racial comment? >> no. >> you don't think that creepy ass cracker is a racial comment? >> no. >> don west for the defense attorney asking why she left out certain details when talking to benjamin crump. for example before her conversation with martin cut off she heard martin say "get off get off." well jeantel was visibly agitated. >> up weren't worried about telling the truth. >> first of all crump is not an officer. i knew he was not an officer, so like i told the mother from the beginning, the officer want to talk to me, know the exact story, everything about what happened that night, they would reach me at my number. got it? >> joining me right now from sanford, florida, greg melvin.

explain how different we're seeing the testimony today, day two from the star witness for the prosecution? >> reporter: yeah, you know, thomas her demeanor in court has been different to say the least. i spent some time talking to jeantel's attorney yesterday before her testimony and he said that she was a reluctant witness. she demonstrated yesterday that she was very much so a reluctant witness. yesterday we saw a lot of back and forth between her and don west the defense attorney. we've not seen as much of that today. it seems as if she's going out of her way to be respectful to say yes, sir and no, sir. yesterday she was on the stand for about two hours in the afternoon under cross, close to two hours. she's been on the stand this morning since just after 9:00. we are right now, looks like we're about to start back again. there was about a 20-minute recess. but we expect that she's going to be on the stand for a while longer, for cross-examination. we also expect there will be at

some point a redirect as well. the state will have another opportunity to spend some time talking to a key witness. this was, as you noted there in the intro, this was the first time that we've heard the racial element of this trial brought in. we heard -- we heard hearsay that this was or she at least thought it was a racially charged event, this was a racially charged encounter. they spent some time going back and forth over presusly why she thought that. again, this was the first time that we've heard. also we've been paying very close attention, obviously to george zimmerman's demeanor in court through all of this. and he has been very stoic. there has not been a great deal of expression on his face at any point during this trial so far. so we'll continue to watch this and keeping a close eye on how the jurors are responding to this testimony. i've been told by our producers in the courtroom they are taking

copious notes and watching the witness and attorney going back and forkts don west go back and forth like they are watching a tennis match. >> let's get back in the courtroom. don west is back asking questions. >> i'm asking the assistance of the state's -- we just want to -- >> warm up. it's warming up. >> i'm sorry, thank you. i don't know how long that will take. in the meantime i can just use

this board. just for the record, state's exhibit 1 is being published and available for the jury to see during the witness's testimony. and may i inquire? >> yes, you may. >> miss jeantel, you see state's exhibit 1. it appears to be a map do, you not? >> yes, sir. >> i take it from your testimony you don't know what that is? >> no, sir. >> so, i won't ask you to identify anything if you don't know what it is. >> yes, sir. >> okay. but do i want to talk with you

about where we left off before the break. and that was at the moment -- >> in to that exhibit being offered since this witness can't identify what is it there's no purpose in this exhibit. >> are you going to be questioning about the exhibit? >> your honor, i want the exhibit on so the jury can put this witness's testimony in the context of what has already been acknowledged to be the community of twin lakes. >> okay. >> so, what i would like to you do, ma'am, is pick up at the point where we left off before the break, and that was when trayvon martin began to run, and the phone disconnected. okay. >> yes, sir. >> you knew that he was running at that point because you could hear wind? >> yes, mr. west.

yes, mr. west. >> so, not only had you told him to run, but you believed that he was running? >> yes, sir. >> and that's when the phone cut off? >> yes, mr. west. >> and then about 20 seconds later you reconnected and you were able to talk with him? >> yes, mr. west. >> and you don't know where he was exactly at that point, correct? >> he had told me he's in the back of his father's/fiancee's house. >> what ubld at that point is that when the call reconnected about 20 seconds later he was already at the back of where -- >> by his father's/fiancee's house. >> by the back of the father's/fiancee's house. >> yes. >> that's where he was staying? >> yes, sir.

