it's so -- it's so impossible to get a bruise and swelling and say, well, that was two different sites. now, the swelling is separate from the bruise, yes, but they are one injury. >> okay. presuming that the bruising on state's exhibit 69 and 70 that the bruising that we see matches up in the jury's mind with that point of swelling, correct? you're making the premise -- >> it does. >> okay. in your opinion -- >> well, you can see it. >> okay. the jury, of course, will make that determination, right? >> correct. >> okay. then there could be -- how many maximum times could the back of the head have been hit on the cement? >> well, to me it was consistent with one, but you suggested by turning the head in different ways it could be two. that is possible. >> three or four?

>> with no injury, yes. if the head is in contact with no injury, yes. >> how about the swelling below the lacerations? >> the contusion. >> below, right. >> the contusion, yes. >> could that have been a separate injury? >> it's possible. >> well, if the head was hit so that just the crown hit the cement one time, let's say the head just snapped back and hit here. that could have caused one of the lacerations, correct? >> yes, but -- >> okay. i appreciate that. so if the head was tilted one way and snapped back so that this was the crowning point, that could be one laceration injury, correct? >> it's possible. >> if the head was this way, another laceration injury. >> that's possible. >> if i was able to resist one of the toss backs of my head, i

can keep the crown higher and that back bruising you just identified could have occurred, right? >> it's unusual because, you know, you're talking about a flat surface. so the head will have to be really contorted to be able to give you all those injuries from different impacts. >> change it now that it's not the cement, okay? change it that it's here. change it that what was -- the bruise on the bottom wasn't flat, that it was against the side. would that cause the bruising down here without the lacerations? >> the side of what? >> the side of the cement. you know it was a cement sidewalk, correct? >> yes. >> you know that they were at the very edge of it, correct? >> yes. >> so you know there is, in fact, an edge of cement. >> it's possible. >> i'm sorry? >> the injury is possible like you are suggesting, yes. >> here is the cement.

we've been talking and discussing all the injuries on the flat sur farks right? >> correct. >> so let's introduce now that there could have been some injuries here. >> your honor, i object to that. facts not in evidence. >> it's hypothetical with an expert. overruled. >> it's possible. >> okay. >> so the possibility is that the head being hit against the cement could easily be two lacerations above may not have ever impacted again when the bottom bruising occurred, right? >> it's possible. >> okay. mr. guy focused you on life-threatening injuries, right? >> correct. >> did they suggest to you in your testimony that this had anything to do with

life-threatening injuries? >> i'm sorry, i didn't get that. office when they prepped you for your testimony here today suggest to you that life-threatening injuries was an element of anything having to do with this case? >> no. >> okay. you understand that the extent of injuries are not significant in this case, do you not? >> i'm sorry. i didn't get that. >> okay. you understand that the extent of any injuries that mr. zimmerman incurred in this attack have nothing to do with the case itself, correct? >> i object to that. calling for our legal conclusion. >> rephrase the question, please. >> i will. were you prepared for the examination to identify whether

or not you could testify that there were life-threatening injuries or not? >> no. >> okay. none of these injuries you identified as they turned out were, in fact, life-threatening, were they? >> correct. >> what about the next injury? >> the what, sorry? >> is the next injury. >> what is that? >> the next injury he would have sustained. >> i'm sorry. i didn't get that. >> could the injury that he didn't have to survive, could that have been life threatening. >> object to that, calling for speculation. >> sustained. >> if i might just have a moment, your honor. >> yes, you may.

>> thank you. nothing further, your honor. >> redirect? >> dr. rao, who was it that appointed you chief medical examiner for district four? >> the governor. >> and are you testifying here today because miss cory wrote a letter on your behalf to the governor some years ago? >> no. >> are you slanting your testimony any way today because she wrote a letter on your behalf to the governor? >> absolutely not. >> all right. you were shown some photographs by defense counsel. were you provided all those photographs prior to trial? >> yes. >> i think you referred to 36 photographs of the defendant. >> yes. >> did that also include photographs of his hands? >> yes. >> would you expect someone who was undergoing a severe attack to try to defend themselves? >> objection, your honor. outside of scope and also speculation. >> sustained on both grounds.

