tonight. and i don't remember much after that. >> lisa, that sounds like george zimmerman is talking about john manolo, the person who came out with a flashlight. he says he said to him, help me, he's killing me but john didn't testify to that. is that a problem for the defense. >> it's absolutely a problem for the defense. every inconsistency in his story is a problem for george zimmerman. that's why most defense attorneys don't want defendants talking to law enforcement. you have the right to remain silent. most defense attorneys want their clients to exercise it. he did not do that. he gave multiple statements inconsistent with his own story or another witness he's story that's a problem for him. >> chris serrino is on the stand now testifying. let's go back and listen in. >> you wanted us to believe that you were concerned about having a flashlight to move back where you just ran? what's up with that? >> it sounds like you're looking

for him. >> you brought a flashlight with you. >> yes. >> what if you don't see him. >> i'm going to catch the bad guy. the punk can't get away. >> this is an interrogation room. we are in a whole different area right here. this is why i took you out of there. so i can recall your memory and let you see if they say if you say you walked back to your car -- is there anything you need clarify right now? did you pursue this kid? did you want to catch him? >> i told you. >> why did you tell -- >> i was frustrated that i couldn't think of the street name. >> you were going to be back in your car. in less than 15 or 20 seconds. why would they need to call you? >> i felt like i didn't give

them an adequate description of where i was. >> the impression would be you're going to continue looking. when they get here, you just tell them where you are going to be. see what i'm saying? never mind. call me when they get -- meaning i might not be at my car. >> we're working for you here, okay? >> yes. >> open your mind. if there's anything that needs to be changed, this is it. we can't do this anymore. play this one. >> 911. >> hear that voice in the background? >> yes, sir. >> i'm not sure -- 911. you need police medical? >> i'm not sure.

there's someone screaming outside. >> that's. >> you what's the address they're near? >> 1211. >> yes. >> okay. and is it a male or female? >> can you hear yourself? >> you don't know why? >> i don't know why. but i don't know. >> does he look hurt? >> i want to go out there and want to know what's going on. >> they're coming. >> yes. >> what is is it -- >> at one point did he smother you? right before you shot him? >> yes, sir. >> immediately behind the shot?

>> 911. you need police medical. >> i'm not sure. there's someone screaming outside. >> what's the address they're near? >> 111. >> yes. >> okay. is it a male or a female. >> help me, help me. >> it sounds like a male. >> you don't know why? >> i don't know why. i don't know. >> send someone. >> does he look hurt? >> i and the can't see him. i want to know what's going on. >> they're coming. >> you think he's yelling help? >> yes. >> what is your phone number? >> gunshot. >> can you recall -- at what

point the suffocation happened? prior to you shooting him, he was on you, correct? >> yes. >> and were you able to reach for your holster? >> yes, sir. >> you shot him at point blank range. he was on top of you, right? >> yes, sir. >> and all that yelling, nobody came out to help you. i can't pinpoint where you were smothering. nobody said they saw you smothering -- they didn't see the smothering part. so ---ing >> screaming because it sounded like it's continuous. something's going on. it's got to stop. we don't hear it stop. >> we don't hear him at all either. is he being quiet? >> is he whispering to you or something? >> is he calm? >> no. he's like angry. >> i don't hear him though.

>> he's on top of me. shut the [ bleep ]. >> when he saw you had a gun that the point? he might have saw you had a gun. was he standing before you punched him? was it -- he couldn't have gotten a glimpse of it accidentally? >> all the time -- >> and once again, getting back to the beginning, what was the qualifications from punching you other than the fact you were following him that you can think of it? why was he so mad at you? >> i've gone through it a million times. >> investigator, at about 52 minutes when you're playing the recording, you specifically say, are you hearing yourself? and mr. zimmerman says that

doesn't even sound like me. do you recall that? >> yes, sir. >> and due this part to the interview, you showed him some photographs. >> yes, i did sir. >> you showed him a photograph of a cell phone, the victim's cell phone that was on the ground. >> i did. >> and you told him that this might have been videotaped. were you bluffing him? were you lying to him to get him to say instinct. >> yes, sir, i was. >> okay. >> you also showed him photographs of the victim. is that correct? >> yes, i did. >> okay. >> your honor, may i have a moment. >> yes, you may. >> need a recess? >> yes. >> yes. okay, court will be in recess for 15 minutes. ladies and gentlemen, put your note pads face down on the chair. follow deputy jarvis back into the jury room. >> and. >> we're watching the trial of george zimmerman. the court is going to take a 15-minute recess.