>> and -- while you didn't know where that was, your sense of it, your belief was that he was close to home? >> yes, sir. >> so, after he reconnected that's where he said he was? >> yes, sir. >> and then did you continue to talk with him? >> yes, sir. >> and i know you think that's where he was, but what could you tell by his voice at that point? >> breathing hard. >> he was breathing hard. okay. are you sure he was breathing hard or that might have just been wind noise from the signal on the cell phone? >> no, it was him breathing hard. he sounded tired. designee sounded tired from running >> yes, sir. >> that was your impression? >> yes, sir. >> and that he breathed hard.

>> yes, sir. >> and his voice changed too, didn't it? >> yes, sir. >> it got kind of low? >> yes, sir. >> almost like a whisper? >> yes, sir. >> and then he continued to talk with you in that want voice for a couple of minutes? >> yes, sir. >> and about a couple of minutes later he said he saw the man again? >> yes, sir. >> and he saw what he told you was the man was close to where he was? >> yes, sir. >> and that that's when trayvon martin decided to say to this man why are you following me

for? >> you could repeat your question again? >> ah-ha. ah-ha. a couple -- could we have that read back. sorry. i lost track. >> the question or the answer? >> my question. >> at that point trayvon martin decided to say to this man "why your following me, following me for"? >> yes, sir. and you didn't say "why your following me for?" ? >> i'm sorry. >> he said "why are you following me for"? >> no, sir. >> it was just a question hey, mister, what your following me

for? >> he didn't say "hey mister why your following me for"? he just asked the question "why are you following me for?" and the man in the breathing voice "what are you doing around here." >> we've already been through that what he said. >> she answered the question. >> did you finish answer urge question. >> yes, ma'am. >> you may ask your next question. >> so, however, you've been talking to mr. martin on the phone for a couple of minutes at this point? >> yes, sir. >> he was talking kind of low in a whisper? >> yes, sir. >> you said you saw the man close to him? >> yes, sir. >> and then he decided to say to the man "why you following me for?" ? >> objection. asked and answered. >> this will be the last time that's asked. >> yes, sir.

>> and at that point you heard a response of some sort? >> yes, sir. >> either what your talking about," what you doing around here?" >> "what your doing around here," sir. >> that's when you heard initially described as a bump? >> yes, sir. >> when you talked to mr. de la rionda on april 2nd, down at sybrina fulton's home -- >> yes, sir. >> -- at one point in the interview you said to him "so the last thing you heard was some kind of noise like

something hitting somebody" and your answer was "yes." is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> "like something hitting somebody" correct? >> a bump, sir. >> i'll say it again. "so the last thing you heard was some kind of noise like something hitting somebody." >> trayvon got hit. >> you don't know that, do you? >> no, sir. >> you don't know that trayvon got hit. >> he couldn't -- >> you don't know that trayvon didn't at that moment take his fist and drive knit to george zimmerman's face? >> please lower your voice. >> do you? >> no, sir.

>> what you heard after that, though, when you talked to mr. crump was nothing else? that's when the phone cut off? >> yes, sir. >> that's what you read in the letter, correct? >> yes, sir. >> that's what you told miss fulton earlier in the day on march 19th? >> yeas, sir. >> however, on april 2nd, when you were talking to mr. de la rionda in sybrina fulton's home, with her sitting next to you, when mr. de la rionda says, "okay, when you heard that noise something hitting somebody did you they are man say

anything or did you hear trayvon say anything?" do you remember that question? >> yes, sir. >> up to that point you never told anyone that after this hit that you heard anything else? correct? >> yes, sir. >> but you said on that day with miss fulton sitting next to you, "i could hear a little bit"? >> yes, sir. >> you said, "i could hear just like i guess the head phone because the head phone he might have gone off." correct? >> yes, sir. >> mr. de la rionda said, "okay, what could you hear?" in a said "like a little get off" some stuff. >> yes, sir. >> that's the first time you said that to anybody, correct?

>> yes, sir. >> and mr. de la rionda said, "you could tell who was saying that?" >> yes, sir. >> and you said, "i couldn't hear it was trayvon." "i couldn't know it was trayvon, something like that." >> objection. improper. >> if you have what she said you need to read that. >> i have to play it. i can't -- the transcript isn't accurate enough because of the way it was said. we can mark that and maybe come back and play it. >> can i read it, sir? can i read it? i'll tell you what i said. >> you can read my notes on that. you can disregard what i said. >> do you want mine? >> i have mine, i think.