>> you were asked about a scenario where the defendant may have hit his head on the edge of concrete. when you watched the defendant's walk through or re-creation, did he describe his head getting hit on the edge of concrete? >> no. >> judge, thank you. that's all i have. >> thank you. may dr. rao be excused? >> she may. >> yes, your honor. >> thank you very much. you are excused. call your next witness, please. >> your honor, the next witness isn't available, but can counsel meet briefly? >> yes. >> and you have been listening to testimony regarding george zimmerman's injuries from the chief medical examiner. court is now in a short recess, so let's get right to msnbc's craig melvin, who is at the courthouse in sanford. craig, what's going on right now? >> reporter: you know, what we

just saw there was very interesting because this was perhaps, arguably, the first state witness that really sort of held her own with mark o'mara on cross-examination. we should note this is not the same medical examiner, obviously, that performed the autopsy on trayvon martin's body. we got a few very important morsels, if you will, from valerie rao. the first of which right out of the gate she testified that george zimmerman's injuries were, in her words, insignificant. she used that adjective several times to talk about the injuries that he sustained. she also talked a little bit about the injuries not being a result of great force as well. we saw mark o'mara on cross-examination try and discredit her by basically saying that she was appointed by angela cory and as a result

implying that her testimony might be slanted. we just heard on redirect that she insisted that was not the case. again, it was very interesting to watch and hear that back and forth. valerie rao maintaining that the injuries that george zimmerman sustained, in her words, were insignificant and also this idea that his head had been slammed multiple times on the concrete. she testified that based on what she saw, that was probably not the case. i do want to update our viewers on another story that we've been following, this motion that was filed by the defense yesterday -- excuse me, by the state yesterday. this motion of inquiry. this goes back to that picture that was posted on instagram last week by don west's daughter molly west. there's the picture right there. there's the picture. we talked about it a lot last week. as you can see there, we beat

stupidity celebration is the caption. #dadkill #dadkilledit. the state filed a motion of inquiry yesterday basically asking for judge nelson to look into this. they were very concerned that a witness may have been as a result of that picture been being made fun of. there was a response here from the defense. i'm going to read you the response. basically saying that based on the information they've gathered that the picture itself was, quote, intended to capture a private moment and that it was actually taken a day before rachel jeantel testified, and it was posted on her first day of testimony. again, no word yet on judge nelson as to whether there will be any sanctions or punishment with regard to that picture. again, right now as you mentioned, court is in recess. waiting to hear which witness we'll hear from next. again, we haven't heard from the paramedic yet. we also haven't heard from the

medical examiner that conducted the autopsy on trayvon martin's body. of course, at some point, we'll hear before the state rests its case, we'll hear from the mother and/or father of trayvon martin. that's the latest from sanford. >> all right, craig. thank you. we'll talk to you again in a bit. let's bring in our trial team, lisa bloom, paul henderson and former prosecutor patrick murphy. lisa, let's start with you. i have a short question and a longer one. short question based on what we just heard is why did the judge rule there that the question could not be asked about what the next injury might have been to mr. zimmerman? >> because it's too speculative. i mean, what something might have been, could have, should have, would have, we don't generally get into that in a court of law. this is an expert. sometimes experts can do that. i think it's too speculative. >> so that sort of violates some of the boundaries that have been set. obviously, we know that lawyers know that. tell us what you think was the strategy in trying to ask that

question. what's the next injury to mr. zimmerman? >> because the defense is trying to show that these injuries were not necessarily life threatening, and mark o'mara said that on cross-examination, essentially saying we never said that, we never said life threatening. the defense wants the jury to put it all together, that he was on the ground, he was getting his head pounded, perhaps only once or twice, perhaps he only got punched in the face once or twice, perhaps he was threatened by trayvon martin, but they want the jury to put all of that together and to create a scenario where george zimmerman was in reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death. that's self-defense. >> patrick, let's talk about that. seems the doctor was a very strong witness for the state, testifying only minor injuries on george zimmerman and certainly not anything life threatening. the contusions on his face representing only one punch in her opinion. to get to second-degree murder, you have to believe that you are in imminent danger of death in order to not be second-degree