i want to go to lisa bloom and ask what we just heard which was audio of the interview that chris serrano and doris he singleton did when they were interviewing george zimmerman a few days after the shooting. very interesting questions. they played back the audio of the screaming, the 911 screaming. chris continually asked him at what point were you being smothered? i don't hear it and i don't hear trayvon martin. we noefl george zimmerman testified specific things he said martin was saying to him. how significant is that? >> i don't know about you, but i'm glad to hear george zimmerman have to answer tough questions. i've been watching every bit of this trial. this is the first time that he had to sit and answer some very difficult questions about the case. i think especially the question about smothering is really important because george zimmerman says he was screaming. he was screaming for help. that's him on that 911 call, right? well, if he's being smothered, if trayvon martin's hands are over his nose and mouth, how is

he screaming? i think that's an outstanding point made by detective serrino. what was the provocation for martin punching had im? that's always been a weak part of his story. he says he came around and out of nowhere after a brief bit of conversation, what's your problem? >> i don't have a problem. you have a problem now. bam, trayvon martin punched him hard in the face. that seems hard to believe. i think what this detective is trying to get out of him, were there other words exchanged, other threatening behavior. >> john kelley, another interesting part, they played back the actual walk through that will investigator chris serino did with zimmerman in which he showed himself going around a t but then he says he was walking all the way across to find another street and as lisa bloom pointed out earlier in the hour, there are only three streets in twin lakes. he says he doubled back but also claims that trayvon martin, rather than just turning around and going home, he double backed

and went towards zimmerman's car. did any of that make sense to you? >> zimmerman's statements are like everything else in the case, they're ambiguous, they're conflicting and there's no reason his own statement should be any different. but yeah, it's problematic for him. is it a game-changer? i don't think so but it's not going to help him at all. the prosecution has a very difficult case here and zimmerman's helping the prosecution with his statements a little bit. >> jonathan capehart, there's been a lot made earlier before we saw these witnesses today about what people have called the demonization of trayvon martin making him the aggressor, making him library to be aggressive. does the re-enactment, the recreation of what happened, does it cut against that and does it make it more ambiguous who was the aggressor on that day? >> i think it does. i do think it makes it more ambiguous who was the aggressor

here. but these, the interview, the interviews between george zimmerman and chris serino are vital. they are very important. i listened to those, to all the tapes they were playing in court today a year ago. they are a treasure trove of information. serino just admitted to the prosecution that the statement that he made about you know trayvon martin's phone having a video camera on it and there might be stuff on there we don't node about, his bluffing the guy and pushing him and as lisa said, this is the first time we've actually gotten to hear in court george zimmerman speak for himself. and if you notice, through all the things that we've heard, the interviews we have heard, george zimmerman give, the last one that we were able to hear where suddenly gorge o george zimmerman has gone from giving specific details and information to it's all very fuzzy.

but singleton, officer singleton and serino press him on prior statements, press him on details and of the facts as george zimmer han had presented them to him in two prior interviews. so you know, i think that for people who are concerned that the prosecution where rachel jeantel, the case is back to where the prosecution has a chance to put all of zimmerman's inconsistencies on the table for the jury to hear. they've heard a lot of things up till this point and now i wouldn't be surprised if a lot of them are scratching their heads asking wait a minute. but that runs counter to what we heard last week. a lot of the facts as they were presented last week. >> and goldie taylor, there's been a lot made of rachel

jeantel's demeanor in the case. how are you struck by george zimmerman's demeanor? does his calm demeanor strike you in any way? >> i find it disconcerting. you have just taken a human life, whether that was purposely, on accident, on unintentionally, it doesn't matter. you have just ended a human life and you are calm. so that's a bit disconcerting to me. he has had a number of inconsistencies today. not just with himself but with the physical evidence as we know it. he said that trayvon martin jumped out of bushes. there were no bushes. he said martin sat up and said you got me. after he had been shot in the heart. so i just think that we may not ever get to see george zimmerman on the witness stand being cross-examined. but what we're going to havinging issing this prosecution cross-examining these tapes of his interviews

using other witnesses to do so. >> okay. i want the panel. >> that's going to be problematic. >> nbc's kerry sanders is joining me live now from florida. give us the latest from sanford. >> joy, i'm listening to the conversation here. i know you know this but i think it's kind of interesting. if we go back to the beginning when this happened, there was a fair amount of criticism of the sanford police department, that they had done sloppy work and not pursuing this aggressively. now i'm hearing as this is presented in court, our legal exbers are saying it looks like the police department tried to use an investigative technique of trying to trick george zimmerman, that they pressed him on the facts and came back. remember, this investigator, chris serino, the detective leading the investigation actually prepared the paperwork for an arrest. it was a manslaughter charge. but it was the police department and ultimately the state attorney in this district that chose not to pursue charges.

