even the people that have talked on your show the last couple of days, all the shows, by and large, the african-americans will tell you that it looks like it should be a guilty verdict, with very few exceptions. >> and whites are the other way. >> it's crazy. >> thank you, lisa bloom, paul henderson, tad nelson and karen de soto. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being was. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. >> thanks, michael, and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, verdict watch in the george zimmerman trial. the jury's decision could come down at literally any moment. these are live pictures from the seminole county courthouse in sanford, florida, where jurors have been shut away in the jury room, deliberating for about three and a half hours now. by this point, they probably selected their foreman and are reviewing the evidence. after 12 days of testimony and 53 witnesses, these six women on

the jury must decide whether george zimmerman is guilty in the shooting death of 17-year-old trayvon martin. this morning, they heard mr. zimmerman's lawyer make closing arguments for the defense. >> you look at all this evidence, and you have to say i have a reasonable doubt as to whether or not the state convinced me. he didn't act in self-defense. that's all you have to do. you don't have to write innocent on the bottom of the verdict form. i want you to really, really look at the instructions, apply them, and just say he acted in self-defense, find him not guilty. let him go back and get back to his life. >> after that, the state had its final chance for a rebuttal. prosecutor john guy made a passionate final plea to the jury. >> this isn't a complicated case.

it's a common sense case. and it's not a case about self-defense. it's a case about self-denial. the defendant didn't shoot trayvon martin because he had to. he shot him because he wanted to. that's the bottom line. what do we owe trayvon martin? 16 years and 21 days, forever. he was a son, he was a brother, he was a friend. and the last thing he did on this earth was try to get home. trayvon martin may not have the defendant's blood on his hands, but george zimmerman will forever have trayvon martin's blood on his. forever.

>> trayvon martin was killed february 26th, 2012, one year, four months and 16 days later. a jury in a court of law is deciding whether george zimmerman should be criminally responsible for his death. every second it goes by brings us closer to that verdict. with me now is my all-star legal panel, joy reid, managing editor the grio.com, former prosecutor faith jenkins, defense attorney ken padowitz, and former prosecutor marcia clark. she is author of "killer ambition." thank you all for being here. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> great to be here. >> thank you. >> marcia, how did the defense and prosecution do today in their final arguments to the jury? >> reverend, i thought they both did a really good job, very strong. and, you know, it's interesting the different styles that they have to adopt. and wisely. so you know, the defense approaches this from a very calm, very reasoned, let's all

calm down now and think rationally, you know, and try to step away from all the sympathy issues that are very much in play for the prosecution. and which john guy i thought very effectively used to his benefit in talking about the young man and boy even, 17 years old to me, have i two sons, and they were once 17, and they were boys. and this man, george zimmerman in contrasting the two, very effectively i thought. >> now, let me go to you for this, ken. you had prosecutor john guy and the defense attorney mark o'mara. they both talked about the following and how zimmerman following trayvon martin, how that plays into the jury deliberation. listen to their contrasting ways of dealing with this. >> every shred of law that applies to this case you will have before you.

what you won't have is any law that suggests something like following member is legal because it's not. >> right up until the time of his death, was that child not in fear when he was running from that defendant? isn't that every child's worst nightmare? to be followed on the way home in the dark by a stranger? isn't that every child's worst fear? that was trayvon martin's last emotion. >> ken, what was the more effective approach to you? you've tried over 30 murder cases in florida. >> well, the defense attorney, mr. o'mara did a very competent,

good job. he focused on basically trying to eliminate this following. he wants the jury to focus on the few seconds right before the shooting so he can talk about his self-defense. so he effectively talked in a conversational, professor-like way to that jury to get across that point. you can't really look at anything other than what happened right at the time of the shooting. opened, the prosecutor, john good, he was brilliant, just brilliant. this was a fantastic closing argument. and the way he handled that is he said don't look at the last chapter, look at all the chapters of the book, and all the chapters of the book, right from the beginning include the following, the following of this kid who was just there holding candy and walking home. and the following in the dark. every kid's worst nightmare. that was just brilliant how he weaved that into his closing argument, and very, very effective with this jury. >> i might note that the jury has sent in a note that they are

