a good day for the defense or a wash? let's play hard ball. good evening. i'm joy reid in for chris matthews. leading off tonight, the final seconds. what happened in the last moments before the shooting death of trayvon martin? in court today, one of george zimmerman's neighbors, john good, said he heard what sounded like a fight that night and stepped outside his town house to see what was going on. what he saw, according to the neighbor, was what appeared to be zimmerman lying on his back with trayvon martin straddling and punching him. he used a mixed martial arts

term, ground and pound, to describe what martin was doing. good also testified there was a call for help, likely from the man at the bottom who he believed was zimmerman. now that was different from the testimony we heard from another neighbor yesterday who thought it was zimmerman who was on top. joining us now, arise legal contributor seema, joseph haynes davis, former federal prosecutor kendall coffey and defense attorney dana swickle. let's get into this question of who was on top. seema, yesterday we had testimony from a neighbor who they played back her very tearful 911 call. and she testified she thought the bigger man, the larger man, meaning george zimmerman was on top. today you have john good testifying he thinks that it was george zimmerman on the bottom.

is it a wash? >> no, it's not. what i don't understand is don't people realize that during the wrestling, they could have switched positions? why isn't this being brought out? and i think it's a reasonable explanation for the differing statements. >> right. and kendall, that is a good point, because john good testified he saw only about ten seconds of the fight that was taking place. and so you do have these sort of cancelling one another out questions about who was on top. but why would the prosecution call a witness in the case of mr. good, who seems to be backing up the defense's contention that zimmerman was the one on the bottom of the struggle, at least at a certain point? >> well, the prosecution knew this witness was going to be testifying. they obviously knew it wasn't going to be helpful for them. they very wisely put him in their case, kind of in the middle of it, so that he doesn't become the critical showpiece part of the defense case later on. accomplishes a couple of things.

first of all, the prosecution isn't hiding anybody. that's valuable. second, though, he is somewhat in the middle of it. the prosecution is hoping that as other things happen, the jury is going to spend less time thinking about this witness. because one thing is for sure, if during the verdict and the time of the deliberations for the verdict, if the jury keeps asking for the testimony to be read back to them of this witness, that's not a good sign for the prosecution. >> okay. really just quickly, i want to play john good's 911 call, or at least part of it so our viewers can take a listen. go ahead. >> you can hear somebody yelling for help? >> um, i'm pretty sure the guy's -- holy [ bleep ]. >> okay. we have several people calling in also. anything else that you heard? >> no. a guy yelling help. oh, my god. um, no, there is a guy with a flashlight in the backyard now. i think there is flashlights and there is a guy -- i don't know if that's a cop. oh, my god. >> okay. we've had several calls. did you hear when you heard

voices it was just one person -- >> there's two guys -- there's two guys in the backyard with flashlights. >> okay. and there is a black guy down. it looks like he has been shot and he is dead. >> okay. >> he is laying, and there is multiple people calling right now, i'm thinking. >> okay. >> i have several officers going out there, okay? >> okay, thank you. >> thank you, bye-bye. >> okay, and now i want you guys to take a look at another piece of sound from john good. and this is where it gets a little bit murkier. this is where he is attempting to describe who was hitting whom. so let's see if we have that sound about who was punching who in that fight. >> now, let's go to this case that night that you saw. the person who you now know to be trayvon martin was on top, correct? >> correct. >> and he was the one who was raining blows down on the person on the bottom, george zimmerman, right? >> that's what it looked like. >> okay. and i said a moment ago you were

literal, because you couldn't actually see fist hit face, right? >> no. >> because it was blocked by what? >> i didn't say it was blocked. i said it was dark out. >> now defense attorney mark o'meara also asked good about who he thought was yelling. here is that sound. >> do you think it was the person on the bottom who was screaming for help? >> rationally thinking, i would think so. >> as a matter of fact, i think you said if it had been trayvon martin screaming for help, since his back was to you, it would have had to be going -- the yell would be going away from you and i think you said it would have to bounce off the wall before you heard it? >> and i think it would sound different. that's why in my head i thought it was coming from the person on the bottom. >> now joseph, i want to ask you about that. because it sounds like he is saying logical inference, that's what it could have been based on the position he saw trayvon martin in. he did not say the words "i'm sure i heard that it was the guy on the bottom zimmerman screaming for help."