that's when the governor appointed a special prosecutor and the second degree murder charges came 44 days later after trayvon martin's death. it's interesting because if you go back at the beginning, the sanford police department as you well know, took a lot of heat on this. >> they really did. you're absolutely right because there was a call actually in to the state attorney's office for advice what to do that fight. there is a big difference between the decision not to arrest that night and the aggressiveness we're seeing out of chris serino investigating the case. >> i should point out that the chris serino today is not a detective. he is back in uniform. he is on patrol. and very often as on the midnight shift and the department's official line is that he requested that. >> all right. kerry sanders, important information. we're going to take a quick break. more coverage of the trial when we come back. i think she tried to kill us. [ sighs ]

are you kidding me? no, it's only 15 calories. [ male announcer ] with reddi wip, fruit never sounded more delicious. mmm. [ male announcer ] with 15 calories per serving and real cream, the sound of reddi wip is the sound of joy. [ chainsaw buzzing ] humans. sometimes, life trips us up. sometimes, we trip ourselves up. and although the mistakes may seem to just keep coming at you, so do the solutions. like multi-policy discounts from liberty mutual insurance. save up to 10% just for combining

your auto and home insurance. call liberty mutual insurance at... to speak with an insurance expert and ask about all the personalized savings available for when you get married, move into a new house, or add a car to your policy. personalized coverage and savings -- all the things humans need to make our world a little less imperfect. call... and ask about all the ways you could save. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy? 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.

zimmerman trial last week was without a doubt rachel jeantel. the friend of trayvon martin on the phone with him just before his confrontation with zimmerman. joining me is her attorney rod vereen. thanks so much for being here. >> my pleasure. always a pleasure to be with you. >> good to see you. i know rod a bit from florida. rod, tell me first of all, how rachel jeantel is doing. she has had a barrage of negativity thrown her way, she's thrust into the spotlight. only 19 years old. how has she reacted to all that has come her way since she took the stand? >> she's doing quite well. i speak with rachel about three or four times a day since the trial. she's taking it in stride. i try to keep her away from the media and tell her to watch as little television as possible. stay off of facebook, stay off all the other social sites

because you're still under oath and she may be called back to be a witness in the case. i don't want anything she may read or hear on the radio or television to influence the way she may of it if she's called back again as another witness. >> defense attorney don west did on the second day of her testimony question her about what he said was a change in her demeanor. did you sort of talk to her after the first day and i say i know it's frustrating but give us what you said to her between day one and day two. >> once a witness takes the stand, they're placed under oath. even their defense attorney or the attorney representing that witness cannot discuss the testimony with that witness. essentially, what happened is when i first got into the case and sat down with rachel and we discussed what is going to happen with regard to the dynamics in the courtroom, she was not an aware there was going to be this be type of good cop, bad cop mentality between the lawyers that she had to sit in front of. she understood that the prosecution was going to ask questions and she was willing to answer those questions as they were presented to her. she also understood that the

defense attorneys were going to ask her questions but did not expect to be beat up as she was in the courtroom. now, she had come before don west before in depositions. the same demeanor that he had in the courtroom was pretty much the way he tried to handle her in the depositions. so what i did is i explained to her, i said there are going to be two sides and two different dynamics in the courtroom. you have to be ready for this. you're going to having mr. day la reon da is going to ask you questions and you can give the answers and open answers to them. when it gets to the defense side, they'll try to be as specific as possible. try not to get frustrated. okay? i expected she would be on the stand for probably an hour. i did not expect her to be on the stand for 51/2 hours. i think her frustration got the best of her the first time. she had an opportunity to get food, dinner, relax, calm down, go to her room, sleep it off and she came back the next day and put up a good fight. >> what do you make as the larger sort of cultural questions risen up around

rachel? it has been a phenomenon in this trial. what it says about the different world that rachel jeantel occupies from let's say the world that don west might occupy. >> first of all, look at who rachel is. she is a 19-year-old young lady who attend public school. she speaks three different languages. english is not her first language. english is not her second language. english happens to be her third language. he's also involved with the culture of the youth today. this is not what i consider to be problematic. most people were focusing in on how was she dressed? how was she speaking while she was on the stand? what was she wearing versus what is material in this case is what was she saying. when i see don west has been practicing law longer than rachel has been alive, of course you're going to see the difference in somebody well educated versus somebody who is not as well educated. and so it appears that mr. west, which he was using different

tactics to try to get her to be uneasy providing her testimony but through it all, she was able to answer the questions and she came across very truthful. her testimony was clearly unrehearsed. and i think that the people who were watching, i think the public recognizes she was telling the truth. >> attorney for rachel jeantel, thank you very much for being with us. >> always a pleasure. >> we're going to take a quick break. as we wait for the george zimmerman trial to resume. so we will be right back. [ fema] it's simple physics... a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food.