>> she's asked for the transcript so she can tell you what she said. i think we should try that first. >> okay. >> i have a multiple page transcript. leapt me find it.

good morning again. this is thomas roberts in new york. we're watching day two the continue testimony of rachelen tell w -- rachel jeantel. we have our legal team standing by that's watching this as well, veteran prosecutor paul henderson also joining us kendall coffee a former prosecutor, lisa bloom. lisa, let me start with you. how is rachel doing as a witness? i would imagine she's been instructed to answer as little as possible, yes, sir or no, sir. >> yes. on kroengs that's exactly the way you're supposed to answer and today she's adding in sir and even mr. west in a sign of respect for the defense attorney. he's now boring in on probably the most important testimony. she said she heard trayvon martin say "get off get off."

mr. west is pointing out this is inconsistent. >> is west being a bit combative anticipates few moments ago when he was pressing her on whether or not she could attest to the fact that trayvon didn't make some sort of physical motion towards zimmerman? >> i think his demeanor has been pretty patient, pretty good. but she's doing better today. and one thing i think is coming across that may be very difficult for the defense to shake. i think this witness is convincing the jury that trayvon martin was, in fact, being pursued by george zimmerman. now the separate question of whether it was trayvon martin who said "get off get off" that's being attacked very aggressively by the defense. not sure how that will turn out. as of right now i think the jury has the sense that george zimmerman was, indeed, following trayvon martin. >> one thing i want to play from earlier is rachel talking about whether or not she lied under oath. take a listen. >> you lied because you wanted

to give a plausible answer to miss fulton as to why you didn't go to the wake? >> yes, sir. >> but on the april 2nd interview, you were, in fact, under oath? >> yes, sir. >> you knew that? >> yes, sir. >> so, paul, this is a young woman being in an extremely untenable position. she's the star witness for the prosecution. how are they pivoting or trying pivot as quickly as they can off the testimony of what don southwest doing. >> she's answering the questions and as you watch her and listen to her snoinld, so it's clear that this is a real type of witness that we see in cases every day. she is unrehearsed. she's speaking from her heart. she is really making it clear as you watch her, even in her demeanor and tone and how she's answering that she's getting

frustrated but, you know, i don't think all of these things are hurting anyone. i think this is actually helpful to the prosecution and certainly as an expert and as a trial attorney, you know, i want her to answer it a little bit differently or be more articulate in how she's explaining to things but this sfeex h speaks to her credibility. >> let's jump back in. the question was didn't you say to mr. de la rionda, on that tape recorded interview when he asked you if you knew who it was, you said -- >> it was trayvon i heard. >> i know that's what you're saying today. >> objection. improper impeachment. >> if you'll read what she said on that date that would answer that. >> there's an issue on that

about the witness. so, according to this transcript that you just saw, when mr. ron said, "you could tell who was saying that?" you said "i couldn't hear trayvon." >> i couldn't hear. read the next page, sir. >> i'm talking about this one now, correct >> yes, sir. >> on transcript that mr. de la rionda has, on page 14, could you tell who was saying that, your answer was "i could have heard trayvon, i could have heard trayvon." >> objection. read the whole part. >> you want to complete her answer? >> sure. "could you tell who was saying

that?" "i could have heard trayvon." >> trust me they messed up. i couldn't hear trayvon. >> what you said was, on that recording of that interview that you had a just to listen to within the last couple of weeks you said," i could --" >> stop. again. one at a time. submit your answer and then you can ask your next question. don't ask your question while she's trying to finish her answer. complete your answer. >> i had told i could hear trayvon. can you read it. you want to finish reading it, sir. >> on this transcript it says, "you could tell who was saying that?" and the transcript says -- >> die not write that. >> up need to do the same thing.

