, there at would be hearsay. >> please approach. >> as they conduct a sidebar deciding whether the objection will be sustained or overruled,

the medical examiner talking about trayvon martin and the injuries on him, we have been wrong, trayvon martin's injuries is what she gleaned from the descenda decedent. the prosecution using her to minimize mr. zimmerman's injuries and one of the ways they claim zimmerman has misled in the many statements given. they do not feel and will argue on closing he has been ov overstating his injuries, that he overstated the extend of the conflict, his head was getting slammed against the side walk repeatedly and he was in fear for his life. they will say, yes, there was some blood and really nothing happened. you can't believe his story when you look at the injuries because they don't support his injuries. they have a list of things they are going to use to suggest george zimmerman is a liar and they will use those prior statements to try to prove that to this jury, prove you cannot believe what he says. we'll take a quick break and resume testimony right after it.

[ female announcer ] doctors trust calcium plus vitamin d

to support strong bones. and the brand most recommended by... my doctor. my gynecologist. my pharmacist. citracal. citracal. [ female announcer ] you trust your doctor. doctors trust citracal.

the medical examiner continues her testimony. i want to set this up for you. during the hannity interview the prosecution play ed, he said, dd you faear for your life the moment you drew out the gun? he said, i wish i could tell you it all happened so fast. and the moment before that, when did you fear you would die? in hindsight it was when he was slamming my head into the concrete and thought i would lose consciousness. i didn't know what would happen at that point. now, they put on the medical examiner to say, it was a little laceration, he didn't need stitches and testified it could have been the result of one punch. they're trying to contradict his presentation of his injuries and the beatdown as less severe than zimmerman portrayed to hannity and others. let's listen in again. >> how would you classify the confusions or abrasions in this

photograph? >> yes. very small injuries. >> could all the injuries exhibited in state's 75 have come from a single blow? >> yes. one impact against concrete, yes. let me show you state's 73. is that also a photograph you were provided? >> yes. >> what injuries were depicted in state's 73? >> here again you have to disregard the dried blood coming from the laceration to the back of the head. you can see very very faint, again, punctate, small abrasions. >> are any of those abrasions life-threatening? >> no. >> how would you classify the abrasions depicted in state's 73? >> very insignificant. >> could those abrasions in that photograph come from a single

blow? sn>> yes. >> why do you say that? >> because the surface area on the side, if you look at my head, if i was to bang on the concrete, i could get all those injuries from one impact. >> you also mentioned that you viewed video clips of the defendant getting out of a police car and walking through the police station that evening. what did his appearance in that video demonstrate to you regarding his injuries? >> he was not incapacitated in any way. he walked on his own power and he was also conversing with the police officers, during this reenactment. >> all right. thank you, doctor. that's all i have, judge. >> thank you. cross? >> thank you, your honor. good afternoon, ma'am. >> good afternoon. >> you got your appointment to your present position because miss cory, the prosecutor in this case appointed you,

correct? >> correct. >> okay. so she's sort of your boss? >> not really, no. >> but it was because of her, she appointed you to this position, right? >> she actually sent my name up to the governor. so if you want to call that an appointment, well, then, so be it. >> well, why don't we do this? i will read a letter to you. tell me if you consider this appointment. pursuant to section 406.15 i hereby appoint -- >> object. >> i'll approach and let her review it maybe. i just have it electronically. >> it's okay. i can explain. >> let me ask the question. >> okay. >> is what i'm looking at a letter signed by miss cory where she says she appoints you to that position? yes or no. >> that was the interim position. i can't say yes or no because i have to explain to you. >> i'll walk you through it. >> one at a time. >> i'll walk you through it. it was a yes to that, she appointed you to the interim position? >> yes. >> you had another position as the medical examiner in the

state of florida, too, correct? >> yes. >> in the fifth district. you were not reappointed to that position by the governor, were you? >> i did not seek reappointment. it was tabled. i did not seek reappointment. >> it was because of some of the problems that existed in your administration in that office? >> correct. >> you got the job in miss cory's office or actually the same district where the prosecutes, right? >> she's a state -- yes. >> how much of your work is on behalf of the state attorney's office in that district? >> the medical examiner really does not work for the state attorney. we are separate. most of the time we are called by the state, however, the defense can call us. you could call me on this particular trial and i would be here for you just like i am here for the prosecution. >> before we get to that, my question is how much of your work is on behalf of the state attorney's office in duval county? sn>> all the homicides. >> all the work? you only deal with homicides? >> no.

