use his power and veto the bill. i personally don't like the way these box stores homogenize all of our home towns. when each has a walmart, a rite aid, mcdonald's and starbucks, they lose their individual identity. but the market should sort that out. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. thanks, michael. and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, the state's closing arguments in the george zimmerman second-degree murder trial. this afternoon, the prosecution gave the jury its summary of the case against mr. zimmerman. a dramatic, emotional presentation. he believes he profiled, followed, and gunned down trayvon martin. it came just hours after the judge ruled that the jury can also consider the lesser charge of manslaughter. a decision that could have a huge impact on how the jury

decides this case. lots to talk about. but we start with the closing arguments. the prosecution reminding the jury of what their case is all about. >> good afternoon. a teenager is dead. he is dead through no fault of his own. he is dead because another man made assumptions. that man assumed certain things. he is dead not just because the man made those assumptions, because he acted upon those assumptions. and unfortunately, unfortunately, because his assumptions were wrong, they von

benjamin martin no longer walks on this earth. unfortunately, this is one of the last photos that will ever be taken of trayvon martin. and that is true because of the actions of one individual, the man before you, the defendant, george zimmerman. >> assistant state attorney bernie de la rionda then walked the jury through what the prosecution has called zimmerman's web of lies. how did he not know the streets of his own neighborhood? did he exaggerate his injuries? if trayvon martin really grabbed mr. zimmerman's gun, why was none of martin's dna on it?

all together, it was an effort by the prosecution to deliver on what it has called mr. zimmerman's web of lies. an effort to undermine his truthfulness in the eyes of the jury. the defense will deliver its closing arguments tomorrow. then george zimmerman's fate will be in the hands of the jury. back with me now is my all-star legal panel, msnbc legal analyst lisa bloom, former prosecutor faith jenkins, defense attorney ken padowitz, defense attorney john burris, and former prosecutor marcia clark. she is also author of "killer ambition." thank you all for being here. >> thanks for having us. >> thank you, thank you. >> marcia, let me start with you. why was the prosecution so focused on what they called zimmerman's web of lies in these closing arguments? >> because this is a key aspect of the proof of guilt in this

case. if all you did was simply get out of your car to look at the street sign, to repeat the name of the street to the police and you didn't follow trayvon martin, and you didn't become the aggressor, and you didn't start the confrontation, and then escalate it to the point of hooting him, if none of that happened, then why did you lie? why do you need to lie if what you did was innocent, if you did nothing wrong? and that's really kind of the whole theme of things. and it all started with the mind-set that trayvon martin was somehow up to no good, and that he was somebody that had to be watched and was behaving suspiciously, when inspect we know based on all of the evidence put together, trayvon martin was doing nothing more than walking home with skittles and iced tea. >> let me go around my expert panel. give me a general assessment of how did the prosecution do today in your judgment. let me start with you, lisa bloom. >> i'm sorry to say, i think it

was a poor presentation. he had a lot of the falcons, but it was a meandering walk through the evidence, instead of making declarative statements. i don't know why he was asking so many questions. questions are doubt. questions are what the defense raises. >> let me ask you, faith. >> i disagree with lisa on this point. there are questions because the only other eyewitness to this encounter is dead. so obviously there are going to be questions. and on rebuttal, i'm sure the state is going to get up and say don't reward this defendant for killing the only other eyewitness. i thought the prosecutor did a great job of painting a narrative today. why are we here? who started this? who profiled? who pursued in who had a gun? who had all the power? one person, and that was george zimmerman. >> john? >> i think it was true he was powerful and he talked about who trayvon was and why he was being profiled and all that. but i have to tell you, i didn't like the questions that he was always leaving up to the juries. and at the end of the day, i don't think he was that strong on whether or not he himself had proven the case for

second-degree murder. overall, i thought he could have done a better job putting forth and punctuating those issues that proved the case as opposed to raising questions for the jurors to answer. >> ken, you have done 35 murder cases in florida. tell what's you think. >> well, it was a good closing argument for the prosecution, but it was not a great one. i mean, these rhetorical questions is effective if used sparingly to show the jury that you're a minister of justice, you're not just a salesman. but he used so many of these question, leaving them unanswered, some of them, that i think it was too many. i would say it was good. he had an effective use of demonstrative aids. he knows the defense is going to use computer animation, which by the way, i did the first one in the state of florida in 1993 in state versus pierce. so i know how effective that animation can be. and the prosecution's answer to that animation was using these visual aids, using the tapes and the statements made by zimmerman