mark o'meara tried to lead him there, but he didn't get him there. >> no. and you have to remember, that night it was raining. it was dark. it's a tussle. it's a fight. it's a rumble, as we say. so that witness did the best he could. i remember him testifying that his wife didn't really want him to go outside. so he didn't want to go outside. he was doing the best he could to recollect as to what was going on. the other thing i want to point out, that also contradicts the young lady from miami who worked for the construction company who testified at the end of the day the day before, which was yesterday, of course, that by and through an interpreter that all she could see was red and black, or something red and dark. and i'm paraphrasing her, because -- and she saw that on top. in other words, that would lead one to believe that she may have saw -- may have seen mr. zimmerman on top. and, again, sometimes when testimony is being conducted

through an interpreter, some communications can be misconstrued. >> and dana swickle, the other thing about john good, although he did on first blush appear to be better for the defense, he testified to what he thought were punches being thrown. but the defense has all along made the claim that trayvon martin was straddling george zimmerman and banging his head into the ground. we still have not heard any witness so far in these two days of testimony say that they saw that. is that a problem for the defense? >> i don't think so, because when you listen to what he was saying today, the pounding -- you know, the ground and pound, and that he saw his back facing him, and he believed george zimmerman was on the bottom. and then you look at george zimmerman's injuries that are consistent with what that sounds like, if you recall those photos of george zimmerman's head, they look like he got scratches on the back of his head. one could think that it was when his head was being pounded against the ground. that's what it looked like. it didn't look like someone

punched him in the head. it looked like something dug into the back of his head, scratched his head, and that's why blood was dripping down. and there wasn't a big punch mark or a big bruise or swelling like one would get when it was hit. so i think the injuries, if they tie it together, they pull it together with the injuries and the consistency of the injuries with what one could believe took place, i think it's fine. >> we'll be back with how people reacted to it. [ female announcer ] the best thing about this bar

it's not a candy bar. 130 calories 7 grams of protein the new fiber one caramel nut protein bar.

the day building a play set begins with a surprise twinge of back pain... and a choice. take up to 4 advil in a day or 2 aleve for all day relief. [ male announcer ] that's handy. ♪

welcome back to "hardball." a focal point of the george zimmerman trial so far has been rachel, a friend of trayvon martin's, who was been described

as the prosecution's key witness. she was on the phone with him just before he was killed. defense attorney don west spent hours over the course of two days, trying to discredit jeantel. and while he did succeed in poking holes in some aspects of her story, such as whether she told an attorney for the martin family that she heard trayvon martin yell "get off, get off" during the confrontation, the core of what she said all along has remained consistent, that on the night of his death, trayvon was being followed by a man who turned out to be george zimmerman. still, a lot of the attention on jeantel has had to do with her demeanor, her diction, and the slang she used. and that has raised some tough questions about the role race and culture will play in how the jury responds. for more on that we're still joined by our panel of experts, seema iyer, joseph haynes davis, kendall coffey, and dana swickle. this did create a lot of buzz on social media. there was a lot of conversation about the way rachel jeantel sounded. how important is that going to be in this case? because forgetting all the social media talk, the jury has to evaluate her too. >> race, culture, politics

always come into play when picking a jury and when presenting your witnesses. what disturbs me is that there is so much negative attention around this young lady, and we are not giving these jurors enough credit. the conversation, at least on social media, is this divide, this lack of connection between those juries and that young lady. why do we assume that just a bunch of white people can't connect with racial jeantel? why are we thinking so little? this -- her demeanor is arguably good for the prosecution, bad for the defense, or vice versa. her demeanor is her. she was authentic. she was honest. and just because you tell a few lies outside the courtroom, like we do every single day doesn't mean that you're not being honest inside the courtroom. i don't think any of us in good conscience can say that that young lady was not presenting herself honestly. >> but kendall, at the same time now, she did stick to the core of her story, which was that it was trayvon martin that was

being followed, that he was not the person that confronted george zimmerman. that part holds. but it is problematic that the way she comes across could simply cause whatever she said to be rejected by the jury, and was it a mistake therefore for the prosecution not to try to get more ethnic balance on that jury during the voir dire? >> well, i think the prosecution got the best jury they could under the circumstances. jury selection is not just a game of guesswork, it's a game of chance. and the folks come through. you do the best you can. but here is what is different about a murder trial. this is not a jury that is just going to shut off because there is a key witness that is maybe different than most of the folks that they know. i think this jury was working very hard and very attentively to get to the bottom of what she was saying. they know how important this is. and as you noted, the essential elements of her testimony stayed together and rang true. i think where this jury is right now after the first week, they're probably uncertain about a lot of things.