we do suicides, traffic accidents, we do drug overdoses, natural death where there is no physician to sign the death certificate. other work. homicides are a very small percentage of our cases. >> i'm sorry. let me clear it up. how much of the work that you do involve crime matters, and i'm presuming in that question, all the crime matters dealing with the duval county state attorney's office? how much of what you do is related to criminal activity. >> we have a total of 1,165 autopsies. after that, probably 110 homicides, so that is the proportion. >> okay. and in all of that work, you work with the various prosecutors, correct? >> that is correct. >> these are the homicide prosecutors for that division or that office, right? >> we have a whole series of state attorneys, yes. but they are on the docket.

>> you can see mark o'mara trying to raise some questions about her credibility and her g pocket of the state prosecutor, angela corey, who is the one brought in by the state attorney general after the local police said there's no there there, no reason to charge mr. zimmerman. then the state attorney general, pam bondi and the governor sat down and said, we think there is a reason to pursue at least an investigation here and angela corey was the prosecutor who decided to bring charges. he's trying to suggest this woman owes her job to angela corey and therefore biased in favor of the state. this is classic cross-examination. this is what you do. we will take a quick break and come back with the testimony, if you want to listen to it while we're on break, foxnews.com. we'll be right back. [ ding! ] ...heart health... [ ding! ] ...and muscles. [ ding! ] that can only be ensure complete! [ female announcer ] the four-in-one nutrition of ensure complete. a simple choice to help u eat right. [ major nutrition ] nutrition in charge.

♪ [ female announcer ] when your swapportunity comes, take it. ♪ what? what? what? [ female announcer ] yoplait. it is so good.

the defense counsel has just gotten her to admit there were abrasions to the knuckles of trayvon martin on his left hand

and now listening to the injuries of trayvon. >> you can have contact with trauma that's visible. >> as mr. zimmerman could have, correct? >> correct. >> a dozen of them, even, right? >> sorry? >> a dozen even, correct? >> a dozen what? >> other impacts. let's get more specific. we've now talked about the potential of two -- you even admit -- let me ask you this. is there a possibility that with a swat or hit or finger nail or something, that even this abrasion on his nose could have been a third? >> anything is possible. >> well, you're here as an expert. i want you to give us your opinion. is that possible, based upon your level of knowledge? >> okay. so, i will ask this -- i know i'm not supposed to ask you questions. >> go ahead. >> so then the next issue would be that each of the punctate marks on his head could have

been caused by, you know, a scratch or that would be the next question posed and you're looking at the preponderance of the evidence and the opinion rendered thereby. so, you know, you can continue this -- >> let's move on. let's move on. but resume on the nose. you saw on mr. zimmerman's right side, there was a protrusion on his nose, is that correct? >> what does that mean? >> i'm using the word "protrusion," a photograph, let's go back and take a quick look at this. you see you have -- we both have one. you have a pointer, correct? >> yes, i do. >> see that spot right there?

>> that's the abrasion, yes. >> right below. that swelling spot, you see that? >> i don't see a spot but i see swelling. >> sorry. that swelling on the initial view actually looks like there's a bone over there, doesn't it, but we know it's not, correct? >> there is a bone, yes. >> but the swelling is not movement of bone, is it? or is it? >> i don't follow that. >> i'm asking you to explain, what is that swelling on the right side of the nose from? >> a left trauma injury. >> what happens is the body reacts to it by rushing fluid to it to try to take care of the site of injury, trauma. >> yes. >> that recedes pretty quickly, doesn't it? >> that depends on the extent of trauma, yes. >> we know in this case, you acknowledge the trauma and swelling there, right? >> yes. >> you notice in the pictures after it, the swelling has