and showing the jury piece by piece by piece throughout the closing. so i think it was effective. i think it was good, but they have a stronger manslaughter case, not second degree. and i would have liked to see more arguments towards manslaughter. and he didn't really touch upon it as much as i'd like to see. >> i don't think he wanted to do that, honestly. he didn't want to make the argument around manslaughter because he knows that's a fallback position. he had to be as strong as he could be on second-degree murder. now his rebuttal argument may be stronger on manslaughter. but not at the first instance. i think he had to walk a fine line there. >> marcia? you've been a prosecutor. give me your general assessment. >> i thought he did a good job. i actually thought it was a powerful -- and more powerful to me in the beginning than in the end. >> right. >> in setting the stage, in setting the mind-set that zimmerman started with. that's so important to set all the wheels in motion. you have a man profiling a boy, a young boy who is walking home in the rain. and thinking these things about

him. and therefore acting upon them. and then, getting out of the car to follow him. and all of that gets all the wheels in motion, if you will. it all started because of zimmerman's mind-set. i thought that was very effective. i too thought there was a little bit too much of the rhetorical questioning. a little bit goes a very long way. and it's okay once in a while. say really? could you really belief this? and if it's truly rhetorical, that's fine. it's not bad to seem even handed. the defense will say this or accommodate what they're going to say, and answer it. you're a prosecutor and that means you have a slightly different role than a pure advocate that a defense attorney. and i agree with john, very much, that they can't talk about manslaughter yet. not yet. right now is the big push for second degree. in rebuttal, you can say look, if all else fails and you don't see ill will, and we don't know why you wouldn't, then you can get to manslaughter and discuss it there, but not now. >> let me come back to you, lisa. let me show you this. they made this point about the

street. the only three streets in the closed community, and they raised zimmerman's use of looking for the street. watch this. >> that's why he kept talking about, oh, i didn't know the name of the street. i was looking for an address. by the way, there is only three streets. how difficult can it be? he is the neighborhood watch guy. he has been living there four years. he takes his dog down to that dog walk. but he doesn't know the names of the street? he doesn't know the main street that you go in? because see, when he admits something like that, then it proves one thing, that he was following him. that he had profiled him and he was following him. >> because he cut down here and made a right against twin trees lane. >> did you catch that? did you catch him in one lie right there? he originally told the police over and over, before and even after this interview, he didn't know the name of the street.

and when they kind of let him talk, he gives the name right there. >> how plausible is that excuse, lisa? >> this is one of the best lies the prosecution has to work with. and he put it out there, and there is no question about it. the defense has said since opening statement, george zimmerman followed trayvon martin. i think the prosecutor spent a lot of time on this because this is easy picks for him. this is the low-hanging fruit. i'm thinking the entire time, and i think the jury was too, get to self-defense. get to the fight. prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this was a murder case. he is not on trial simply for making improper assumptions and profiling trayvon martin. that is a part of the case. he needs to spend some time on that. but he needs to spend his time more effectively and get to the crux of the case, get to the killing. show the jury why this is beyond a reasonable doubt a murder case. we never got a prosecution theory of the case. all we have is the defense

theory of the case, that zimmerman is down, trayvon is on top. how did zimmerman sustain the injuries to his face? did he punch himself in the nose? did he walk into the tree? did he fall face-down into the concrete. ? we have never heard a prosecution theory how that happened. i don't think we. >> faith, wait, wait, wait, wait. faith, let me show you this. the prosecution made a point about zimmerman saying and played that he said that he touched a gun. let me show you this. >> he's got this gun in his holster, and you'll see in a few minutes, maybe more than a few minutes, one of the things that he does, he demonstrates to the police where he had the gun. and it wasn't right here in the front. it was towards the back. and it was hidden. and he'll demonstrate to the police out there where it was. look at the gun. look at the size of this gun. how did the victims see that in the darkness?

where was it? it wasn't outside. it was tucked in behind. and he'll demonstrate to the police where it was. how did the victim see this gun? >> now, faith, that is a point that lisa bloom has been making, the holster point, the fact where it was and all. but doesn't that also answer lisa concern about addressing self-defense, because if he lied about him touching the gun or knowing where the gun was, doesn't that punch a hole in his saying i feared for my life? >> yes. and here is the thing. the prosecutor, they're not going get up and say oh, this is exactly what happened. this is when the gun was pulled out. they don't know. it's not clear. but what they're saying is we may not know this, but we know this person, the defendant, is lying about it. there are two people involved

here. one is dead. the other is a a liar. look at the lies he is telling. the small lies, not knowing the name of the street, to the big guys, trayvon martin going for the gun, putting his hand on the gun, being inconsistent about those two things. he told two different stories about that. so that's one of the inconsistencies, one of the lies. that's huge, because it's based on what the defendant has said, the prosecutor is arguing today it is physically impossible for trayvon martin to have done what george zimmerman said he did. >> ken, what do you think? >> remember, the prosecution had two choices here at the beginning of this trial. they could have put on no statements of zimmerman and forced the defendant to take the stand on the defense side of the case. but they elected to go with this web of lies theme. and by putting on all the video and all the statements of zimmerman, their theme in this case is web of lies. so they have to stick with that. and they're showing in the closing argument here, there are all these lies. one lie after the next lie after the next lie. ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you can not believe the