murder. the doctor's testimony seems to challenge george zimmerman's story. >> that's right. that's why i thought today was a very strong day for the prosecution, especially with the chief medical examiner. when you look at the testimony that she said, that, one, none of these were life threatening injuries. two, these were not significant. lastly, these injuries were not from a cause of great force. that goes exactly against the justification that zimmerman's trying to put out there that he was attacked and he was basically self-defense, which again, the chief prosecution witness today, the medical examiner, was very clear on. >> let's bring in paul. what do you think about that idea and also the role of the medical information here? i mean, obviously for people watching at home, you see a strong contrast when it's a trial relating to the death of one individual. so obviously the ultimate experience someone can go through first is trying to get a gradation or some sort of objective view of how much

injury the defendant sustained. >> right. i think what really stands out to me from the medical examiner and what i think is going to stand out to the jury is that this is objective information. this is why i think it stands out that she was such a strong witness because she was so clear in her opinion, and it almost flies in the face of the stories that we've been hearing over the past few days from his best friend and from the recorded information that has been shown to the jury about his version of the story. now we're starting to piece together independent factors that a medical expert is evaluating and the context of those stories, and it's not adding up. so that's why i think it's really significant because it's tying up why these stories or why there's a pattern that does not hold true based on scientific, independent evaluation from a medical expert. that's the lynch pin from today's testimony, which is why it's so important. >> lisa, i want to jump back a little bit in time with you,

talk about something that happened a little earlier today. to the idea that is the george zimmerman story completely holdeding up or is it showing itself to have holes, there was a moment earlier today when it challenged the idea so trayvon martin was covering his nose and his mouth and also reaching for his gun. let me play a little tape from earlier today to get you to comment on that. oh, i'm sorry. i thought we had it. we don't have it yet. we'll have it later. >> that's okay. >> just the idea of covering the nose with one hand, covering the mouth with another, going for the gun with another. how many hands did trayvon martin actually have? >> is we >> well, that's right. it would be comical if it wasn't so tragic. zimmerman has said in a number of his stories that trayvon martin's hand was sliding down his body. if you picture trayvon on the top and zimmerman on the bottom and going for a gun, wouldn't

most people directly go for a gun than kind of oddly sliding their hand down someone's body? that's something that really hasn't been questioned much with george zimmerman. but i find it a little odd. >> yes. >> all right, guys. stay with us. we're going to have a little bit of a break here and then we'll check in with what's going on in egypt, a huge international story. then full coverage up ahead here on "the cycle" of the zimmerman trial. 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

what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! 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'.

humans. even when we cross our t's and dot our i's, we still run into problems. namely, other humans. which is why at liberty mutual insurance, auto policies come with new car replacement and accident forgiveness if you qualify. see what else comes standard at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy?

and it's time for a look at what else is happening in the news cycle this tuesday. that massive wildfire burning

through more than 8,000 acres in arizona is still 0% contained at this hour. the community northwest of phoenix is remembering 19 members of that elite fire team killed in the blaze. the widow of 29-year-old andrew ashcraft, a father of four, gave a pretty emotional interview to savannah guthrie on the "today" show this morning. >> well, it's a sad day, but we're hanging in there. we have a lot of support from the community. a lot of support from the other wives who are going through the same thing. we're doing the best we can. just one day at a time. in our time of mourning, we want people to know they were heroes. they were heroes in our homes. they were heroes in our community. they were heroes for the people they helped there. our kids will remember them as heroes as well. they loved what they did. these men worked together. they lived together. they fought fires together, and they died together doing what they love. >> that is a heartbreaking story. we'll keep our eye on it. also in the news right now, egypt is on the edge.

you're seeing it here live. three government spokespersons are the latest to quit the regime of the country's islamist president mohamed morsi. he's in the midst of what looks like a 48-hour ultimatum, which was publicly set by the military. protesters have been gathered in cairo's tahrir square for what some are calling the beginning of, yes, a second revolution. we'll be watching it and carrying more of that live for you. and the world will be shocked. those are some words from glen greenwald today concerning some upcoming leans by edward snowden. he says he hasn't been in touch with snowden since he fled to hong kong. india became the latest country to reject snowden's request for asylum. now back to the george zimmerman trial. the state called a u.s. air marshal and self-professed best friend of george zimmerman to show inconsistencies in