finished deliberating for night and will return 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning to deliberate. again, the jury has stopped deliberating tonight, and are going back into their question. and they will pick up deliberations 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. joy reid, let me go to you on what was just said about the following. is it important based on how the judge gave instructions, is it important to the jury to note a whole story of the following going forward, or based on under the instructions, do they only have to consider the moments around the shooting? >> well, rev, i think that it's important for the prosecution to take it back to the following. and this is the reason why. what the -- and i'm not an attorney. but under florida law harkes the prosecution has to prove is that george zimmerman was the initial aggressor, that whatever happened in the few minutes during the fight, it was george

zimmerman who instigated the fight. and what they were trying to weave in the end, and i thought john guy also was very, very good. i was very emotionally affecting. and it also brought up something i was very confused as to why the prosecution didn't say before. this was a kid who was being followed who was probably scared. so the idea that someone is following you, is that in and of itself aggression? is the act of following someone, trailing them, chasing them, and then finally catching up to them, did that present fear for trayvon martin such that he had a right not only to defend himself, but that he was in fear of his life. it takes away from the notion of george zimmerman as a victim, and for the prosecution it makes him the guy that was the perpetrator, the guy following, stalking, following this kid, scaring him, and ultimately killing him. >> faith, you are on the same point. >> first of all, john guy, i agree with ken and joy about him. because in trials when you're trying cases, your message, in order for you you to be in the message as a juror, you have to believe in the messenger. john guy was messenger today.

he spoke on behalf of trayvon martin, on behalf of his parents, on behalf of the state of florida. he said we don't really know what happened in that altercation between trayvon and george zimmerman, but here is what we do know. and he painted that narrative from beginning to end, which ended with trayvon martin being shot and killed in his last emotion, his last thought was fear, because a man he did not know was following him. and i thought that was a great point today. >> now marcia, let me ask you something that is going to be critical. in florida law, and in the law as you know it, you've been a prosecutor, does the prosecutor have to remove any doubt of self-defense, or does the prosecutor have to debunk that it was reasonable for him to feel that it was self-defense, and the defense have to establish that it was more than

reasonable? because i kind of heard in o'mara's closing that as long as you have any doubt, is was self-defense, then you've got to acquit george zimmerman. >> well, and not any doubt, but a reasonable doubt for sure. and it's the prosecution's burden to not only prove their case in terms of a second-degree murder, but also disprove that george zimmerman was justified. they have to disprove that he had a reasonable belief in his own eminent death or great bodily injury. and so it's a burden for the prosecution to shoulder, and that's why it was so important for john guy to start with the very beginning of everything, as he did so effectively in showing the mind-set of george zimmerman. the ill will, these punks always get away with it, all the statements he made to 911, showing he is already targeting anding this of trayvon martin as a criminal with no basis at all. why does he get out of his car? that's great.

start right there. if what you want to do is tell the police somebody might be up to no good, you call the police and wait in your car there is no reason for him to get out at all. and especially not the lame excuse he gave for looking at the street sign. >> ken, what then is the defense story that the jury is going to be able to go through in the evidence that established that at that moment, that he had no choice other than to use self-defense, that that was reasonable. because we had a lot of witnesses talking about who was on top or bottom. but what was the evidence that they presented to say oh, no, he was in absolute fear of his life, and that was reasonable? >> well, what the defense wants the jury to believe is that at the moment that he was in this fight with trayvon martin, that martin was going for his gun. and the only way he could protect his life and protect himself was to grab the gun first and shoot trayvon martin. if you believe that, then you believe his self-defense, and then there is an acquittal. if you don't believe that, if you don't believe that trayvon martin saw the gun, if you don't