wait until mr. west finishes his question before you give an answer and the reason i do that because the court reporter can only take down one person talking at a time. so listen to the question. >> so, according to this transcript it says, "you could tell who was saying that?" and your answer "i could have heard trayvon." mr. de la rionda said, "i'm sorry." you said "i could have heard trayvon trayvon." >> i would read the next half a page which gives a complete answer to this issue. >> what i would like to do now, judge is play the recording and threat jury decide what this witness said. >> is it in evidence? is it in evidence? >> i don't think it was

pre-marked as in evidence, but we can offer it. we just want to play that part to see if it refreshes -- >> understand what you want to do. my question is it in evidence and you don't think it is. then i want need to be marked or identification, the state needs to say whether they object or not and then i'll make a ruling as to whether it gets admitted. so if you want to make a not have it marked, you may do so. >> your honor, what we -- okay. >> may we approach the bench and may we approach with the transcript so the court can read

t originalal transcript? >> you may approach. >> we listen to the second day of testimony from rachel jeantel. she was the young lady on phone with trayvon martin in the final minutes much his life before george zimmerman walked up and approached him. this is the testimony that they are going over. what she earlier said in her deposition and she's now being pressed a little harder on the exact words and lisa bloom is with me. lisa i want to bring you in real quickly. what are they trying to get to here with why they are trying to press her over and over again on this same instance. >> because this is the most important part of the cross-examination, of the most important witness that we've heard so far because she says that she was on the phone with trayvon martin and the last thing she heard him say was "get off get off" which implies george zimmerman was assaulting him. in prior statements according to the defense attorney don west she said," i could have heard

trayvon martin saying that," implying maybe she's not clear about whether she heard it at all or whether he was the one saying it. the prosecution says no she didn't say that in a prior statement, she did not make an inconsistent statement because she tends to speak softly perhaps that earlier transcript is incorrect. now they are booting up the audio to play the audio in the courtroom so the jury can compare. >> the jury being of utmost importance here how to figure out how they take the witness, rachel herself. they are in a bench conversation there with the j.p. we'll take a quick break here on msnbc and be back in a moment. nt are baked with brown rice and sweet potato! triscuit has a new snack? no way. way. and the worst part is they're delicious. mmm, you're right. maybe we should give other new things a chance. no way. way. [ male announcer ] we've taken 100% whole grain brown rice and wheat, delicious sweet potato, and savory red bean... and woven them into something unexpected.

the new brown rice triscuit line; with sweet potato and red bean varieties. a new take on an old favorite. with sweet potato and red bean varieties. so wof the house?hink it's got a great kitchen, but did you see the school rating? oh, you're right. hey babe, i got to go. bye daddy! ...but what about when my parents visit? ok. i just love this one... and it's next to a park i love it i love it too. here's our new house... daddy! you're not just looking for a house. you're looking for a place for your life to happen. zillow bulldog: oh, the dog days of summer! bulldog: time to celebrate with your mates, grill a few dogs... eh, hot dogs. bacon burgers... dashchund: mattress discounters' 4th of july sale ends soon? bulldog: that cloud reminds me... radio: the tempur-pedic cloud collection-- bulldog: that's it! radio: now with 48 months interest-free financing-- basset hound: free financing? radio: or get a queen-size sealy gel memory foam mattress for just $497.

bulldog: that's a ringer of a deal! radio: mattress discounters' 4th of july sale ends soon. ♪ mattress discounters

welcome back. we've been watching this morning the second dave rachel jeantel testifying in the george zimmerman trial. right now we just saw before the commercial break attorneys approaching the bench to discuss

with the judge whether or not they will play earlier recorded versions of rachel's deposition, her testimony to the jurors in the room. the jurors have left while they have tried to figure out whether or not that audio will be worth playing. lisa bloom is with me right now as well as kendall coffee and paul henderson. lisa, let me start with you. they want to play the earlier recorded version so the jury itself can make out how she described whether or not trayvon said to rachel "get off get off" >> you're being charitable to the deaf. the defense is hoping the jury will see she made a prior inconsistent statement. this is building towards closing argument. that's where the defense is going. >> paul, let me ask you, because as a prosecutor what would you say to that what lisa is saying and,000 pivot. >> i can see that's exactly what the defense attorney is trying do. she clarified immediately while