zimmerman's story. >> if you had any facts wrong that were conclusively proven wrong by the evidence, would you refer to the evidence? >> without question. >> if he told you he shot once and there were four shots fired and you had in your book there was one but the forensic evidence supported four, you would defer to that? >> i'd support that 100%. >> to the extent he may have told you something -- he remembered he told you something different than it appears in the nonemergency call, which is recorded with the event, you would prefrefer to that? >> absolutely. i may have heard wrong or documented it wrong. >> okay. lisa bloom, what were they thinking calling -- the prosecution calling george zimmerman's best friend? what was the mind set? >> the number one question i've had in the last two weeks covering this trial has been why did the prosecution call this witness? i hear that day in and day out. i've been defending them because the law enforcement witnesses

they have to call for the sake of completeness. if they don't, the defense is going to call them and point out to the jury the prosecution was hiding it. this guy did not have to be called. george zimmerman's best friend, who said twice, he's the best friend i've ever known, who obviously adores george zimmerman. he's also law enforcement himself. he's an air marshal. he's written a book. he's gone on "dr. phil." maybe there are some slight inconsistencies in zimmerman's story he gave the prosecution. he said, for example, that zimmerman told him that trayvon martin grabbed the gun. that's different than reached for president gun. and that trayvon martin's knees were up to his armpits. overall, we got to hear a lot of stuff on cross that was very help toful to the cross. how devastating this incident was to zimmerman and his wife. he had to go into hiding, et cetera. >> paul, you're a prosecutor. would you have called him? >> well, i think i understand why they may have called him,

just for the corroborative evidence to make sure that, you know, at the end you can argue this is the information that he told his best friend. so when you're looking at the inconsistencies, they're not under duress. they're not to law enforcement where he may have been nervous. they're to his actual best friend. it was recorded in this book. so i think maybe that witness was called just to affirm his story, especially -- and it's going to be highlighted when that story doesn't fit the framework of the forensic evidence. that's why i think they called him in the first place. clearly, everyone on the jury, everyone in the audience, everyone in the courtroom was hearing his conversation and saying, like, this is the guy's best friend. it's not like we're really going to listen to what he has to say in terms of his opinion about what happened that evening, except in that context. that's the relevance of him telling him the story in the way that he did. >> right. and paul, can you weigh in on

lisa's points that sometimes in the prosecution's case you have to go broad and bring in certain things that to the uninitiated or even to the jurors as they learn, they say why is this comingcome coming in, but sometimes there's that extra burden on the prosecution. >> there is that extra burden. you want to make sure we have a record, a clear record of everything he said about the incident. as a prosecutor, you don't want to leave any of that information out because you want to make sure that the jury hears every version of that story that he has told just in case he doesn't get up on that stand. because the only thing you'll be able to cross-examine and point to is the information in those videotapes, the information in his confession, the information that he told to his best friend that gets recorded in a book. you don't want to turn around at the end of the trial and not be able to discuss a recorded statement or a comment that he made to someone because you didn't call that witness, even if you thought that witness may be biased in other areas because he still can reflect some of the

information that zimmerman told him around the time that the incident occurred. so that's why we're seeing this. >> patrick, let's broaden the lens. the point lisa was making that a lot of the state's witnesses, people are saying, why did the state call that person? i think we've seen several times that the defense is able to make the state's witnesses seem like defense witnesses. is that representative of the complexity of the state's case and the difficulty of the state's case, or is it that the defense team is so good they can turn these witnesses around? >> the defense team is good, but you have to look at the fact that in the prosecution, like in political campaigns, sometimes it's important to hang a lantern, which means you have to put your words out there so people understand it. in this case, it was important to bring mark in for two reasons. one, he wrote a book. this is zimmerman's best friend, yet he already wrote a book about it. there's two major inconsistents here. one, the fact zimmerman said he

grabbed that -- that trayvon martin grabbed the gun. number two, in his book he said that trayvon circled the car several times, that they were always in eye contact. that's a major inconsistency. again, zimmerman -- he didn't testify at the trial, but he did basically go and we have the vid videotaped interview, said that he was afraid for his life. if he was so afraid for his life, why did he get out of the car? >> excellent question. all right. we'll be right back with more of the george zimmerman trial after this. now we've got everything you need for a great summer. this 5-piece dining set on clearance, save over $49! marco! polo! this metal frame pool on rollback, you save $80! woo! fire up the savings. this 4 burner grill on rollback, you save $11. how bout all these bikes on rollback? like this mongoose adult bike, you save over $20! get more summer for your money at walmart's super summer savings event going on right now at your local walmart.