snake zimmerman would cut off his head. he is a liar. the rest of the snake dice, meaning you can't believe zimmerman, therefore you can't believe self-defense. and therefore he is guilty of murder. that's their argument, and they're sticking to this theme of this web of lies. >> all right. our legal team is staying with us for the full hour tonight. and there is so much to talk about. coming up, who started the altercation that night. >> why does this defendant get out of the car if he thinks that trayvon martin is a threat to him? why? why? because he's got a gun. he's got the equalizer. >> how important is that argument for the prosecution? and remember, friend or foe, i want to know. send me your e-mails. "reply al" is coming. stay with us.

have you joined the "politicsnation" conversation on facebook yet? today thousands of you were in our phrasebook community. you watched live as the prosecution gave their closing argument. but if you couldn't watch live during the day, we've got more highlights from today's arguments, coming up next. but first, we want to hear your thoughts on the trial. please head over to facebook and search "politicsnation" and like us to join the conversation that keeps going long after the show ends. discover card. i wanted to ask you a couple questions. i've got nothing to hide. my bill's due today and i haven't paid yet. you can pay up 'til midnight online or by phone the day it's due. got a witness to verify that? just you. you called me. ok, that checks out. at discover, we treat you like you'd treat you. get the it card with payment flexibility.

[ john ] nope. [ tires squeal ] twelve bucks a night! no. they have waterbeds. ew. no! are we near a gas station? [ phone beeps] [ phone ] no. is that from the mini bar? [ both ] no. is that a cop? no. [ cop ] do you know how fast you were going? no. eighty-seven [ groans ] he's right. is that oscar mayer? [ karen] yes! [ male announcer ] in a world filled with "no", it's nice to finally say "yes". oscar mayer selects deli meat, no artificial preservatives and gluten free. it's yes food. it's oscar mayer.

to quote the defendant, and pardon my language, he was one of those [ bleep ] that get away. pardon my language. he was one of those [ bleep ]. >> quoting george zimmerman's own words, the prosecution today said those words helped prove that he is guilty of second-degree murder. but now the jury will also be allowed to consider the lesser charge of manslaughter, and that could prove crucial to the verdict that they reach in this case. back with me is our legal panel. lisa, let me start with you, because you have to leave in a minute, and we'll see you later in the show. how important is second lesser charge for the jury to consider? >> i think it's extremely important. many people have said this is a manslaughter case, not a murder case. i've always disagreed -- well, not always. but since the close of the prosecution case, i thought they put on a good case actually for second-degree murder. i just don't think they put it away today in closing argument.

bottom line, i think you have to present the evidence for both you. present it in the alternative. you certainly hit hardest at the top charge. but they have the manslaughter charge. they're going to be instructed on it. you don't ignore that. you talk about that charge as well. i think either one, a conviction on either one would be a clear win for the prosecution. >> marsha, here are the charges that the jury will consider. second-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, and manslaughter, which if done with a firearm, has a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison. so if they convict on either one, it is significant punishment. clearly it doesn't return any kind of life to the family because they've lost their son and brother. but it clearly is punishment. >> that's true. and it's significant. and, you know, the problem is that in every murder case, we cannot bring the victim back. i mean, ultimate justice would

be the victim comes back. but we can't do that. so the only thing you can do is punish the defendant with a significant punishment as the conviction warrants. in this case, either conviction is going to wind up a very significant sentence for him. and i think that's appropriate. >> ken, you know the prosecutor talked today about assumptions. he said that george zimmerman made that he shot trayvon martin a lot of assumptions. listen to this. >> this defendant made the wrong assumption. he profiled him as a criminal. he assumed certain things that trayvon martin was up to no good, and that is what led to his death. what started this? assumptions. incorrect assumptions.