believe that trayvon martin could get to the gun, then that calls into question the entire self-defense argument that they're making to the jury. and keep this in mind. the prosecution, once the defense raises self-defense, the prosecution has to prove under florida law that beyond a reasonable doubt, there was no self-defense. so the burden shifts to the prosecution once self-defense is raised by the defense. the law is like mud. this jury is going the hear this law from the court and they're going to be like every jury. they're going to have a hard time going through it because the lawyers can't even agree what that gobbledygook means when the judge reads that law to the jury. >> faith, having said, that and about seeing the gun or grabbing for the gun, let me show you some of what john guy laid out in terms of the inconsistencies, and tell me whether that addresses some of that from the prosecution's standpoint.

>> sean noffke told me to get an address. that didn't happen. listen to the tapes. listen to the walk-through. and listen to the non-emergency call. sean noffke never said that. why? why lie about that? it's so important. that's why. because he wasn't going back to the car. he was going back to trayvon martin. trayvon martin covered his mouth and nose. really? you really think if that were true there wouldn't be george zimmerman's blood on these sticks that they pried under his fingernails? do you really think that's true? that was a lie. there is only two people on this earth who know what really happened, and one of them can't testify. and the other one lied. and not one lie. over and over and over again.

what does that tell you about what really happened out there? >> faith, is it enough to say that the self-defense claims by mr. zimmerman were based on lies. is that enough to debunk any doubt about his self-defense? >> if the jury wants -- in considering self-defense, in order for the jury to believe george zimmerman acted in self-defense, in order for this jury to believe that he reasonably feared for his life, they have to trust in what he said. they have to believe the statements that he made. that's why the state went after these statement, went after his own words. they're using his own words against him, because they're telling this jury you simply can't trust him. you simply cannot believe him. and if you don't believe him about these facts, not knowing the name of the street, not continuing to follow trayvon, then you cannot believe him about self-defense. we already know, he has admitted to shooting and killing trayvon.

and if you don't believe him about self-defense, then guess what? he is guilty of murder. >> joy, when you look at the charges, second-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, and manslaughter, which if done with a firearm as a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison, hearing both the defense and the prosecution what do you think is likely to be the impression the jury goes in before we hear any of the evidence that they sent for or tried to review? >> you know, rev, i think interestingly enough, the two things that the prosecution firmly did establish is number one george zimmerman did follow trayvon martin, not with standing his statements. and number two, that he did act with spite. i think it's hard not to interpret f-ing punks and these animals always get away. i think they could clear that bar. so i'm not sure if that gets you to the level of second-degree murder or not.

that's really up to the jury. but, you know, i think that faith makes a really important point. the only person that establishes george zimmerman's self-defense claim is george zimmerman, because there were no other witnesses to the entire fight. but the second thing that establishes george zimmerman's claim is his wounds, the actual blood on the back of his head, the nose, the bloody nose, and that sort of thing. you also saw john guy try to take that apart. he showed the same picture mark o'mara has use very effectively during the defense presentation, and he said look at this guy. does this guy look like somebody who had to fight for his life. look at his nose. does that look like a life-threatening injury? look at him. it also had a double effect of showing george zimmerman, not the soft, pudgy guy sitting there, but someone who looked a lot tougher. so i think the prosecution needs to take down not just his statements by saying he was false in other things, but they also have to take down what really is the strongest defense evidence, and that's the bloody nose, the bloody head. >> i'm going to ask the panel to

please stay with me. much more to talk about. coming up, what arguments today did the jurors find most compelling? we go live to the courthouse in sanford, florida. stay with us. all business purchases. so you can capture your receipts, 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.

have you joined the "politicsnation" conversation on facebook yet? thousands in our facebook community have been joining daily. watching our live feed of the trial and sharing their thoughts. and we'll keep bringing you all the latest from sanford, florida, throughout the weekend. for all of that, head over to facebook and search "politicsnation." and like us to get the latest updates from sanford, florida, and to join the conversation that keeps going long after the show ends.