i'm in my work van, having lunch, next minute i'm in the back of an ambulance having a heart attack. the emts gave me bayer aspirin. it helped save my life. i was in shape, fit. i did not see it coming. my doctor recommends i take bayer aspirin to help prevent another heart attack. [ male announcer ] aspirin is not appropriate for everyone so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. i've lived through a massive heart attack. i don't take life for granted. see your doctor and get checked out. ♪

earlier this morning, officer chris serino was back on the stand for a second day. he was, of course, the on-call investigator the night that george zimmerman shot trayvon martin, an action zimmerman claims was in self-defense. >> your review of the evidence there, was it any indication that trayvon martin, trayvon

benjamin martin, the young man i think 20 days -- had just turned 17, was committing a crime that evening, sir? >> no, sir. >> was there any evidence that that young man was armed? >> no, sir. >> you were asked specifically about exaggeration. did you feel he had exaggerated the manner in which he was hit? >> yes, sir. >> is that something you would use in reference to somebody that you're going to invite over for dinner? would you call them these [ bleep ]? >> no, sir, i would not. >> does that seem like a friendly comment about something else? >> no, sir, it's not. >> the way my client said the word [ bleep ], did that give you any cause for concern as to the way he said it? >> no, sir. >> didn't show any ill will or hatred when he said these [ bleep ] always get away? >> it seemed like more of a generalization. >> the defendant claims that the

victim was suffocating him, correct? >> yes, sir. >> okay. did you find any evidence of blood on the victim's hands? >> none that i'm aware of, no, sir. >> and there was evidence that the defendant was bleeding, especially on his mouth, right here on his mustache. he had some right under his nose, some blood, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and i'm hitting you, correct? that's what the defendant is claiming. i'm suffocating you. would you have your hands like that, like this, or would you be fighting me? >> i'd be fighting you. i'd be fighting you. >> that was some potentially significant testimony just earlier today in the zimmerman trial. we want to go to craig melvin who's on the scene. you have an update for us? >> reporter: yeah, right now court is -- there was the recess. the jury is not back in the courtroom right now. lawyers for state and lawyers for george zimmerman are haggling over something that the state wants to do right now.

the state wants to call a witness. they want to call a teacher that george zimmerman had. prosecutors want to tell the jury about some justice classes, some criminal justice classes that george zimmerman took at one point, some online classes that he took. they want to use this to show the jury that george zimmerman had knowledge of police techniques and also perhaps knowledge of self-defense techniques as well. so that is what the attorneys in the courtroom are haggling over right now. at this point, it's not clear as to whether judge nelson is going to decide on that matter. that's what's happening right now. >> just to draw you out on that, that's so important as we see in these kind of cases. there's always two trials. there's the foundational trial of what's going to go into evidence. the jury is released from the room. they won't hear about this debate over whether some records regarding mr. zimmerman's

history in education and. if admitted, the jury would hear a debate over the relevance of that material, right? >> reporter: precisely. that's arguably why the defense team is trying to keep this information out. mark o'mara at one point during the hearing during the commercial break also said that he would not object if he thought that the state was simply trying to introduce this evidence for, you know, just basically for that reason, to introduce some evidence. o'mara's claim is that the state wants to introduce this so that they can introduce a theory as to why zimmerman may have behaved a certain way after the shooting. >> interesting. >> at this point, it looks like judge nelson is going to try and decide on this right now.

she's considering some case law. but she's also taking a look at the specific courses george zimmerman took as well. >> all right. thank you for that report. i will bring back our legal team and go right to you, lisa. we want to be careful here. we're not prejudging what we're going to get in terms of a decision. this material may not ultimately enter the trial. if it does, of course, what we're hearing from the prosecution in those arguments that craig was just reporting on is the notion that this underlying background about his sort of training and his familiarity with defensive te techniques or policing techniques is relevant. >> let me shed a little bit of additional light on that. i have two ear pieces in at all times. one is the show. one is the courtroom. i can listen into the courtroom a little bit as we're talking. what is at issue is whether a professor who taught a class that george zimmerman took on criminal investigations should testify. the defense says, why are we