they may not be sure what to make of rachel jeantel. but they believe trayvon martin was followed, was pursued by zimmerman, and whatever else after that came about because george zimmerman ignored the dispatcher and went looking for this guy. >> because of the focus on jeantel, i want to play just a little bit of sound from it. let's take a look at this exchange with the defense attorney. >> of course, you don't know if he was telling you the truth or not. >> why you need to lie about that, sir? >> maybe if he decided to assault george zimmerman, he didn't want you to know about it? >> that's very retarded, sir. >> i'm sorry? >> that's really retarded to do that, sir. >> dana, there are some people who criticized don west for being really tough in rachel jeantel on how he questioned her. how tough to go given the age of the person on the witness stand and given the way that you as the attorney, as well as the person on the stand has to come

across? >> i think as a defense attorney as it relates to each and every witness, you start off with a game plan. you start off with i'm going to go this way, i'm not going to be difficult, i'm going to be difficult. if they give me a hard time, i'm going to try to keep my cool. but we are talking about a murder trial here. we do have a man's life on the line. and i think what really went on is i think he intended to start off being not necessarily nice, because that's not his job, and you know what? it is his job to be somewhat tough on her. and it is his job to try to catch her in lies and make her probably make mistakes on jury stand. and you know what? maybe a part of his job is to get the jury to dislike her. so i think what happens is as you're questioning a witness, depending on how it's going, i think that's when you do your game plan and you manipulate her, you maneuver along the way. i don't think he was too hard on her. i think he did what he needed to do. i think he tried his best. and you know, with this particular witness, you either love her or you hate her.

you either think she was authentic or you thought that she was rude. but it just depends on each and every juror. you would be surprised what the jurors are probably thinking. we all think we know what they're thinking, but i guarantee you they're thinking other points. >> that's a really good point because there really were polarized reactions to rachel jeantel. there were some people who thought look, she is really authentic. she was being herself. her first language was creole and she also speaks spanish and english was the third language she learned. she is not sophisticated. she certainly wasn't dumb because she was listening to she was asked and sticking to her story. is race really the elephant in the room in the way that people perceive this young woman? >> race is indeed immutable. but you have to remember also the judge, judge nelson, debra nelson, who is just an outstanding judge in the 18th judicial circuit of seminole county, issued an order that

race could not be used in this trial in terms of using it to quote, unquote, talk about the profiling effect. >> we're going to have more in a moment. this is "hardball," the place for politics. i was just a concerned mom, with a crazy dream. a wish that there was a company that i could rely on, that did all of the hard work for me. i'm jessica alba, and the honest company was my dream. [ male announcer ] legalzoom has helped a million businesses successfully get started, including jessica's. launch your dream at legalzoom today. call us. we're here to help. ... you thought wrong. seize the summer with up to 50% off hotels at travelocity. aren't always the most obvious. take the humble stevia plant, with a surprising secret to share:

sweetness. truvia sweetener. zero-calorie sweetness, born from the stevia leaf. from nature, for sweetness. like other precious things that start off white, it yellows over time. fact is, when it comes to your smile, if you're not whitening, you're yellowing. crest 3d white whitestrips go below the enamel surface to whiten as well as $500 professional treatments, at a fraction of the cost. guaranteed, or your money back. crest. life opens up when you do. want a whiter smile today? try 2 hour express whitestrips.

want a whiter smile today? and now i will break this plate in half with my bare hands. there we go... the perfect healthy meal. half of the plate is fruits and veggies. and the other half is full of whole grains and lean protein with low fat dairy on the side. now you can always have meal on your hands that's nutritious and delicious... the more you know.

welcome back to "hardball." we've talked about the demeanor of witnesses. now let's look at the demeanor of some of the attorneys, particularly don west and mark o'meara, both for the defense. first, here is west with rachel jeantel yesterday. >> trayvon got hit. >> you don't know that, do you? >> no, sir. >> you don't know that trayvon got hit. >> he couldn't -- he had to -- >> you don't know that trayvon didn't at that moment take his fist and drive it into george zimmerman's face. >> please lower your voice. >> do you? >> no, sir.