she was on the stand," no i did hear let me see it because i can tell you." >> paul, let me interrupt you. >> some stuff. >> up heard get off? >> get off. >> can you tell who was saying that? >> i could have heard trayvon. >> i'm sorry? >> i could have heard trayvon. >> your question to -- >> she said on the recording, "i couldn't hear" -- whatever you can say. >> in. the next part she clears up what it is. the answer. they cut it off mid-stream. >> that's true, judge but mr. ron walked her down the path suggested things to this witness

that she just fold along and agreed. >> i asked you what's your question to this witness. >> what did she say? what did you say right there? >> trayvon, i could hear trayvon, yes. >> let's play it again. >> did you hear the man say anything or did you hear trayvon say anything? >> i could a little bit. >> what did you hear? >> like a smack the head phone, the head phone might have got off. i could hear a little bit. >> what could you hear? >> like a little "get off" >> you heard "get off." >> what exactly did you stla?

would you just tell us exactly what that says? >> could hear trayvon. >> that's your testimony? >> yes, sir. >> okay. i understand the answer. i want to play it for the jury and let them make up their on mind what she said. >> any objection to this being introduced into evidence? >> yes, your honor. >> what's your objection. >> she already stated what is it. the interpretation the defense is arguing this says something different. >> please approach. >> i apologize. they cut off the audio. you've been watching this with me. they played back tear luier deposition the cd of her testimony.

we're hearing hearsay "get off get off" is what she heard but she could not tell it was trayvon orko tell it was trayvon? >> that's the $65,000 question. the we is whether she initially said "i could have heard" or "i could not hear" and then upon further questioning from the prosecutor "no, i could hear." i heard it. trayvon martin is the one who said. that's her story today. the defense showed that story evolved because she's trying to be helpful to the prosecution and martin family. >> kendall, let me ask you, this is a lynch pin to her testimony and the prosecution's case. >> it's lynch pin just as you say, maybe the whole case to the prosecution. remember it's not a crime if george zimmerman followed trayvon martin even confronted him verbally. what's critical in terms of whether self-defense can vab lid did george zimmerman begin the physical aggression, did he

throw the first punch. this testimony that trayvon martin allegedly said "get off get off" is the most important thing we heard to date as to who started the fight. >> it's very important when we hear the fact, the jury will hear the earlier deposition, recorded deposition and then hear rachel speak to it, whether or not they believe that she is reciting on stand properly what they are hearing in the court. >> i think the way that they framed it, if they go back and listen and you see the question asked of her when they play that tape what you could hear. then she gives the information about "get off." she keeps explaining back and forth to him," could have heard" means she could hear and what she did hear and that's why they are fighting so much about this because the defense attorney really wants to undermine that testimony and really wants to try and show that either it wasn't true and she was coached, or she's misremembering or she's

not telling the truth but i think she's coming across really credible to everyone that's watching the totality of her testimony and understand exactly what she's saying. they under why she didn't say that story the first time when she was speaking in front of the mother. they understand why she gave a more complete statement when she talked to law enforcement and now that she's on the witness stand and clarify. the defense attorney is trying reframe it, replay the tape and make it clear to everybody in the courtroom that he disagrees with that statement and that answer she's giving on the stand indicating to everyone that this is what i remember. this is what i said. this is what i heard. and this is what happened on that night that proves that zim areman was the initial afwresor because trayvon was saying get off of me. >> we just saw rachel leave the room for a second while the attorneys are at the bench. we'll take a quick break and we're back after this.

us! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. [ woman ] hop on over! every day we're working to and to keep our commitments. and we've made a big commitment to america. bp supports nearly 250,000 jobs here. through all of our energy operations, we invest more in the u.s. than any other place in the world. in fact, we've invested over $55 billion here in the last five years - making bp america's largest energy investor. our commitment has never been stronger.