essentially maligning george zimmerman because he wanted to be a police officer? he may have wanted to go on a ride along. we've seen, by the way, the defense do a lot of cross-examinations of police officers that begin with, do you like being a cop? do you enjoy it? why do you enjoy it? because i like helping people. trying to establish there's nothing wrong with wanting to be a police officer. well, the prosecution says, no, that's not what this is about. why we want to get this into evidence is to show he knew the law. he knew the law of self-defense. he knows how criminal investigations go. that's why he tailored his story to be a story of self-defense. >> right. paul, to that point, perhaps this argument they're having right now and the earlier discussion with the best friend, who, of course, went through the police academy, is all to the idea on the state's theory of he wanted to be a police officer and he was playing or behaving as one in his mind that night. >> and not just that he wanted to be a police officer. it goes a step further. he's familiar with police

practices. he's familiar and has studied self-defense and self-defense theories. so he would know what to say and how to craft a story. so what the judge is really evaluating now is, is that going to be more probative or prejudice? so that's what we're discussing and waiting for now. i see both sides of it, and i understand completely why a prosecutor would want to get this information in and to say that this is an individual that was fixated on law enforcement and that had more than a passing familiarity with law enforcement. and this is why we hear him talking the way that he talks and kplun kating the way he communicates, and that colors his communication about his story and how the events unfolded that night because he had exposure, knowledge, and awareness of what a self-defense story could look like, and that's why we're having this discussion. that's why they're trying to keep it out. >> patrick, interesting moment from the trial earlier today that got a lot of attention.

bernie was extraordinarily animated at one point when he was trying to make a point about george zimmerman's mind state toward trayvon martin. can i play a little bit of that? do we have that moment? >> is that something you would use in reference to somebody that you're going to invite over for dinner? would you call them these [ bleep ]? >> no, sir, i would not. >> does that seem like a friendly comment about somebody else? >> no, sir, it's not. >> that moment got a lot of attention. it seemed that he showed a different side of himself to the jury and the courtroom. what do you make of the sort of almost histrionics going on there to make his point? >> right, because what the prosecution -- what the state of florida is alleging of george zimmerman, that he had the criminal intent, the mental state to commit second-degree murder. and to show that he had a predisposition. as you look at right now -- again, there are two trials going on. the trial there where those six jurors are sequestered versus

the jury of public opinion. we know more than what the jurors know. we know the fact that, you know, that george zimmerman got a d-minus in his criminal justice class and he knows about investigations, et cetera. the jurors don't know that. they don't know this guy called the police 46 times so he understands their standard operating procedure. these are all important facts that we know as the public that unfortunately the jurors who make the decision do not know. >> but lisa bloom, sometimes an attorney's got to be a bit of a performer in the courtroom, right? >> a lot of theater. that's why i think even if you can make a tiny, tiny point, for example, by calling george zimmerman's best friend, you have to think of the overall theatrics of calling witness after witness after witness for the prosecution's case that makes everybody scratch their head and say, am i in the prosecution case or the defense case? why am i hearing from so many people who talk about what a terrific guy george zimmerman is, including the lead

investigator in the case who said at the end of his testimony yesterday, i thought he was telling the truth. then the day began with the judge saying, oh, jury, remember that moment? well, just disregard that. i mean, really? do we really think they're going to disregard that? >> that's right. all right. we'll be back with more right after this break. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ [ male announcer ] the all-new 2014 lexus is. this is your move.

with olay, here's how. new regenerist eye and lash duo. the cream smooths the look of lids... softens the look of lines. the serum instantly thickens the look of lashes. see wow! eyes in just one week with olay. we are back with live coverage of the george zimmerman trial. we have craig melvin on the scene in florida. craig, we were just talking before the break about a decision the judge may reach as early as this hour or may take more time about admitting what would amount to evidence and also testimony regarding mr. zimmerman's history and classes he may have taken about policing and criminal justice. so sketch out for us, if you will, i want to be fair here and speak to the two points. on the prosecution side, there's a case being made this is a gentleman who was overly zealous and overly aggressive in pursuit

of his notion of policing, of community policing, even as an individual or citizen. on the defense side, there's a notion that at least some desire to serve the community and do, you know, public neighborhood watch is a good thing and whether or not you pass the test to be a police officer is not the only thing the jury should care about. with those two sort of competing theories in mind, tell us about what the argument is right now. >> reporter: right now -- in fact, what's been happening for about 15 minutes now, the jury is not back in the courtroom. the attorneys for the state and the attorneys for george zimmerman have been haggling over -- essentially they're trying to introduce evidence that george zimmerman was knowledgeable about the law and more specifically knowledgeable about stand your ground. you'll remember right after lunch they played an excerpt of that fox interview. they played the interview, george zimmerman talking to sean hannity. one of the questions was, did