right now george zimmerman's fate lies in the hands of six jurors who have just finished deliberating for the day. they went into that jury room today after hearing arguments that were very different in their presentation, their style, and staging. >> now we have our first very large graphic. this is what happens when you get carried away with graphics. they get ten feet long. how many times was it said that

trayvon martin -- i'm going to show you what mr. de la rionda mentioned. it's an animation. it's not evidence. to your section, but first there is the shot, to the nose, we contend. number one is where the flashlight is found, george's small flashlight is key. >> in the prosecution's rebuttal, the state took a different approach. >> i don't have any audio clips for you. or video clips or charts or big, long, ten-foot-long timelines. i don't have all the fireworks. all the animation. but come back with me. come back with me to that scene where it happened that night. come back with me and bring with you your god-given common sense. >> two different approaches.

both may have been effective, but how did it play to the jury? the panel is back with me. faith, we saw animations and graphics from the defense, and more emotion from the prosecution. what approach was more effective? >> well, the defense obviously doesn't have the emotion on their side in this case, and that's why you saw o'mara's closing arguments really lacked the drama throughout it. and he made a point of trying to paint trayvon as this very scary individual. he brought out the cardboard figure. he showed the animation. and he was sending that inference, that message there. trayvon martin was not only just scary to george zimmerman, but juries, he should be scary to you too. and then john guy came back in his rebuttal and said but this is who trayvon martin really is, this 17-year-old. he just turned 17. he has skittles. he had iced tea. he was being followed. he knew he was being followed. and his last emotion was fear.

>> now, let me ask you, ken. when you look at the fact that he did, he being o'mara, used the cardboard cutaway, let me show exactly how he used that, and then how john guy for the prosecution responded. >> you know how tall he is. take a look at him compared to my eye height. >> maybe about the fact that the city attorney's office decided to charge him, he has to have done something wrong. maybe that's the impression you have. >> he was responsible for this state, not being able to ask trayvon martin to step forward so i could put my hand on his shoulder -- i'd love to do that. who is responsible for that? and trayvon martin is not, was not, will never be a piece of cardboard. >> tell us. what do you think, ken, was the

most effective there? >> well, there was a treasure trove of lawyer toys used by o'mara. and you know what? normally, and in many cases, they're very, very effective. a good portion of the closing argument he used photographs of each witness and said something about each witness. and it was flashed on a screen before the jury. very effective. the computer animation, i did the first computer animation in the state of florida. the one he used not effective. fell flat. wasn't a good use of animation. but now in the response from the prosecutor, that was brilliant. he turned it around. he had the last word, which that is what he had, and he basically took the items, the toys, the legal, you know, items that are being used in front of these juries, the demonstrative aids and turned it around and smacked down the defense attorney with it. so i thought the last word really was the best word. i think that was the most effective for the prosecutor to basically push aside those

demonstrative aids and minimize theory effectiveness by how he talked to the jury about them. i thought it was brilliant by the prosecutor. >> marcia, your view of the two contrasting on those particular items we showed. >> you know, to me, it's kind of a lesson to be learned there is such a thing as a bridge too far when it comes to the demonstrative exhibits. a little bit is good. can be very effective to punctuate the important points. and then you tibb overboard and you turn into disneyland. and, you know, i thought the cartoon was actually -- sorry, the animation probably more effective than i thought it was going to be because he did play the 911 tapes in conjunction with them. and i thought that was a good use of the tool. but it went too far. and then when he stood up the cardboard cutout of trayvon martin in an effort clearly to show that trayvon martin could look menacing, could look imposing because he was taller than george zimmerman, i think that that was taking it a bridge too far. and as we saw, it backfired. checkmate. the prosecutor stood up and said that's a cardboard cutout.