and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions, or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion.

visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. all this produce from walmart and secretly served it up in the heart of peach country. it's a fresh-over. we want you to eat some peaches and tell us what you think. they're really juicy. it must have just come from the farm. this right here is ideal for me. walmart works directly with growers to get you the best quality produce they've ever had. what would you do if i told you all this produce is from walmart? wow! is it really? (laughter) find fresh peaches and all your quality produce. backed by our 100% money back guarantee. walmart.

(announcer) bring the adventure to their bowl with a whole world of exciting flavors. friskies. feed the senses. panel, msnbc legal expert lisa bloornlgs contributor goldie taylor, "the washington post" jonathan capehart and former prosecutor john q. kelly. we just did talk to rod vereen, the attorney for rachel jeantel. she has become a cultural phenomenon for this case. she's just a 19-year-old kid dragged fwhoo the process who in his words testified from what she remembered and remained consistent to her story.

how have you reacted to the cultural moment that is rachel jeant jeantel? >> there were for many of us watching rachel, we know her in so many ways because she lives in our community. she attends our public schools. he works as a cashier at the local five and dime. rachel jeantel is every bit an example of what's happening in urban america as a young person as my children are. i just think that having her on the stand, having her in the spotlight, she was a hesitant witness at best from the moment she was called by trayvon mar n martin's parents, from the time she interviewed with mr. crump to the time. >> he was finally interviewed by the defense lawyer don west. that she really did not want to be in the spotlight. and i can understand why. if you look at social networks and what's happening to her persona, i think it's the most unfortunate thing i've ever seen that they are talking about her

appearance, they're talking about her linguistic style. they're talking about her level of education and whether or not she can read cursive writing. nous flash, they stopped teaching is your sieve writing public schools sometime ago. they teach it maybe as they teach latin. i do not expect her to understand cursive writing. looking at rachel jeantel through the eyes of you know an america who hasn't necessarily understood her day to day life and wa she does to survive, cope and make it in this world. i think these jurors probably hail more likely from that america than everyone rachel jeantel's and that might be a problem. >> yeah, and jonathan capehart in the addition to what goldie was saying, you had rachel apparently introducing people to the notion that a young person in the situation she was in may not make her first move to call police, may not want to talk to an attorney. these are sort of new concepts

baby to om in america but for african-americans they're not. >> the idea that, well, she said it sounded like he was in a fight. so it didn't sound like it was a big deal. i thought i would call back. don west takes ta to mean a physical fight whereas to a lot of the other people fight can range from just an altercation just words back and forth up to a physical fight. and the idea that she asking her, well, why didn't you call the police if you were so concerned? why didn't you -- well, why from her perspective and from a lot of african-american teenagers perspectives, why should i get involved? why do i want to involve myself with the police especially when for far too many.african-americans, teenagers on up to folks in middle age and elderly african-americans was the interactions with police haven't been so hot. >> absolutely. panel, hold on. court has resumed. officer chris serino is back on

the stand. >> away from the front entrance to the back entrance, correct? >> correct. >> and enters long oak way. that's the third one right there, correct. >> yes, sir. >> okay. and finally, sir, in your interview of the defendant, you showed him several paragraphs including the photograph of the victim, et cetera, is that correct? >> yes, sir, i did. >> if i may approach the witness, your honor. >> you may. >> stays's exhibit 94, is this one of the photographs you showed the defendant? >> yes, sir, i believe so. >> if i may publish that to the jury. >> i'll object at this point. i don't -- here or at the bench? >> at the bench. >> okay. let's bring back in our panel and i want to go to nbc legal analyst lisa bloom. you know, con rafting the jean

tell testimony which we just talked about and the testimony today, the one thing lisa, that does seem to be consistent is this story of pursuit. the story that rachel jeantel said that essentially george zimmerman was sewering tray voen and the testimony today where he tried to explain he was walking back to his car but the detective saying where was he hiding? and serino pressing him on were you not going after this young man. how did that strike you? >> i want to make a quick comment about rachel jeantel. i've been watching the entire trial. i haven't seen a lot of the negative comments that people are referring to about her, thank goodness i guess. i can say she was dressed appropriately for kourth on both days if that's one of the negative comments about her, that's silly. in the context of a trial, asking tough questions, cross-examining a witness is what defense attorneys do. that's what they did with rachel jeantel, what they're doing with george zimmerman even though he hasn't testified yet.