on the part of one individual. >> isn't that the theme of the prosecution? isn't that the theory of their case, that this accused mr. zimmerman started with assumptions, profiled martin, killed him, and lied about it? ken? >> reverend, the reason that he does not get an a plus and gets a c-plus to a b-minus in my opinion, is assumption is a wimpy word. zimmerman didn't make assumption on that night. he made prejudgments. he prejudgments with this young man with a hoodie as being a criminal. he prejudged a whole bunch of things. he didn't make assumption. that's a very neutral word. i didn't like the use of that word. but yes, his theme overall was effective. it goes into the web of lies. that goes to the amounts of second-degree murder. but i agree, you know, with some of the commentators that this is

not a very strong case for second-degree murder. it's a much stronger case for manslaughter. so i think when the jury is going to be hearing from the prosecution first, while they have all night to think about what the prosecutor says before the defense closing tomorrow, it would have been good to touch upon manslaughter and insert that in there in a certain way so the jury can start thinking about it without giving up the argument that it is in fact second-degree murder. so it's not an assumption. there were prejudgments by zimmerman, and they were not neutral assumptions. >> john burris? >> absolutely that's correct. i think the term here that no one is talking about, this was a racial profiling time of assumption and prejudgment. >> yes. >> because you think he did it with respect to all the other cases that came in, they were all african-american, young men. here is another one he saw and he made certain assumption about it, made prejudgments about him. and there there his whole attitude and conduct based on that.

that goes to the mental state that goes to second-degree murder. i don't know if it gets you all the way there. but he certainly had the a predisposition at the time to prejudge this young man and because he was an african-american male walking in the neighborhood, wearing a hoodie, believed he was acting in a suspicious way, even though he wasn't. that part is important. i think that at the end of the day, though, the prosecution has to deal with this whole question, though, of what happened during the course of that fight. now, what they have done is tried to build this case around circumstantial evidence which is the lies that were told, and therefore you have a circumstance you can infer by lying that he must have had a mental state that is consistent with the attitude he had at the very beginning. that's a tough way to make it. but that's the road that they have gone down. >> but faith, we're dealing in florida. five members of the jury are white. if he had brought up race without having specific evidence of race, could that have backfired? >> absolutely. >> did he say by saying

profiling and preassumptions, didn't he put where the jury may be able to see that without raising race and then the defense saying no one came in here and said there was a race problem? >> the prosecutor is using the word profiling. these jurors know exactly what he is referring to. they know that the prosecutor is not saying that zimmerman profiled trayvon because he didn't like the kind of candy he was carrying. they know that the prosecutors arguing they profiled him because of the way he look and how he was dressed. they understand that. they also know that these prior calls are coming in, and that his mind-set started developing not on the night that he saw trayvon martin, but months prior to that, leading up to this incident and the night that he saw trayvon martin when he said they're not going to get away. he meant it, because then he followed him and confronted him. >> marcia, the prosecutor called george zimmerman a wanna-be cop. listen to this. >> recall how he says that at one point that trayvon martin is

circling his car? and my point in saying that is number one, you have to determine whether that is true. but let's presume that part is true. and he says he's got something in his hands. why does this defendant get out of the car if he thinks that trayvon martin is a threat to him? why? why? because he's got a gun. he's got the equalizer. he's going to take care of it. he is a wanna-be cop. >> is that effective, marcia? >> oh, i thought it was very effective. and i've been saying this all along, reverend. you know, he started this, knowing he had the lethal power in his pocket. he got out of that truck, knowing that he had a gun. and, you know, that makes a whole different mind-set. now, what that should do, and a responsible gunowner will tell you, what that should do is make him feel even more restrained, even more careful, because he knows he has lethal power in his pocket, and you don't use that unjudiciously. but that's the problem with someone like george zimmerman, who gets out of his truck with

his big head of steam, which is what the prosecutor is talking about, about all the other cases where the prosecutors messed up and didn't do anything about it and the punks got away. he gets out and is all puffed up with his gun. he is going to run trayvon martin down. he is not scared. if he was scared and he was worried and frightening, then why did he get out at all? he knew the name of the street. i think the prosecutor showed that beautifully, by showing how he popped the name of the street right out during his conversation with the police. and one other thing, reverend, i just want to say one thing about having to disprove -- the prosecution has to disprove self-defense. when you get into, why are they talking so much about the defense theory of the case, they are required to disprove, disprove self-defense, not just prove their case, but disprove self-defense. >> i got to take a break. i'll come back to you, faith. stay with me there is much more from the trial today. coming up, we'll bottom line it. did the prosecution prove the

case? and how did the jury react today? we're live in sanford. and what will the defense have to say in their closing argument? plus, after day 12 of testimony, what evidence and testimony had the strongest impact in this case? ♪ [ slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast you'll forget you had heartburn. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums

since aflac is helping with his expenses while he can't work, he can focus on his recovery. he doesn't have to worry so much about his mortgage, groceries, or even gas bills. kick! kick... feel it! feel it! feel it! nice work! ♪ you got it! you got it! yes! aflac's gonna help take care of his expenses. and us...we're gonna get him back in fighting shape. ♪ [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes at aflac.com.