running a small business riding against the wind. uphill. every day. we make money on saddles and tubes. but not on bikes. my margins are thinner than these tires. anything that gives me some breathing room makes a difference. membership helps make the most of your cashflow. i'm nelson gutierrez of strictly bicycles and my money works as hard as i do. this is what membership is. this is what membership does.

welcome back. we continue our live coverage of the george zimmerman trial. rachel jeantel, the young woman on the phone with trayvon martin right before the fatal shot that took his life on that night with george zimmerman there, listening to the testimony today of this young woman. they've been going back and forth about whether or not she was able to clearly hear "the voice" of who was saying "get off get off" right before the phone call went dead. lisa let me go back to you. all they need to do from the defense side is create that little bit of doubt in her story for the jurors to hear. >> that's absolutely right. put it another way the prosecution has the burden of proof in this case of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that george zimmerman is a murderer. the only way they can prove it

is through evidence in the courtroom through witnesses like this. so, i disagree with the prior comment that everybody in the courtroom thinks she's a terrific witness and highly credible. i think there's a wide divergence of viewpoints about her. none much us knows what the jury thinks of her. she's told a consistent story from the beginning to end that trayvon martin success followed. but on cross-examination she's been caught in fairly large number of lies that she's had to concede to. not only that a story that's evolved and changed as she told it over and over again. >> one thing was about her age. you can't blame this young woman for the media attention borne out of this being over teenage ever 18 she would be targeted because she's pivotal witness. she fibbed about a couple of years so her identity would be protected. >> in normal human interaction this is true but this is a murder trial where the prosecution has to prove its

case. and the way that the defense goes after witnesses in any case is to attack their credibility. and when you have one lie, you can explain it. when you have two lies perhaps you can explain it. when you're up to four or five or six it's a problem for the witness's credibility. >> paul, i know you're jumping to get in here. >> i am. it's not that i think she's a terrific witness but i think she's a credible witness and i think people under her story because i understand her story and i'm listening to what she's saying and there's ghoing consistencies any time you tell a story more than once. i don't think they are lies. i think that in this jury panel this jury full of women, full of mothers that they are listening to her and understand what she's saying and it's not that she's a professional witness because she's never been in a murder trial before. she's never been asked questions like this where they are focusing on her tone, her mannerism, what type of words she's using, as she's describing what she's understands but come

ago cross at least clearly to me and i believe to this jury that her story is credible, she believes that she heard him, she believes what she knows about that evening, that she's communicating to them and that's what's going matter and that's why they stopped that point and you see the defense attorney spinning around and trying to show the transcript, trying to challenge her with what he's hearing on the tape because he doesn't like her answer where she's clarifying and affirming for the jury and affirm forge him leapt me tell you what i meant when i said that because i did hear and this is what i heard. that's what's coming across. >> i'll ask the panel to stand by because we're in this brief recess. once rachel begins to testify once again we'll go back. i want to get on to some other news. nelson mandela's conhas improved overnight. mandela remains in critical condition but now stable and well wishers and supporters continue to gather outside the hospital. speaking in senegal, president

obama offered these thought about mandela. >> i think he's a hero for the world. and if and when he pass from this place, one thing i think we'll all know is that his legacy is one that will linger on throughout the ages. >> we can see the crowds behind you. the good news about mandela's condition has to be a good word as spreading on the streets about how well the 94-year-old is doing. >> yeah. right, thomas. people are blaerng it and there are growing crowds out here. if i move gently out of the way you can take a closer look. that's the crowd right outside of the entrance to the hospital and there family members came out of the hospital to collect some of the flowers that had been left for nelson mandela and one of them spoke and said thank

you for all the love you've been showing and said nelson mandela stable. we heard from an interview from one of mandela's daughters i won't lie it doesn't look good but when we speak to him he responds and tries to open his eyes. he's still there. he might be waning off but still there. at the same time nbc news has conducted an interview with another of nelson mandela's daughters zindzi and she had this to say. >> my father met with president obama. positively the other day i said to him obama is coming. when i spoke about president obama his eyes just opened and gave me the sweetest most gentle smile. >> and zindzi men dandela talkio