receded? >> yes. >> and here a few hours? >> it depends on the severity of it. here, it was not severe and declined. >> where do you think that was bleeding from? >> from inside his nose. >> where would there at go if he was laying on his back? >> where would what go? >> the blood. >> it depends if you are alive, you would -- if it went back in your throat, you would cough it out. >> or swallow it? >> i don't know. >> i mean, it's going back down your throat, isn't it? >> yeah. you'd cough it out. i don't know if you would swallow it but maybe that's a good suggestion. >> okay. so we have the nose injury, one, we have the potential of the injury up here you identified could be a second shot, correct? >> it's possible, yes. >> if i showed you a pictu picture -- let's say we did in

fact have a video and the video showed a smash to the head to the nose here and sort of overhand. let's say there was an overhand shot. you have a video or, let's say, an eyewitness who saw an overhand shot, would that be consistent, that overhand shot, with that injury up there? >> the bruise, the small bruise? >> yeah, right up there. >> it's possible, yes. >> well, is it consistent? >> it could be. >> okay. on the back here, you testified that you believe that all this was created or consistent to have been created with just one strike on the concrete or cement? >> okay. so all this, i don't follow that. i see two lacerations and a small bruise. >> okay. you see this laceration? >> yes. >> this laceration. >> okay. so, you know, it's being actually camouflaged by the dried blood and the dripping of

the blood, but one that examined him said one was 0.5 centimeters and 2.0 centimeters, which is very small. so, you know, after it's cleaned and you look at it, you don't see what your suggestion maybe that there are a whole series of injuries back there. >> i will just ask a couple of questions about all this. you said, i think, in direct examination, this is consistent with one strike upon cement, correct? >> concrete, correct. >> concrete. you're not suggesting to some reasonable degree of medical center that there was only one strike here, correct? >> no. >> so this could, according to where this was -- let's identify a term. i will use the term crown. we know what the crown of the head normally is up here? >> correct. >> i will use crown in a

different term for the next few questions. that means the point that hits the cement. can we use that term for a couple questions. do you know what i mean by that? >> do what? sorry. >> rather than the crown, the first thing to hit the ceiling if you stand straight up, let's just say that this is where the impact on the cement is, okay? >> okay. >> now, the head could impact just there, correct and just hit there, right? >> but if the impact is on the side -- >> absolutely. we don't actually know what part of his head contacted this cement, do we? >> we know that there are two injuries that resulted from the impact. >> right. >> that's a given. >> they could be separate, right? >> except they're in close proximity, yes. >> i would hit a knuckle right

there, if i could hit two knuckles at a time, correct, according to how it happens, what the physics is of how it happens? >> i am not very good in physics. we're not talking about knuckles. >> i'm sorry. >> we're talking about one surface area. so i can explain simply i don't know about what the physics of this injury is. >> let's get away from physics. let's just say he was hit where -- see this line right here? see that line? making a line? >> you mean the area? >> no, the line i'm making with the laser? >> yes. >> let's just say only that on this side came in contact with the cement. is that possible? >> oh, yes. >> if that were true that only the point on this side came in contact with the cement that only that injury would occur or could occur that way, correct? >> that's possible. >> and now, if we look at the

other side, the same line, that side, let's just say that only this side of the skull was in contact with the cement, then that injury would happen, correct? >> that's possible, too. >> two separate injuries? >> possible. >> you're not suggesting it's any more likely one or two, are you? >> doing the preponderance of the evidence and the preponderance would suggest that one impact is more plausible than the way the head is shaped, to have two separate impacts, but like, you know, if you say that that was something that was eyewitnessed, then, yes. >> what if somebody put their hands, let's say, on the side of the skull and smashed this way? >> judge, i will object to facts not in evidence. >> sorry, your honor. i didn't hear the objection. >> facts not in evidence, sustained? let's say you have evidence there is a fist being hit down