[ male announcer ] fight pepperoni heartburn and pepperoni breath fast with tums freshers. concentrated relief that goes to work in seconds and freshens breath. tums freshers. ♪ tum...tum...tum...tum... tums! ♪ fast heartburn relief and minty fresh breath. diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues... with three strains of good bacteria. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'.

up next, we'll go live outside the courtroom in sanford, florida.

how is the jury reacting to today's dramatic prosecution closing argument. stay with us. 's known definitely for its traffic, congestion, for it's smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the busses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution to the earth. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment. you will lose 3 sets of keys 4 cell phones 7 socks and 6 weeks of sleep but one thing you don't want to lose is any more teeth. if you wear a partial, you are almost twice as likely to lose your supporting teeth. new poligrip and polident for partials 'seal and protect' helps minimize stress, which may damage supporting teeth, by stabilizing your partial. and 'clean and protect' kills odor-causing bacteria. care for your partial.

help protect your natural teeth. details are really important during four course. i want to make sure that everything is perfect. that's why i do what i do. [ male announcer ] it's red lobster's just $14.99. start your feast with a choice of soup, then salad, plus biscuits! next, choose one of nine amazing entrees like new coconut and citrus grilled shrimp or linguini with shrimp and scallops. then finish with dessert. your four course seafood feast, just $14.99. [ mortazavi ] everything needs to be picture perfect. i'm reza, culinary manager.

and i sea food differently. i'm reza, culinary manager. so you can capture your receipts, ink for all business purchases. and manage them online with jot, the latest app from ink. so you can spend less time doing paperwork. and more time doing paperwork. ink from chase. so you can. [ herbie ] eh, hold on brent, what's this? mmmm, nice car. there's no doubt, that's definitely gonna throw him off. she's seen it too. oh this could be trouble. [ sentra lock noise ] oh man. gotta think fast, herbie. back pedal, back pedal. [ crowd cheering ] oh, he's down in flames and now the ice-cold shoulder. one last play... no, game over! gps take him to the dog house. [ male announcer ] make a powerful first impression. the all-new nissan sentra. ♪

george zimmerman's fate ultimately lies with the jury of six women. by this time tomorrow, they will likely already be in deliberations. joining me outside now at the courthouse in sanford, florida, is msnbc's craig melvin. craig, so much drama in that courtroom. how did the jury react to the state's closing argument today? >> reverend al, this is something that we've been keeping a close lookout on over the past few weeks as this trial has gone on. we can tell you that the jurors were taking far fewer notes than they typically do this. has been a jury that has sort of prided itself on taking copious notes. not so much today. the juries seem to be quieten gauged, listening instead of writing down. something else we should note here, reverend. i don't know if a lot of folks

have realized this. but tomorrow, before the jury starts deliberations, three of them are going to get a big surprise there are nine in the box. before they begin their deliberations, judge nelson is going to say to three of them, thank you for your service. she'll identify them by numbers. she'll thank them for their service. and then she'll excuse them. those are the three who are alternates who do not know they are alternates right now. >> all right. msnbc's craig melvin, thanks. and let's go back with -- let's go back through some of the key testimony. let's go there first. back with me faith jenkins, john burris, ken padowitz and marcia clark. a big part of the state's case is disproving zimmerman's claim that trayvon martin covered his mouth. >> this photograph, the defense keeps parading, recall what i did? i said what do you expect? blood. and i'm going to show you the photographs. not just that the medical

examiner saying oh, that dr. bao, he is incompetent, he didn't know what he was doing. no. i'm going to show you the photographs at the scene which show what? no blood on his hands. they're going to say oh, it was raining that night. wow. and i guess the blood on the defendant's head just stuck there, right? but on the victim they just kind of vanished? >> den, how crucial is this argument today? >> i think it's very good. he is being very sarcastic, which i sometimes do in front of a jury. but it's real. heavy comes across to the jury like this is so unbelievable. and it is unbelievable that the blood stays on zimmerman's head, but it gets washed off in the rain allegedly on the hands of trayvon martin. it doesn't make sense. common sense in life experience for the people in that jury are going to say yeah, that doesn't make sense. zimmerman is not telling us the truth here. and that's the web of lies theme that the prosecution is hammering away. you can't believe this guy. and if you can't believe him, you can't believe this self-defense.

it's very crucial, very good point to the prosecution. >> one thing that during the trial we'll remember is the pathologist testified that zimmerman's injuries were consistent with his story. faith, let me play that to you. >> is this injury consistent with mr. zimmerman's head having impacted a sidewalk? >> yes, sir. >> you can see there is a swelling right here. it's very prominent. it's just below the area where he has a mall abrasion. >> is the injury you see in this exhibit consistent, this exhibit 79, consistent with having been punched in the nose? >> yes. the physical evidence is consistent with mr. martin being over mr. zimmerman. >> so, faith, how important is that? >> well, here is the deal. george zimmerman said he was hit in the face 25 to 30 times.