trayvon martin was a living young child, and don't tell me -- there is only one reason he's not here for me to put my hand on his shoulder, because of this guy over here. great. wonderful. it shows how you can take all the animation and the whoopty whirly gigs and go a little too far. and giving john guy the open door he walked through to smack them down and say this is about human beings, not cardboard cutouts, and not cartoons. and he did it beautifully. >> joy, both the prosecution and the defense talks about common sense, the jurors using common sense. let me show you this. >> be careful with the common sense because common sense is the way we run our everyday lives, the way we make those snap decisions that we have to make every day. if you start using those same processes that we're used to everyday that look at things, make a decision and move on, that subtly and unintentionally you're going to minimize or

diminish in standard that has to be applied in this case. >> common sense is so important. this isn't a complicated case. it's a common sense case. i'm asking you to use your common sense. use your heart. use what you know is real. use what you know you heard and the law in this case. >> joy, you've been down there. you have one side saying your common sense may not understand the complexities of this case, and may not be able to deal with the standards that you need in the law. you have another one saying this is a common sense case. what do you say, joy? >> rev, i have to tell you, i was a little confused by mark o'mara using that tactic. i'm not sure i would have done, that because it essentially concedes that the common sense answer to this case is that george zimmerman is guilty. but that you need to suspend that, you need to ignore your common sense. and i think mark o'mara did the same thing with emotion.

there is a risk that you condescend a little bit to the jury when you say maybe your common sense and the emotional part of you, all you six female jurors wants to go this way, but you need to not do that. don't think like that. you need to think -- you need to use your reason and not your common sense, use your reason and not your emotion there is a risk that in doing that, i know across social media, there was a lot of people responding to it that way, that it come across a little condescending, where as with john guy, it was the opposite. he was saying embrace your natural common sense. he even said come with me. it was almost like a pastor. he was giving a sermon. let's just use common sense and use your emotions, embrace that part of you. so i think for female jurors, i would guess that john guy's presentation was probably more effective, more impactful. and we'll see when you combine that with the evidence what that does in the deliberations. >> faith, the fact that the jurors have ended their deliberations today, and they have made the requests for

evidence, should we laymen read anything into that? is the length of time and the extent they seem to go through evidence, will that send a signal, or are we just trying to look through the weeds for anything? >> no. you shouldn't read anything into this. i mean, they just got the case today. there are only six jurors deliberating in this case. so i don't expect deliberations to take too long. but they just got the case today. they just were charged on the law. and they've asked for the evidence. so they're really just getting started. and so i don't think there is anything to read into the fact that they stopped deliberations today. they going to start again at nine income the morning. i do believe that these jurors, like most jurors, they really do take their jobs seriously. they understand the stakes of this case, that one person is dead and the other person is on trial really for his life. and so they understand that. and i think they're going to take this seriously and they're going to be diligent in their deliberations. >> ken padowitz, thank you for your time this week. the rest of the panel are

staying with us. still ahead, six jurors will decide the fate of george zimmerman. how did they react in the jury box today? we'll go live to the courthouse where they're deliberating in sanford, florida. one... more... step! [ mom ] my little girl...she loves to help out on big jobs. good thing there's bounty select-a-size. it's the smaller powerful sheet that acts like a big sheet. look! one select-a-size sheet of bounty is 50% more absorbent than a full size sheet of the leading ordinary brand. ♪ i got it! [ mom ] use less with the small but powerful picker upper. bounty select-a-size. and try bounty napkins.