on one side of the head, would you agree the opposite side of the head would be forced downward? >> it could. >> okay. it could, right? >> it could. >> all right. that would cause an injury just on one side of the skull, correct? >> it could. >> you see this bruising right here, do you not see that swelling? >> no. that's the shape of his head, i think. >> in your opinion, you came to a conclusion that crowning over there is natural? >> yes. that's the parietal area of the scalp. >> i'm curious why it doesn't seem to show itself as protruded on this side. >> sometimes shapes of head are different. we're not all symmetrical. if you look, there is no discoloration there. so that may be an anatomic variatio variation. >> so right here, do you see any bruising or any discoloration at

all in that photograph? >> i don't see bruising but i see small very tiny punctate ma marks. you know, the other thing is the photograph you're looking at, the hair is so short that -- >> this is an interesting situation because you know her -- she clearly sees her job as to diminish the extent of the injuries or she clearly sees the injuries as not that significant and they're sparring over how bad they could have been and so on and so clearly, whether the jury will go with her and say, it's really not that bad or whether they will believe o'mara and think, why is she fighting so hard to diminish them? does that show bias on her part, and then they dismiss her testimony. that will be up to the six jurors in the box. if you want to watch this while we take a quick commercial break streaming live on foxnews.com,

more after this break. what do you think? [ mom ] yea, give it more sparkles.

[ male announcer ] your kids make great things. so give them a tasty, wholesome snack that has eight grams of whole grain... and is now made with real strawberries and bananas. honey maid teddy grahams. two new flavors now made with real fruit.

welcome back, everybody. we continue with our george of trayvon martin and george zimmerman trial. i want to bring in quickly our panel. former prosecutor, faith jenkins and ouranalyst. he started off in cross-examining the medical examiner by mentioning her history and whether she had been let go from her prior job and our producer in florida forwarding editorial on that what he may have been going for. there were some allegations against her. she was appointed by the governor in 2011. there was a letter obtained by the mayor's office to the state medical commission she would have answered to in which the city was claiming employees had seen her using the autopsy sink to wash her feet, using her bare hands to perform procedures and even demanding unnecessary autopsies to raise the bottom

li line. didn't stop there. complaints from employees, bullying, hostile environment, so on and so forth. i don't know whether he's going to get further into that. that's all part of the attempt to discredit the witness. >> yes. minimize her credibility, absolutely. they're already doing that. even forgetting about what you brought in, incredible and amazing and i'm sure -- >> washing your feet in the autopsy sink -- >> the whole picture. even before this came in, she said consistent with minor injuries, right? on cross-examination he's going very thoroughly through saying, wait a second, there were two lacerations on the back of the head. that couldn't happen with one meeting of the i had with the concrete. it must have been more. >> that's what you wonder whether they're big or small and look relatively small those injuries on the back of the head, you do wonder how they could have happened with one slamming of had the on the concrete. >> the point the prosecutor is making with this witness and her

testimony, it's inconsistent with you being punched 25 or 30 times or your head being repeatedly slammed to the concrete to the point you're going to lose consciousness. i think the point here is george zimmerman certainly embellished the part of his testimony. we know there was some physical contact between george zimmerman and trayvon martin. the question the jury has to answer, are his injuries significant enough to justify george zimmerman turning around and shooting him. you can't turn a fist 28 into a gun fight. >> that is not the question. >> that is one of the questions. >> let me tell you what i think the question is and you tell me whether you agree. the legal question is not were his injuries significant, he was actually facing imminent death or bodily harm, it is did he believe it? >> one of the facts they look at are his injuries. >> they're going to look at his injuries as a factor in that determination. >> wait. let me stop you. i don't want to mislead our viewers what the legal standard is. the defense does not -- the jury does not have to believe he was actually about to die,

zimmerman. >> yes. >> actually about to suffer severe bodily harm. they have to believe he thought he was. >> what was in his head at that moment? that's florida law. >> actually, it's what a reasonable person would believer in that situation, not just what's in his head. his injuries is a factor is that consideration. >> so they're trying to diminish it. answer me this. my feeling is, you know, having practiced law, if i were advising this witness before she took the stand, i'd go up there and say, yeah, he got hit. you can see, lacerations, he has a broken nose, not the worst stuff i've ever seen, not great. she seems to be trying very hard to minimize at least, which to me if i'm sitting in the jury box, i'm thinking, why is she doing that? >> exactly. jurors want especially experts to be unbiased. if they're being paid by the state, to be unbiased. she's a medical examiner. she's not supposed to be swaying