his head was repeatedly slammed against the concrete. and then look at his injuries. his injuries speak for themselves. he refused medical attention the night of this incident. he got two band-aids on the back of his head, no stitches, no sutures. well still don't know the exact damage to his nose because he did not go to the doctor to find out if he had a diagnosis whether it was fracture order broken because he didn't feel he needed the medical attention. the bottom line is he did not have significant injuries. he had minor injuries, completely inconsistent with the story and the beating that he said that he took from trayvon martin. that's a problem for him here. >> john burris? >> i agree with that. part of this whole notion about for the prosecution's case is that he claims that he was severely injured and beaten so that therefore he was beaten within an inch of life and about to receive great bodily injury

and therefore he used grave bodily force. what if he wasn't? he decide he had enough and essentially was in the middle of a fight and brings out a gun. therefore, you easily get to manslaughter, but you can also in fact given the mental state that he had before, you might very well push your way into the second-degree murder. the point is it's a significant lie in terms of exaggeration of his injuries. it is not consistent with someone who is getting ready to receive great bodily injuries. >> marcia, if you listen to another of the witnesses the lead investigator in the case, he testified he thought zimmerman was exaggerating about those injuries. listen to this. >> you said in response to a question from mr. de la rionda yesterday that you perceived mr. zimmerman's injuries to be minor, correct? >> yes, sir. >> you were asked specifically about exaggeration. do you feel he had exaggerated the manner in which he was hit? >> yes, sir. >> how important is that, marcia? >> oh, that's so critical.

to me, i have to say, even more than all the other lies, and there are some pretty big ones there, this one about the injuries is the most critical. because it shows you an effort to -- it actually shows to meconciousness of guilt. i'm going to have to say that i was really getting the tar beat out of me because otherwise i can't justify having shot this kid. and to the extent -- and that is so verifiable. you can look at him. look at him. he had, like faith said, two bandages on the back of his head? come on. he walked away refusing all medical attention, and then claims he was beaten repeatedly with his head slammed into the pavement. nobody buys that it's so important. and by the way -- >> it makes sense, marcia, if he is super man. he has no injuries. so that is where it makes sense, or george zimmerman is lying. he is not just exaggerating. >> right, right. therefore without kryptonite, trayvon couldn't have won. it's also significant, don't forget the pathologist who testified for the prosecution

who said i find these injuries to be insignificant, and also consistent with a single blow, that he could have fallen and made all of these injuries at the the same time, which means that all of this scenario about pounding his head into the ground, which by the way i never bought from day one, none of the injuries fit that. which is something else i wanted to say. yesterday when they were doing a demonstration with the dummy, if you recall john guy, the prosecutor, showed himself straddling the dummy and used it for purpose of showing position. a really good graphic way of showing how could possibly it could have gone down the way george zimmerman said. and then mark o'mara gets on top of the dummy, which weighs about maybe five pounds and starts pounding into it the ground to show how george zimmerman's head could have been pounded. i hope somebody pointed out the fact that that dummy weighs 5 pounds and george zimmerman weighed 200. you don't pound a person that way. >> john, go ahead, quickly. >> uwas going to say you also got to look at how he was moving around when the police arrived. he wasn't stumbling, falling. all of his gait was perfectly

normal. this is not a person who had been pounded into the cement because he would have been dizzy or something. >> and did not ask for medical attention which says his state of mind was that he didn't even the had what injuries one could argue. panel, please stay with us. much more after the break. stay with us. i met a turtle friend today so, you don't get that very often. it seemed like it was more than happy to have us in his home. so beautiful. avo: more travel. more options. more personal. whatever you're looking for expedia has more ways to help you find yours. trust your instincts to make the call. to treat my low testosterone, my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18

or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron. the judge and the defense. tension in the courtroom. could it hurt the defense case? that's next.

we've learned a lot during this trial and seen some things we have never really seen in a courtroom. like an attorney objecting to the judge. this seems to be no love lost between defense attorney don west and judge debra nelson. once again today, the fireworks went off after attorney west asked for a special jury instruction. >> i'm not giving that instruction. >> we submit that's an integral part of our defense and you're in error by not instructing this jury properly on the law. >> i understand. i have already ruled. you have -- you continually disagree with this court every time i make a ruling. i have provided you on three separate occasions with the court's professional conduct in the courtroom. and included in that is do not continue to argue with the court after we've ruled. if i have made a mistake in this case, you will appeal.