nbc news and suggesting her family would welcome a visit by president obama if doctors loud it. >> do we know when the president will be traveling to that area of the country? >> we expect him in a day or so. what we're told is that there hasn't been a formal request for president obama to come here to the hospital. that's what zindzi mandela says. there's many things for them to consider. clearly the conversation is being had. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. so we have a victory for american democracy. those were president obama's words this morning as he gave his first on camera reaction to yesterday's dual landmark decisions. the president said this about what comes next. >> there are a whole lot of implications that flow from i want because the supreme court

did not make a blanket ruling that applies nationally but rather lifted up the ability of states to recognize the dignity and respect of same sex marriage, and that the federal government couldn't negate the decision by those states. >> now here's what's happened in the last 24 hours since these historic rulings came down. president obama has asked attorney general eric holder with overseeing changes in cabinet agencies in response to the doma ruling. defense department is beginning to distribute spousal benefits. 84-year-old edie windsor said she cried when she heard this news. >> for someone tonight who remains opposed what do you most want to say to them? >> maybe trust me. okay. i think it would be better for countries by giving dig to when

this beautiful person i lived with. okay. and today my country gave dignity and appreciated who she was. >> my country gave dignity. joining me right now is james essex a member of edie wind sorn's legal team. congratulations to you on what we saw yesterday, certainly edie is now going down in history as an icon for civil rights in this country, a true hero. but thanks to edie with doma gone it means lesbians and gays who are legally married are eligible to a host of benefits, 138 that they were obstructed from before. we still have 37 states that don't recognize marriage equality. that's about 70% of the u.s. population. so how are people in the country supposed to recognize the two americas that we're living in because of this

>> well, look, you're right yesterday was a great day for lgbt americans and all americans because we saw america's equality prevail. what we're seeing in the country as a whole is a continuing conversation and evolution in public opinion around the freedom to marry for same sex couples. i think america is coming to realize that gay people want to get married for the same reasons that straight people want to get married, to demonstrate our love and commitment for each other in front of friends and family. >> one thing i want to point occupant because this is important and i'm sure you've read through this but injustice scalia's dissent. there's more sweeping legislation for all 50 states is only a matter of time. scalia said as far as this court is concerned no one should be fooled. it is just a matter of listening and waiting for the other shoe. how do you interpret that? >> look.

he's saying look the majority in the doma only decided or purports to decide the constitutionality of the defense of marriage act whether the federal government could continue to existing marriages of same-sex coupl couples. he's right that many people in america want to get married, lesbians and gay men want to get married and the country is on a journey and the country is getting to a place of equality in an incredibly quick way. last november 1st there was six states plus the district of column that that aloud same-sex couples to marry and none of those marriages had got federal respect. today we have 13 states plus the district of columbia and federal respect for all those marriages. now we were at 11% of the country, now we're at 30%. the momentum on this issue is astounding. >> we have leap frogfroggedleap

thanks to edie windsor. >> she is a treasure and hero for all of us. >> yes, i completely agree. we'll go back now. i understand that rachel jeantel is back on the witness stand in sanford, florida. >> because it sound like his voice? >> because it sound like his voice? >> yes, ma'am. >> sound like his voice or kind of sounded like his voice? >> it sounded like his voice. >> so help me understand this better. as far as what you said on the recording, when mr. de la rionda said could you tell who was saying that, are you sayi iningt what the jury just heard was you saying i could hear it was va von. >> yes, sir. >> you didn't say i couldn't hear it was trayvon or i couldn't know it was trayvon. >> i said i could hear it's

trayvon. that's how i speak. you cannot hear me that well. >> all right. you were having trouble hearing him because he -- >> he had had trouble hearing me. >> now i'm really confused. are you saying that -- >> the state attorney had trouble hearing me. him. the suit? the bald-headed? >> that doesn't help much, does it? >> nope. >> so, i'm sorry that i'm not quite clear on what you're saying. you're saying first of all to the jury that what you said is "i could hear it was trayvon. >> i could hear it was trayvon. >> then he asked you again and you you said, "that's why i was calling his name." >> yes. >> but by then, the phone was disconnected? >> yes. >> so you heard -- when you gave