>> and contrast that with the defense attorney mark o'mara today as he began questioning witness jonathan good. >> morning, sir. >> morning. >> don't really want to be here, do you? >> i guess it has to be done. >> sure. you were very reluctant to be involved in the case at all, correct? >> correct. >> how does an attorney's demeanor affect not just how the jury sees the attorney, but more importantly, how the jury views the witnesses? we're back with seema iyer, joseph haynes davis, kendall coffey, and dana swickle. dana, you talked about this a little bit before. does it seem like they're playing a little good cop/bad cop, or this is a question of witness we like, witness we're not so keen on? >> you know, i think that's possible. i think that don west had a job. i think he tried to do what he could. did he seem a little bit aggressive? i'm sure he was. but he was trying to get the point across that most people i think could be missing at this point because they're focusing so much on everyone's demeanor. no one really knows what happened when they confronted each other.

no one knows who threw the first blow. no one knows how it escalated. nobody knows. and no one can say that. and i think that's a very important point. and i think probably by the time he was questioning her at that moment, he probably just got so frustrated and was just wanting to pound that one point home. she didn't know if trayvon threw the first punch. she didn't know if it was zimmerman who did. she didn't know. and so what seemed to be aggressive might not have been. and then you have a mark o'meara. it was a completely different witness. what that witness was testifying to could have helped the defense. so i don't think that they were good cop/bad cop. i think it's just once again how you treat a witness because how things are going and what they're saying. >> and i hate to butt in.

the fact of the matter is that witness was a defense witness. the young man, mr. -- >> well, he was called by the prosecution. >> he was called by the prosecution because the prosecution wanted to take the air out of a defense witness. but when on cross by mr. o'mara, because it's his witness, the fact of the matter is he is going to treat him differently. on the other hand, with my esteemed colleague mr. west, he has an ethical professional duty to zealously advocate for the accused. that's the cornerstone of our constitution. now, would i have liked to see him be lighter with ms. jeantel? of course i would, because i'm human like everybody else. but at the end of the day, we have the accused. the accused has to prove nothing. the prosecution has to prove everything. and he is entitled to a zealous

defense, and that is indeed what he is getting. >> seema, don west may have been trying to do something else, too, we were just talking at the break about. he asked ms. jeantel on the second day, on day two of her testimony, you seem a little different. your demeanor seems different. what do you think was going on? >> everybody wanted to know what was behind that question. i will tell you. mr. west was trying to get at whether rachel jeantel was coached by the prosecution that evening. now, here is the rule. prosecutors cannot talk to their witnesses when they're on cross-examination. same thing for the defense. the bottom line is if you -- if you're testifying, joy, and you're on cross, and i called you to the stand, i cannot talk to you when you are on cross. what we think happened is that ms. jeantel's lawyer, he probably said to her, okay, let's bring it down a few notches. >> right. >> throw in a few more sirs, stay calm, and just be prepared for a long day. >> and i'll give the final comment to you, kendall. we are talking a lot about the demeanor of the attorneys because it does sort of play into the end result with the

jury. they have to at some level trust at least if not like the attorneys. and it's interesting, because this is a case that is sort of in reverse, where you have the aggressiveness really coming from the defense, not from the prosecutors. >> well, jurors don't have to love lawyers. they have to find that they're credible. and i think, frankly, all the lawyers in the courtroom are doing that so far. as lawyers, we all talk about the lawyers and are they being lovable and are they being clever or glib. but at the end of the day, this jury is trying desperately to get it right. this is in many ways certainly the most important, highly visible decision they'll ever make in their lives. so they're paying a lot more attention to the witnesses and trying to find out what really happened on that night. >> and kendall, one other quick question to you about rachel jeantel and the way she was prepared by the prosecution. they interviewed her before. bernie de la rionda had interviewed her before. they knew she had limited english from proficiency. would it have been smarter for them to use an interpreter with her rather than allow to her to go on the stand for those two long, excruciating days of testimony? >> i don't think so. because interpreters seem to create just such a barrier.

for better for bitter, she came off as real. and i think ultimately on the essential points of her testimony, she was believable. i'm not sure where the jury is on her statement that it was trayvon who said get off, but the rest of what she had to say that was significant, i think the jury believed her. >> thank you, seema iyer, joseph haynes davis, kendall coffey and dana swickle. and after nine years of working at walmart, i know savings. and right now we've got everything you need for a great summer. this 5-piece dining set on clearance, save over $49! marco! polo! and these op swim separates, on rollback you save over 20%. this nook hd's on rollback. you save $40. great for summer reading. coolers on rollback. sunscreen on rollback. and these towels on rollback. so soft. get more summer for your money at walmart's super summer savings event going on right now at your local walmart. 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

welcome to main street u.s.a. we're in illinois, a town that had to reinvent itself many times. we're talking to small business owners about what they had to do to keep their community and their business thriving. that's coming up next on "your business." >> small businesses are