>> this comes a day after a testy exchange when mr. west tried to object to the judge when she asked mr. zimmerman if he planned on testifying. >> have you made a decision, sir, as to whether or not you want to testify in this case? >> your honor, i object to that question. >> okay. overruled. have you made a decision a as to whether or not you want to testify in that case? >> i object to that question. >> overruled. the court is entitle inquire in to mr. zimmerman's -- >> on mr. zimmerman's -- >> i am asking your client a question, please, mr. west. >> i object to the court inquiring to mr. zimmerman about his decision whether or not to testify -- >> your objection is overruled. >> and then something you don't see every day. the judge literally walking out on attorney west while talking. >> court is in recess.

i will give my ruling in the morning. i'll see you at 8:00 in the morning. court is in recess. >> it's 10:00 -- >> it's 9:56. court is in recess. thank you very much. with all due respect, we'll see you at 8:00 in the morning. >> i'm not physical able to keep up this pace much longer. it's 10:00 at night. we started this morning. we've had full days every day. weekends, depositions at night. >> the judge walked out. she was gone. all of this happened without the jury in the room. but with the defense closing argument tomorrow, could it have any impact on the outcome of the case? marcia clark, wow, what do you have to say about these exchanges? >> well, you know, things take place in a court of law. i can say that i've actually been in more fiery exchanges than those myself, and i've seen other defense attorneys who were more on the hot seat than don west was, though not often.

look, here is the thing. number one thing is the judge is right about the fact that once the court rules, you've already made your objection, you've made your record. that's what you have had to do. once you have done it, the court has ruled against you, move on. unless you have a new point to assert that no one has considered, different story. but that's not what has happened here. don west keeps going after the same thing over and other and over again. and she says i ruled, stop repeateding yourself. she has a sequestered jury that is waiting in the wings every time they do this kind of stuff. and they don't have time to waste. and she is very wisely protective of this jury which is excellent. i know john doesn't agree with me about requesting the client about whether or not he wants to testify. i acknowledge it. but i disagree with john. she has a right. she has a duty to inquiry as to whether or not this man wants to testify or waives his right because it's a personal right for the defendant to have or not honor or not. she has to make it clear on the record that he has exercised his

own independent choice. to argue with her about that is ridiculous because she is not asking incriminating questions. she is asking for a record on appeal. that's all she is doing. so a lot of this argument back and forth it does nothing for him. >> let me ask someone who is never fiery and always subdued, lisa. >> how did i know that was going to be me. >> what do you think about all these exchanges? >> all this bickering, what are they, cable news pundits? it's something to really watch in the courtroom. and i'm torn, because i really like a fiery advocate for his client. but i also really like a woman in a power position. so i can't possibly call this one. >> right. >> i can call it. i can call it. >> ken, you're there in florida. does this affect the defense closing at all? >> no. >> listen, george zimmerman hires a lawyer to fight for him. he doesn't want his lawyer doing the waltz with the judge or playing nice in the sandbox. so although i wasn't very happy with mr. west with his knock-knock joke in the

beginning of the trial, he scores tons more points in my book. he is doing his job. he is making a record. he doesn't really care about the fight with the judge. he wants that court reporter taking down what the defense situation is and how they're being prejudiced. so he is doing his job. he is fighting hard for his client. and you know what? he is earning his money. and i think he is doing a good job. i think he should continue to fight if he's got the fight for his client. we're talking about liberty. so you got to fight for your client. >> absolutely. i agree with this totally. >> now, john, the state has asked don west to be investigated for a photo his daughter posted after rachel jeantel testified. the caption on the photo read "we beat stupidity celebration cones and dad killed it." could that be a factor why the judge is so tough on him? >> no, i don't think so. i think the judge is dealing with don west as he presents himself in court. she is not going to hold him responsible for his daughter unless she knows, has reason to believe that he was involved in it. >> well, he was in the photo with the daughter.

>> well, yeah. i would hope that she is not. don west is doing a very aggressive job as a lawyer. i disagree on certain points because i don't like the way he treated rach. . but he has properly stood up to the judge when he needed to. i didn't say the judge should not have inquired whether he wanted to waive zimmerman, it's a question of when you do it. i don't think the judge should have done it at that time when the case had not resolved itself. don was perfectly right to protest that type of inquiry at that time. certainly there was going to be a time when that was appropriate. look, i agree that lawyers are supposed to fight for their clients. and sometimes the judge is a person who doesn't necessarily have your client's best interests at heart. and there are different agendas taking part. >> i'm going to have to hold it right there. i want you all to stay with me. i'm coming back to get final thoughts from all of you about what to expect tomorrow. that's next.