but they're going to over every possibility inconsistency in his story. that's ha p that's what they're doing with all of the witnesses. that's what attorneys do. i didn't see any difference in her testimony versus any of the other prosecution witnesses so far. >> john q. kelly, likewise, that is what is police do. chris serino, it was a great pointen kerry made that there was an investigation that continued even after the nonrest. the pursuit serino was doing, the methodical way he's going back over the testimony, over the story with zimmerman is proving to be really important information for the prosecution. >> yeah, i mean, it's the first time you see a little pushback from law enforcement in not taking zimmerman's statements at face value. going back 0 again just like lisa said to richal jean tell's testimony, any comments, you know, negative comments directed at her i think are so ignorant in united nations educated, this is a 19-year-old that was thrust into very disturbing

circumstances not by any of her own doing whatsoever. and yeah, she didn't want to be there. i don't think anybody would want to be there under those circumstances. and i think she did a heck of a job of hanging in there, testifying and being as consistent and truthful as she possibly could be. and the one thing i'll add too, the one thing that you see investigators serino has with rachel jeantel is either one of them would rather be anywhere else in the world than on the witness stand when they're there. >> i think that is fairly clear. >> the body language is just like -- it's almost unbearable to even watch. >> the body language is definitely clear. i want to make a point. there's a distinction between the law on the case and the logic in the case. charles wrote an interesting column in the "new york times" in which he wrote the bar may be high for the prosecution but the logic is bake. there's been no suggestion that trayvon martin was doing anything wrong the night george zimmerman grew wary of him, pur sud him and came into contact with him. i want to go back to jonathan

capehart on this because i think that is the thread that i feel like that's running through the prosecution's last two days. they're essentially not able to establish that trayvon martin was doing anything aggressive or wrong, yet he was sized by zimmerman literally as the suspect. >> right. even with the serino tapes and the re-enactments and everything, it's all about trayvon martin walking home. walking from that 7-eleven. even george zimmerman in than video re-enactment talks about how he saw trayvon martin walking on the sidewalk, slowly. yes, it was raining. sort of looking at the buildings. but there was nothing there that said he did anything wrong. now, zimmerman lumped him in, lumped trayvon martin in with all the other people he had seen in the neighborhood checking things out, robbing people. and so so that's why when we have the expletive laden quote from george zimmerman, those

blanks always get away to george zimmerman's behind, he lumped trayvon martin in with those other people he saw robbing his neighborhood. those other people who were doing things in his community that he didn't like. and as he wrote on his statement and as we heard in this testimony from officer singleton, to george zimmerman's mind, trayvon martin was "the suspect." >> goldie, there was an interesting dichotomy here where we've had testimony that either george zimmerman was on top in the fight or trayvon par tin was on top in the night. here today you heard george zimmerman in the walk through with he did with investigator serino saying he got on top of trayvon martin at some point and spread his arms out away from his body but all the testimony so far has said his arms were tucked underneath his body. do you think that's going to be important? >> i think it is going to be important. i don't know if you've ever been in a fistfight but i have. there are times when one person is on top and there's sometimes

when you're on top. so i can see this thing sort of tussling back and forth. there are some curious things what he has to say about that. he said that after you know he had shot trayvon martin, that he got on top of him. to restram him. why? trayvon martin decide almost instantly or as the coroner said within 20 seconds. the other issue is that he said that trayvon martin was on top of him with his hands over his mouth and knows smothering him. how could he have that if george zimmerman was screaming out, how could he be being smothered at the same time? >> in addition telling manolo help me with this guy but manolo didn't testify to that. court is back in session. let's go back and listen. >> i have no further questions, your honor. >> thank you, cross? >> turn this down unless you need it.

good afternoon, officer. how are you? >> fine, how are you? >>. >> to set the stage and i know that you had testified to some of this, though not all of it, in your direct examination, you were you became the chief investigating officer whose responsibility was the entirety of this case, correct? >> yes, sir. >> so that you were the one who looked at what was done on scene, decided what else needed to be done, tacked that out to the other people who would assist you and beak led the investigation down the path that it was to go? >> yes, sir. >> and in doing that, you

assigned different tacks to a number of different law enforcement officers, correct? >> yes, sir. >> gathering evidence was one tack that you put out to other officers. correct? >> yes, sir. >> interviewing additional witnesses and sort of setting the stage to get all of the information available that you could, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and once you had gathered that information, then you would put that together, talk about it with your team, that included everyone up to the chief of police, bill lee, correct? >> correct. >> and even including members of the state attorney's office, the 18th circuit city attorney's office, right? >> yes, sir. >> it was all part of the investigative team that you were beak in char charge of within the context of this investigation that you were running that team in order to come up with everything that needed to be done to move this case forward? >> yes, sir. >> okay. >> you haven't testified to