the -- when you answered the questions and gave for the first time that you heard this little "get off" on april 2nd, the phone cut off right after you heard "get off." >> yeah, got cut off. you could hear grass sound. wet grass. and you hear trayvon just saying get off, get off. i was screaming saying trayvon, trayvon, then the phone, yeah, hung up. it ended. the phone ended. >> what? >> the phone had ended. ended. >> had what? >> ended. >> so what you're saying is that after you heard something

hitting somebody, then you heard grass? >> repeat your question again. >> after you say that you heard something hitting somebody, then you heard grass? >> i didn't say that. didn't say someone was hitting somebody. i heard "get off." that's what i said. i start hearing trayvon "get off," sir. >> at the beginning of the recording we just played, mr. did he la rionda said, "so the last thing you heard was some kind of noise like something hitting somebody, and you said yeah. do you agree? >> i said yes, sir. >> you just heard it, right?do ? >> i said yes, sir. >> you just heard it, right? >> did you hear that? >> no, sir. >> could we play that again? >> no, sir. go ahead, sir. >> can we play that part again?

>> go ahead, sir. >> so the last thing you heard was some kind of noise like something hitting somebody? >> yeah. yeah. >> did you hear that? >> yes, sir. >> is that you? >> yes, sir. >> and then when mr. de la rionda said -- basically after that, did you hear the man say anything or did you hear trayvon say anything, and you said, i could hear a little bit. is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> so this is the point where, in prior statements you you said the phone cut off.

correct? >> yes, sir. >> but today, in miss fulton's living room, and he asked you, "could you hear anything else," you said, "yeah, as a matter of fact, i could hear a little bit." correct? >> yes, sir. >> and the first thing you said, well, i could just hear like i guess because the headphone might have come off -- or -- so you're saying there that you heard the had headphone, in your mind -- >> came off. >> -- came off. then the next thing you heard was grass? >> no, sir. >> can you describe that for me, when you say you could hear grass, or even wet grass, like you said yesterday, could you tell me how wet grass sounds?

>> what? leaves rolling all over. >> when you described the sound as you could hear wet grass, what is it that you actually heard that led you to make that opinion? >> somebody rolling all -- rolling on top of the grass. >> are you saying now that you heard people rolling on the grass? >> objection. miskrish mischaracterization of what she stated. >> sustained. you asked her to describe and she gave you what she could give as a description. >> well, let's hone in on that just a second. so you said in this interview, and then you said today, that

after the sound of something hitting somebody, and you think the headphone might have been off, you heard wet grass, and i want to know what it is you actually heard that made you form than opinion. >> the headset. >> i'm sorry? >> the headset. all i could hear was somebody rolling on -- on the headset. because trayvon had his headset. >> are you saying now that you heard somebody rolling on the headset? >> yeah -- talking about trayvon. it had to be talking about trayvon. that's where his headset be at.

>> are you saying that the sound of wet grass that you used to describe this yesterday, as you describe it today, you're saying that you believe that was people rolling around on the ground? >> yes, sir. >> and what's that based on? what is the sound you heard that led to that conclusion? >> i really don't know how to describe it -- >> i didn't -- >> i really did not know how to describe that. >> do you know how one of those headsets works? >> like this. >> right. so if something brushes against it, you hear just like you heard

here. >> yes, sir. >> so it could have been fabric, could have been wind, could have been a thousand other things than somebody rolling on ground. couldn't it? >> yes, sir. >> and for that matter, you don't even know what "get off" means, whether that means somebody on top saying that the person underneath was saying "get off," or somebody was backing up, saying "get off," or -- >> objection. argumentative. >> let me hear the rest of the question. >> -- or what may have been meant if in fact you even heard it? >> i did hear "get off," sir. >> but you don't know what it meant because you didn't see any of this. correct? >> no, sir. >> and you don't know now how long that took from the point that you heard something