to gauge whether or not the projects will be done in a timely fashion and within budget. angie's list members can tell you which provider is the best in town. you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare. now that we're expecting, i like the fact i can go onto angie's list and look for pediatricians. the service providers that i've found on angie's list actually have blown me away. find out why more than two million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. thto fight chronic. osteoarthritis pain. to fight chronic low back pain. to take action. to take the next step. today, you will know you did something for your pain. cymbalta can help. cymbalta is a pain reliever fda-approved to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain. one non-narcotic pill a day, every day, can help reduce this pain. tell your doctor right away if your mood worsens, you have unusual changes in mood or behavior or thoughts of suicide. anti-depressants can increase these in children,

teens, and young adults. cymbalta is not for children under 18. people taking maois, linezolid or thioridazine or with uncontrolled glaucoma should not take cymbalta. taking it with nsaid pain relievers, aspirin, or blood thinners may increase bleeding risk. severe liver problems, some fatal, were reported. signs include abdominal pain and yellowing skin or eyes. tell your doctor about all your medicines, including those for migraine and while on cymbalta, call right away if you have high fever, confusion and stiff muscles or serious allergic skin reactions like blisters, peeling rash, hives, or mouth sores to address possible life-threatening conditions. talk about your alcohol use, liver disease and before you reduce or stop cymbalta. dizziness or fainting may occur upon standing. take the next step. talk to your doctor. cymbalta can help. ♪ it's about where you're going. the new ram 1500. best-in-class 25 mpg. ♪ north american truck of the year. ♪ the truck of texas.

better residual value than ford and chevy. it's the fastest-growing truck brand in america. guts. glory. ram. diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues... with three strains of good bacteria. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. 50 years ago dr. martin luther king said i have a dream. today we have made progresses, but the struggle for rights and opportunities goes on, for blacks, for latinos, for women and the lgbt community. this summer we'll highlight stories of the individual efforts to move this nation forward to advance the dream. >> advancing the dream, a special series all summer long

on "politicsnation" week nights at 6:00 on msnbc. tomorrow morning at 8:30, the defense gives its closing argument. then the prosecution gets time for rebuttal. then the judge gives the jury instructions. and then they get the case. back with me once again is our panel of legal experts. let me ask each of you what do you think the defense has to do in their closing argument, and what do you think the prosecution has to do in its rebuttal tomorrow. let me start with you, faith. >> the defense is going to say the state has not met their burden of proving this case beyond a reasonable doubt, or proving this was not self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. on rebuttal the state is going to argue george zimmerman is a liar, you can't believe anything he says. this 17-year-old is dead. he needs to be held accountable. >> lisa? >> the defense needs to explain the inconsistencies and say any time somebody tells a story over and over, there are going to be

inconsistencies. that's true with the prosecution witnesses. it's true with george zimmerman. he may be guilty of profiling, of making wrong assumptions, but he is not guilty of murder. for the prosecution, they need to put a theory out there that explains what happened. they could simply say that there were words exchanged, perhaps shoving. trayvon martin did punch zimmerman. he is down. he pulls the gun, trayvon is screaming for help, zimmerman is angry and he shoots the gun. >> marcia? >> yeah, i think that the defense has to first of all explain away george zimmerman's aggressive conduct in following. he has to explain that he wasn't following, and that somehow trayvon got the jump on him and frame it in their narrative so that trayvon looks like the aggressor and george zimmerman looks like the victim throughout in order to get to the point where he is justifiably shooting at trayvon. and in rebuttal, the prosecution is going to have to reframe the argument, and i think at that point put out some kind of a solid theory, not blow-by-blow, but show how really it was george zimmerman who was the aggressor, who made all the moves that required ultimately

trayvon to defend himself. >> all right. >> and then zimmerman shot him. >> john? >> yeah, i think what the defense has to do is put aside as much as they can what happened beforehand and deal strictly with the shooting itself, and show that the defense is a plausible self-defense. then the prosecution has to refute that. in terms of the rebuttal part, i do think they have to deal with the question that these injuries were not so significant that it justifies pulling out a gun and shooting this young man. and they can do that by showing the injuries and the medical testimony that they have. >> let me go quick to ken. >> the defense has to show micro, that they focused right on seconds before the shooting to show she was in fear for his life and he had to defend himself and fire that gun. tonight prosecution side, they have to show macro. the entire stalking, following him, putting him in a corner. trayvon martin stands his ground, has to defend himself, and then how the shooting occurs and how that ends up being second-degree murder or manslaughter. >> well we are certainly going to follow this tomorrow, both the defense and the rebuttal,

and the judge's instructions to the jury. i want to say thank you to my legal panel, and i want to say thanks to you for watching. and let us be here tomorrow to assess what we see on the closing day of statements. thanks for watching. i'm al sharpton. "hardball" starts right now. let the closing arguments begin. let's play "hardball." good evening i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews. leading off tonight, closing argumenting in the george zimmerman trial, capping off a dramatic day in court. bernie de la rionda of the state delivering an emotionally charged final appeal to the jury to find zimmerman guilty of second-degree murder. it tied together virtually all of the elements and arguments that we have seen them present in this case including zimmerman's infamous profanity-laced call to the