you know anything about stand your ground? george zimmerman said no. right now the state is essentially trying to introduce evidence that would prove that he may have, in fact, did know, not just information about stand your ground but also other details that would perhaps have helped him craft a story after the shooting, specifically -- i want to make sure i note everything that they're getting in. so stand by while i look at my notes here. specifically, right now they are trying to introduce -- they're trying to introduce his transcripts from seminole state college. they're trying to introduce coursework as well, specific coursework regarding a class that he took that discussed florida self-defense law and stand your ground. they're also trying to introduce zimmerman's application to the prince william county virginia police department as well. they're trying to demonstrate -- the state's trying to demonstrate that george

zimmerman very much wanted to be a law enforcement officer. very much wanted to be a part of law enforcement. they're also trying to introduce zimmerman's application for a ride along as well with sanford police. so again, lawyers were going back and forth for about 15 minutes. at one point we heard judge nelson actually say, you foe what, guys, i'll give you 30 minutes to take a look at some case law. i'll adjourn for 30 minutes, look at case law, and perhaps come back. so this is what appeared to be maybe a small back and forth, it look like this could be a substantial development this afternoon. >> all right. craig melvin, thank you for that report. we'll take it right to our legal panel. paul, i want to go to you. i want to pick up on the language that craig melvin just used talking about crafting a story in service of this defense. >> exactly. >> when we get a traditional statement, we think of someone explaining what happened. the prosecution's theory here, which has to be tested, of course, is that this was not

just a story or a sequence of information from the person but rather something crafted, as melvin was saying. let me read one example so people understand this theory. in the statement from mr. zimmerman, he talks about how, quote, i upholstered my firearm in fear for my life. he goes on from there. explain to us how that fits in with the prosecution's theory and how pivotal this evidence could be. >> well, this is lynch pin for the charges. so we have to prove as a prosecutor what your state of mind is. so to justify self-defense. it's the force of self-defense that you're trying to match up in the story. so you can't just say, i got into a fight with someone and i shot him dead. it has to be i was in fear of my life and that allows you to use deadly force. so when he's saying that he didn't have a plan beforehand and these things all just unfolded, it looks suspicious when you know that he has

actually taken these classes. it looks suspicious when you know that he's familiar with this terminology and he knows what to say and how to phrase it so that, of course, his lens and what he communicates to the public, to the jury, to the police, to anyone that's asking him about this story is that i was merely meeting physical deadly force myself with my gun. reason that's a problem is we're starting to hear evidence now objectively like the medical information saying these were not serious injuries. >> i think a way to say what you're proposing is it will look more suspicious to the jury if this evidence is in. >> exactly. that's exactly why they're fighting so hard to keep it out. if he's taken a class about self-defense or on stand your ground and he's already testified that he was not familiar with it t well, it looks like you just took a class on that very subject just a few years ago and here's your grades. did you have to write a paper?

did you have to write a test? did you know something about it? then if you did, why would you lie about it? obviously, the inference is the reason you're not telling the truth is that your whole story may be cast in doubt because of it. that's the fight that's going on now and why the prosecution is trying to introduce those transcripts and those documentations to infer and show you he was familiar and knew exactly what he was doing and knew exactly what to say to craft a defense as he told his story. >> lisa bloom, we are right now in this sort of trial within the trial trying to decide what information can the jury know. patrick just gave a very impassioned speech saying it's unfortunate the jury doesn't know certain things. as a general principle, it's helpful for us as citizens that the jurors are not allowed to know everything. i don't want to be judged on my entire life. i want to be judged on the incident around which i was arrested for, correct? >> yes, although i think you'd do just fine being judged on your entire life. we don't want that for criminal