virtually any of that yet though, have you? >> you haven't testified to the tasks that were given out to the different officers, you haven't testified to your coordination of all that information coming back together, have you? >> as to the megd oddology of the case, no, i haven't. >> basically all you've testified so far is the statements from my client. >> correct, yes. >> okay. and let's talk about those statements for just a minute. as you first talked to my client and i'm not going to test your memory too much, but can you give me the timing? we know this event happened on the 26th of february, 2012, about 7:00, 7:15. when was the first time that you spoke to my client? >> at about five after midnight on the 27th. >> literally six hours after the event happened, correct? >> six hours, five and a half

hours, yeah. >> okay. and at that point, you knew as was just testified to before you that he had been interviewed by officer singleton, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and you had that information available to you. correct? >> yes, i did. >> you also had the benefit of all of the other information at least that which was gathered between 7:15 and midnight from sanford police department, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and you had been working a lot that night talking to witnesses and interviewing people, correct? >> yes, sir. >> one of those people that you interviewed was the what we call the eyewitness, i'll ask if you call him the eyewitness, john goode. >> ques. >> remember speaking to him. >> yes, sir. >> he was the one person who actually had eyes on on what happened between trayvon martin and george zimmerman that night? >> yes, sir. >> and you had the benefit of that interview with you as you first talked to mr. zimmerman? >> yes, i did.

>> so when we look at your interview, various interviews with mr. zimmerman, is it fair then for the jury to take it in context that you had a lot of information to you at midnight, that officer singleton did not have? >> yes, sir. >> matter of fact, as i think she testified, she had virtually no information available to her at that point, did she. >> from what i know, no, sir. >> but you had talked to john good and several other eye or ear witnesses, correct? can. >> yes, i had, sir. >> had gathered a lot of that information, gathered either yourself or by tasking other officers who then reported to you. >> yes, sir. >> okay. >> and with all of that information sort of as a foundation, you were then able to talk to george zimmerman and have him walk you through what he perceived to have happened,

correct? >> during our first interview. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> speaking to the one at 1:05 a.m. on the 27th, six hours after the event? >> yes, sir. >> so as we go through it or as the jury listens to it again, they should keep in mind that when you sort of short circuited through some of the facts with mr. zimmerman, it's because you already know them from other witnesses, correct? >> yes, sir. >> okay. >> you had talked to officer singleton and she had sort off downloaded on to you the substance of the conversation or interview that she had with mr. zimmerman, correct? >> briefly i spoke with her, yes. >> okay. i'm going to go through the september -- i'm sorry, february 27th interview with you.

but i'm going to ask you first so that when we go through it, i want you to highlight it for the jury, if there were any significant differences that existed between officer singleton's interview several hours earlier and your interview at midnight on the 27th, okaying? ing >> okay. >> okay. did you notice any significant differences that caused you concern based upon your years of experience as an investigator? >> not immediately, no, sir. >> okay. >> for example, you had to focus on how the two people first got in contact with each other, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and did you -- do you recall whether or not you had listened to the nonemergency call by the time you talked to mr. zimmerman the first time. >> at that point, no, sir, i had not. >> you had not. but you questioned mr. zimmerman about whether or not he had

followed mr. martin, correct? >> on our first interview? >> yes. >> i may have. i'd have to check the transcript. >> yeah, and i happen to have a partial transcript here. if i were to tell you that you said you reported a suspicious person, you said yes, sir. you said you followed him and he said yes, sir. >> yes, sir. >> did he acknowledge to you that he at least followed and kept an eye on martin, did he not? >> yes, did he. >> was that anything that concerned you? >> no, sir. >> you didn't at that point have the benefit of the nonemergency call where the operator asked two times in succession, what's he doing now or words to like effect? >> no, i had not. >> did it seem to you that the -- did you not have that -- i'm sorry, did you not have that benefit that have transcript? >> no, sir. >> okay. >> and you also asked him whether or not had he lost

visual of the person, correct? >> i think i stated to him that he did. i was summarizing what i had known that he said already. >> because that had come from the singleton interview, correct? >> correct. >> any concern with that? >> no, sir. >> he and then you had told him that you would like to do a walk-through or a recreation the next day, correct? >> yes, sir. >> now, we had officer singleton testify to this, but obviously he was mirandized, correct? >> yes he was. >> and affirmatively waived that? >> yes, did he. >> and you knew and you had advised him that had he wanted to stop the interrogation at any point, that that was his right. >> officer singleton did, yeah. >> and he never stopped the interview, did he. >> no, he did not. >> always was willing to answer