evidence one way or another. she's not supposed to be on anybody's side, that's the point. >> the business about angela corey appointing her, i don't know, faith, was that persuasive? someone's got to appoint her. she stuff about how she's being -- not really willing to give much on some of these injuri injuries -- i don't know maybe having the opposite effect of what she intends. >> she's trying to say her analysis is completely independent and doesn't matter who she works for. as far as cross-examination on her working for the state attorney i've heard that in about 20 criminal trials. >> always the case. >> what criminal defense attorneys do, work with the facts they have, try to create the illusion of bias. in medical frisorensics, jurors usually give their testimony a great deal of weight given their expertise. >> but her testimony said her findings were consistent with one strike, not that it actually was one strike. >> when you compare that to george zimmerman's story he was hit 25 to 30 time, even if it's

one, two, three -- >> and the broken nose, i'm sure that will be coming out. the lacerations were not the only injuries zimmerman suffered that night. >> i understand that. >> you have other things. if the jury believes that's zimmerman screaming, help, help, help! >> that's completely different. >> they're not going to -- i don't think they will say, well, they were only small lacerations. if they believe that was zimmerman and not martin, then they're going to believe he was a man who was very scared. that doesn't necessarily resolve the whole case. >> don't forget that testimony already came in this morning through zimmerman through his interview with sean hannity. >> i want to ask you about that, the fact the prosecution played the interview. >> they're working behind and don't have anything to lose. to hear george zimmerman say he has no regret getting out of his car and following trayvon martin and shooting and killing him and it was god's will, that is stunning. >> nothing to lose?

>> they put his statements in already. they have all his statements. they heard his story numerous times. this is another time he's giving a statement and they will point out the inconsistencies. out the inconsistencies. already taken the stand. >> what about, it was god's plan and the mother of the victim is sitting in the courtroom, that's god's plan? >> it's important that the prosecution, if they want to get something on this, have got to include lesser includeds. manslaughter, negligence, assault, because if the jury says it wasn't second degree but we have a dead boy here. we want to punish zimmerman for something. what can we do? >> i see your point. they couldn't just pull up one sound bite from hannity. >> the rule of completeness. >> they were in a bind. the sound bite gives them

something to argue about state of mind and he seemed callous. >> they had a shot of him taking the stand. >> he's not taking the stand. >> all right. stand by.

we resume now with our coverage of the trayvon martin-george zimmerman trial. trayvon martin the victim, and zimmerman the defendant. she testified she just examined photos but did not actual examine george zimmerman's or trayvon martin's body and now she is being shown other photos. let's listen in.

>> let me ask you to compare, if you would, the picture you were just showing with state's exhibit 70. >> do you have that one? >> i'm looking. >> i don't -- >> may i have this back? >> thank you. so, the least number of contact

between scalp and cement were three. correct? >> correct. >> and as many as how many? >> that's a scenario that you would know how many. >> well, of you looks at this from a medical perspective and trying to comp with not the minimum number but the maximum number, give us your opinion. >> i told you the. >> that is the minimum. >> correct. >> my question is, tell us in your professional opinion how many it could have been as a maximum? >> i don't know. >> why not? >> because you were presenting the scenario about various possibilities. you have to tell me and i will tell you, yes or no. >> as i said to you, there could be a possibility that --

>> fascinating to watch the demeanor and the sparring. shepard will have more more of the coverage of the george zimmerman second degree murder trial. thanks again.

>> good afternoon. this is fox news continuing coverage of the george zimmerman murder trial in central florida. right now the defense attorney is questioning the head medical examiner for seminole county. the medical examiner did not examine the body of trayvon martin, but instead is working off reports and has described zimmerman's injuries to his head as minor. now the defense attorney continues questioning. let's his listen. >> consistent with one but suggested by turning the head in different ways, it could be three. >> three or four? >> with no injury,