[ 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 prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.

six women jurors will decide

if george zimmerman committed a crime the night he shot trayvon martin. we'll go inside the courtroom. that's next. [ 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 you'll forget you had heartburn. in miami, coca-cola is coming together with latino leaders to support hispanicize, and the adelante movement. teaching tools for success, and fostering creativity. these programs are empowering people to lead positive change, and helping them discover how great a little balance can feel. through initiatives like these, our goal is to inspire more than three million people to rediscover the joy of being active this summer. see the difference all of us can make, together. bob will retire when he's 153, which would be fine if bob were a vampire.

but he's not. ♪ he's an architect with two kids and a mortgage. luckily, he found someone who gave him a fresh perspective on his portfolio. and with some planning and effort, hopefully bob can retire at a more appropriate age. it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade. [ male announcer ] some question physics. some question gravity. and some... even have the audacity to question improbability. with best-in-class towing and best-in-class torque these are some of the bold, new ram commercial trucks -- built to blow your imagination. guts. glory. ram. woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ]

man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen. 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. [ 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. for two centuries, we have lived by the constitution and the law. no juror has the right to violate rules we all share. at this time, if all you have will please take your notes with you and follow deputy jarvis back into the jury room. >> that was 2:28 p.m. when judge nelson sent the jury on their way to begin deliberations. they deliberated for three and a half hours and are done for the night. the jury consists of six women, five of them are white, one is black or hispanic. five are mothers, and they range in age from their 30s to 60s. so how did they react to today's closing argument and rebuttal? joining me now live outside the courthouse in sanford, florida, kyle hightower, reporter for the

associated press, who has been inside that courtroom for every second of this trial. kyle, what did the jury look like when they got the case today? >> reverend al, i would say anxious and maybe a little stoic as they left the courtroom this afternoon. this is a group that whenever judge debra nelson has asked them for breaks, for water, to stretch out a little bit, they always denied her. but today they took her up on an offer right before lunch to take a break before she gave them their official instructions. they seemed very stoic and anxious as they left the courtroom today. >> now you reported one juror had a strong reaction at one point today when prosecutor john guy said this. let me play to it you. >> don't misunderstand me. your verdict is not going to bring trayvon benjamin martin back to life.

your verdict is not going to change the past, but it will forever define it. >> kyle, what did you see at that point? >> well, obviously, reverend al, it was a line. it was obviously designed to elicit emotion. and juror b-29, the juror from chicago, originally from chicago, with eight children, only one child over the age of 18, she wiped away a tear. i mean, it was very noticeable. she reached up and wiped the corner of her eye and the bottom of her eye twice to wipe away a tear. it definitely elicited emotion that i think john guy was trying to go for. >> all right, carl hightower, thank you so much for your time. so what are the jurors discussing now, and when can we expect a verdict? lisa bloom joins the panel. and lisa, the jury is done deliberating for the night. and earlier they asked for an evidence list. what do you make of that, and what do you make of this juror

with the tear? >> well, she was obviously moved. and this is a very intense case there is no question about it. you know, we talk a lot about the fact these jurors are mothers, and that's true. they're also professionals, a number of them. and let's include their brains as well as theuteruses when we' talking about them. one ran a call center. one ran a construction company. two of them work in the medical industry. so i would like to talk about them as full human beings and not just mothers. this jury deliberated as you said for three and a half hours today. and they're not done. it's a little bit of a slam i think to mark o'mara, if i may say so, because he seemed to confident in his closing argument that there was going to be a quick verdict. i think he was even implying to them that they should write innocent at the bottom of the form. well, he didn't get that today. i don't think he is going to get that at all. he might get a not guilty, but he is not going get them to write innocent at the bottom of the jury form. >> marcia, this jury has been sequestered for more than 18 days.

you know about guesequestered j. how does that impact what goes on? >> i do think it makes them move more quickly. obviously ual they all want to get home. no question about that. they have been pushing really hard through this trial there is a bit of a stutterstep as you just heard from the live reporter, the ap reporter, now that they know the case is coming into their hands and they're going have to actually deal with it. i can imagine them kind of doing a little bit of a gulp. it's bound to happen. they're going to come in and hear different opinions. people who think they're friendly and get along very well are going to be surprised by what they hear from the people they thought they knew after living together for 18 days. nevertheless, with the pressure of knowing that they cannot leave this hotel, these confines until they finish, i think they will push through to finish. i'm not surprised they department come today, not at all there is enough here to think about. there it is a simple case and there are not hundreds of witnesses. but nevertheless there are very sharply defined opposing points of view that can be brought to