all of your questions. >> completely. >> of course, you stopped the interview and said that that the point, you had other things to do with the investigation. >> yes, sir. >> he was brief lili or just a quick check-in with mr. zimmerman at that point to get some questions answered, right? >> yes, sir. >> and in any of this interview with you, and we're going to go through each one with similar questions, did he evidence any anger or disdain towards mr. martin. >> no no, sir. >> did officer singleton even tell you that he wasn't aware that trayvon martin had passed away until she told him? >> i can't recall, sir. >> okay. >> thor to that mr. zimmerman spoke to you about and i know

we're going to get into some other interviews that went on later, was there anything in that interview that have at the point -- let me back up. i'm sorry. he was in police custody from the time that officer singleton interviewed him until the time you did, correct? >> yes, he was. >> and he did not have his cell phone available, did he? >> i don't believe so, no, he didn't. >> he did not have any access then, did he, to the of investigation that was ongoing back at the scene? >> no, he did not. >> so would you agree then that he was unaware of anything that you had discovered as what had happened at the scene? >> like i say, yes, he was unaware. >> i used the term that it was sort of a virgin interview the one that he had with singleton, right? >> yes. >> the first time anyone got to him. that's a police technique, isn't

it? >> you want to get to a shooter, a person who you would say at least a person of interest as soon as you can, correct? >> yes, sir. >> before they are infected by additional information, correct? >> yes, sir. we refer to it as locking him into a statement. >> locking him in. >> yes, uh-huh. >> what's the reason for that? >> so the information that he provides can be as pristine as possible without being contaminated by outside influences. >> exactly. one of your primary goals as an investigator is to make sure that whatever evidence you can get and keep as you say, pristine is the way you want to do it, right? >> yes, sir. >> that includes pieces of evidence, correct? >> yes. >> which is why we use gloves and forcepses and bags and evidence tape to make sure it all stays pristine, right? >> yes, sir. >> and it's why you want to make sure that witnesses stay away from each other. you actual separate them, don't you, so that they don't get a

chance to hear what the other one is saying? >>. >> under best circumstances, yes, sir, it's preferred. >> why do you do ta? >> it's preferred to keep each individual's testimony individual. >> because if there were going to be differences in the witnesses' testimonies or statements an, you want to make sure they stay apart from each other not to sort of collaborate on what they say happened? >> correct. >> why that is intentional or just a by-product of hearing what the other witness says, correct? can. >> correct. >> so in of this interview process, officer singleton had first shot at empty zimmerman and got that and documented it, correct? >> so to speak, yes. >> and then he was kept separate and part from the investigation so that your interview with him was also as pristine as you could keep it, correct? >> yes, sir. >> would you agree that it was in fact perceived that he was not infected with any additional informationing? >> yes, sir. >> okay. that information that you had

gathered though included information that what john good had told you, correct? >> yes, sir. >> so you were armed with the information of the statement john good which was. >> objection as to hear. >> i overruled. >> you were armed -- you were already the chief investigator at this point, right? it was assigned to be your case? >> yes, sir. >> your responsibility is to find out what all the other witnesses say. >> yes, sir. >> so you can incorporate that into the next witnesses you talk to? as best you can. >> yes, sir. >> tie it all together, yes, sir. >> and in tieing it all together when you went to mr. zimmerman during your first interview with hip, had you informationings from john good and a number of other witnesses, correct? >> yes, sir. >> okay. and that interview from john good that you had available to you, you used when you were questioning mr. zimmerman, correct? >> yes, sir. >> of course. you knew that john good. >> may we approach the bench? i apologize.

>> we are watching the trial of george zimmerman who is charged with second degree murder in the death of trayvon martin. we have a sidebar. that's our opportunity to go back and discuss what we're larry. lisa bloom, can you explain where it appears the defense attorney is trying to going with officer serino? he's sort of trying to establish the way he questioned george zimmerman. >> right so police officers are allowed to bluff, even lie when they're investigating people in the united states. they can say we have a videotape that shows otherwise. and try to get somebody to make an admission. they can do that. it's perfectly legal. it's done all the time. it's a legitimate investigative technique. sometimes injuries don't like it. and the defense attorney is trying to point out out george zimmerman was read his rights, he knew he had a right to stop the questioning at any point and he waived that.