defendants. look, if he got a d-minus in the class and i'm the defense attorney, let it in. this is not a guy who's capable of coming up on the snap, you know, just a quick moment after a horrific a horrific shooting, to just come up with this story that i was in fear for my life. let it in. he is interested in law enforcement. there is no secret in that. yeah, he took classes. guess what? he didn't do very well in the classes. he is not a very good student or not a very good student in that class. sometimes i think the attorneys just argue the opposite of what the other side says without thinking it through. i think if this comes in, the defense can turn it right around. >> you said in the break that this is important. we don't want to judge, say even drug dealers, with every offense they've committed. stick to the case. >> i think lisa is right. attorneys tend to be argumentative. i'm familiar with that -- >> that's not true -- >> but yeah, it goes to a big point. and when people talk about justice meaning you get your day

in court, we often mean your day in court to be judged only on what you're accused of. and it gets very ugly if you pull in every mistake you've ever made or every prior and those of us who have worked in criminal justice reform don't often think defendants should be judged by everything that ever happened to your point. >> all right. let's take a break. we'll be right back with more. you wait all year for summer. ♪ this summer was definitely worth the wait. ♪ summer's best event from cadillac. let summer try and pass you by. lease this all-new cadillac ats for around $299 per month or purchase for 0% apr for 60 months. come in now for the best offers of the model year. 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

i'm gonna have to ask you to power down your little word game. i think your friends will understand. oh...no, it's actually my geico app...see? ...i just uh paid my bill. did you really? from the plane? yeah, i can manage my policy, get roadside assistance, pretty much access geico 24/7. sounds a little too good to be true sir. i'll believe that when pigs fly. ok, did she seriously just say that? geico. just a click away with our free mobile app.

we're back with the closing thought for this hour on what is going on in this trial. it seems to be, i want it hear from the panel, that george zimmerman thought he was a police officer and that is what he was working on in that assumption, what does that matter? >> well i suppose it confirms to their theory. he was a wannabe cop. he took the law no his own hands. he was a vigilante. >> paul, why are they going with this tierry? >> i think they are connecting the dots. they will ask prosecution to reference information introduced and they want to make sure that jury understands who they put on the stand and why they put them up there to tie the evidence and make him look more guilty. >> patrick, is this theory going to help. >> it will help. because it will show george zimmerman told shawn one thing

and reality was something different. >> keep it here on msnbc for coverage of the george zimmerman trial. martin bashir takes over after this break. mom always got good nutrition to taste great. she was a picky eater. well now i'm her dietitian... ...and last year, she wasn't eating so well. so i recommended boost complete nutritional drink to help her get the nutrition she was missing. and now she drinks it every day. well, it tastes great! [ male announcer ] boost drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones, and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. and now boost comes in two delicious, new bars.

look for them next to boost drinks. [ dietitian ] now, nothing keeps mom from doing what she loves... ...being my mom. "that starts with one of] the world's most advancedy," mom distribution systems," "and one of the most efficient trucking networks," "with safe, experienced drivers." "we work directly with manufacturers," "eliminating costly markups," "and buy directly from local farmers in every region of the country." "when you see our low prices, remember the wheels turning behind the scenes,

delivering for millions of americans, everyday. "dedication: that's the real walmart" humans. even when we cross our "ts" and dot our "i's", we still run into problems. that's why liberty mutual insurance offers accident forgiveness with our auto policies. if you qualify, your rates won't go up due to your first accident. because making mistakes is only human, and so are we. we also offer new car replacement, so if you total your new car, we'll give you the money for a new one. call liberty mutual insurance at... and ask us all about our auto features, like guaranteed repairs, where if you get into an accident and use one of our certified repair shops, the repairs are guaranteed for life. so call... to talk with an insurance expert about everything that comes standard with our base auto policy. and if you switch, you could save up to $423.

liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy? good afternoon. i'm joy reid in for martin bashir. the george zimmerman trial is currently in recess. we will be back to the courtroom when the jury comes back into the room. >> okay, let's jump right into

the medical examiner's testimony. i'm going to start with be, lawren lawrence, because that is your expertise. they really tried hard to push the medical examiner to talk about george zimmerman's injuries. how important is it for the defense to prove those injuries were severe and substantial in order to prove self-defense. >> it would support the idea that george zimmerman felt his life was in jeopardy. you know, when you have a gun, you have the license to carry a gun, you normally have training. you are taught never to use lethal force unless you're life is in jeopardy. and so, it is important for the medical examiner to talk about the kinds of injuries that george zimmerman sustained. of course, sometimes what appears to be minor injuries can be much more serious. for example, there are situations where people can fall down, bang their hea