he voluntarily spoke to law enforcement. they had information he didn't have. nevertheless, he came forward and giving answers as best he could. that's the defense argument here. >> we're going to take advantage of this pause in the proceedings to take a quick break. we'll be right back. y kevin...sk for heartburn? yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. enjoy the relief! [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. it was very painful situation. the rash was on my right hip, going all the way down my leg. i'm very athletic and i swim in the ocean. shingles forced me out of the water. the doctor asked me "did you have chickenpox when you were a child?" the pain level was so high, it became unbearable.

wait a sec! i found our colors. we've made a decision. great, let's go get you set up... we need brushes. you should check out our workshops... push your color boundaries while staying well within your budget walls. i want to paint something else. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the the home depot. right now get $5 off one-gallon cans and $20 off five-gallon buckets of select paints and stains

we're back and court is back in session in the zimmerman trial. let's lis. >> and experience traumatic type scenarios like he went through, they typically end up with anxiety problems. he appeared to be lacking, in my opinion, as far as what was going on, what he was in the middle of. it just seemed that something was going on with him. >> would you call that in sort of generic terms a real flat affect as to what was anding? >> in generic terms, yes. >> did that cause you concern that he -- that he had in fact gone through a traumatic event

and his response was a flat affect about it. >> at some point, yes, it did. >> you even said to him, you're going to be anxious, you're going to have nightmares. i'm going to get you some help. didn't you say ta to him? >> yes, i did. >> what help did you mean you were going to get for him with what he had gone through? >> any kind of medical attention if needed and that would have -- whatever he might have needed himself. >> psychological intervention maybe. >> after a medical exam perhaps. >> okay. you have not had to draw your weapon and shoot and kill anyone, have you? >> no, sir, i have not. >> but certainly you know fellow officers who have? >> yes, i have. >> and it is from that experience that you understand what may happen a person who has had to shoot and kill somebody? >> objection as to similar situation, unsimilar situation. my objection is to relevance. >> sustained. >> may i at least be heard as to the relevance?

sta it's not relevant what may have happened to other people in other situations. >> yes, your honor. whatever your life experiences have been, it pruett brute you to the interrogation room that night with mr. zimmerman suggesting he was going to have anxiety and nightmares and that you would do whatever you could to help him with that, correct? >> yes, sir. >> was he cleaned up by the time that he got to you? >> yes, he was. >> did you see what he looked like at the scene? >> i had seen the picture that officer wagner had taken of him prior to. >> okay. if i may approach the witness, your honor. just so we're clear. >> may we approach the bench? the same objection that was --

>>. >> and we are watching the trifle george zimmerman charged with second degree murder in the death of trayvon martin. john k. kelly, can you establish what's going on here? what do you think that mark o'mara is trying to achieve with his questioning? >> like any defense attorney, he does not want to have to put his client on the stand at all. so what he wants to establish is that the statements an zimmerman gave at the time to serino, that they were voluntary, that they were forthcoming and they were the unvarnished truth. and maybe there will be inconsistencies and maybe there will be a little head scratching about some of the things he said, but in the end, they think that will carry the day and they do not want to have him testify. >> lisa, do you read it that way too, this is an attorney who does not want to put his client on the stand? >> i do. there's no question that one of the defense's favorite pieces of evidence in this case is the

photograph of george zimmerman with the bloody punched in nose and face. he wants to put that up and show that to the jury whenever possible. that was the last piece of evidence they showed over and over again on friday, late afternoon knowing that the jury was going off for a sequestered weekend wanting to leave the jury with that vivid image in their mind. he now wants to show that again to this witness even though this witness chris serino says that's not the way he saw him. he saw him after he was cleaned up. it wouldn't be a relevant piece of information or evidence to show to this witness. nevertheless, he wants to put it up and show the jury over and over again, look at george zimmerman's injuries. >> very quickly jonathan, can you imagine this trial resuming or concluding without george zimmerman on the stand. >> certainly i can see that happening especially with mark o'mara not wanting it to happen. but by playing these the serino tapes interviewing george zimmerman and whatever else we're going to hear before the

prosecution wraps its case, you know, to put george zimmerman on the stand i think would be something devastating for the defense because then live in a courtroom, george zimmerman would have to account for those discrepancies in evidence and testimony and for me the number one discrepancy is trayvon martin's hands. goldie brought it up. i've written about this many tiles. how is it possible that trayvon martin's hands went from being spread out by zimmerman to completely under his body within less than a minute before police and other people came out outside to see what was going on. >> goldie taylor final thought. if it struck you that the video show a confrontation ta took place around the first house in that at twin lakes but the actual body was found about three houses in. your final thoughts. >> i think when we begin to hear the physical evidence in this case, i suspect that it may contradict some of the things