bear in the jury room. i would expect to see a verdict by tomorrow night. >> joy, let me go to you. one of those witnesses, marcia said it wasn't a lot. but one was sybrina fulton, the mother of trayvon martin. and mark o'mara brought her up in his closing argument. listen to this. >> miss fulton, how dare you question the mom of a passed away 17-year-old. doctors cut people sometimes when they do their work, and that was something i had to present to you to something about the way it happened. >> how important and effective was sybrina fulton's testimony that o'mara even clarified why he did what he did? >> well, you know, rev, i think any time the mother of the victim testifies, it's obviously impactful. it obviously effects the jury and it's effective. she said what you would expect

her to say, that she heard her son crying out on that 911 call. i think she was a very good witness for the prosecution. but mark o'mara has a job here, which is to try to get the juries to step back from the natural sympathy and emotion you'll feel when talking about a dead teenager. he's got to get them to put that aside. i think anything that he can do to mitigate what jurors might feel was a tough questioning of her, i don't think it was tough questioning of her. listen, i understand you're sympathetic to this mom, but that's not your job. his presentation was professorial, not the emotional presentation, because it is his job to drain the emotion out of the case, to walk people back from their emotional instant response and to get them to just look at whether or not the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. >> now, let me go to you, faith. when you heard readbacks, when you review testimony, obviously emotions and personalities of witnesses and all are gone. in this particular case, as a

lawyer, who do you think will be -- who would that help the most in terms of just reviewing solid evidence and testimony without emotional as we go through all the deliberations? >> well, i think it depends on what readback the jurors asked for. i mean, if they are considering all of the prosecutors' witnesses and what they said, they may ask for more readback to get clarification on that. but these jurors, some of them have taken notes. some of them have not. it's their recollection that will rule. and so they may ask -- this trial has been three weeks. so they may just want to remember specifically there may be some internal debating going on about what a witness said. and about certain facts. so they may just want to recall what that witness said and ask for readback based on that. so you can't really read a lot into that. because like i said, i think some witnesses have taken a lot of notes. but the jurors may not want to rely on someone else's notes.

they may want the information from the court reporter herself. >> all right. panel, please stay with me. we have a lot more to discuss. the right to self-defense. but whose self-defense? the answer to that question is key to this case. members of the american postal worker's union handle more than 165 billion letters and packages a year. that's about 34 million pounds of mail every day. ever wonder what this costs you as a taxpayer? millions? tens of millions? hundreds of millions? not a single cent. the united states postal service doesn't run on your tax dollars. it's funded solely by stamps and postage. brought to you by the men and women of the american postal worker's union. "stubborn love" by the lumineers did you i did. email? so what did you think of the house? did you see the school ratings? oh, you're right. hey babe, i got to go.

bye daddy! have a good day at school, ok? ...but what about when my parents visit? ok. i just love this one... and it's next to a park. i love it. i love it too. here's our new house... daddy! you're not just looking for a house. you're looking for a place for your life to happen. [ 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. ♪

but the instant frizz? not so much. so i'm taking pantene's 72-hour dare. [ female announcer ] beat humidity for a smooth 72 hours. get pantene smooth with moroccan argan oil in a pro-v system. help lock out humidity. keep frizz from forming. go 72-hour smooth. [ eva ] ditch the frizz...

i dare you. [ female announcer ] get smooth from pantene, the world's no. 1 haircare brand. hair so healthy it shines.

when the jury comes back tomorrow morning, they'll be wrestling with one central question. did george zimmerman kill trayvon martin in self-defense? that claim is at the heart of mr. zimmerman's case, but today the prosecution again raised another question, something lots of people have been e-mailing me about. didn't trayvon martin also have a right to self-defense? >> that child had every right to be afraid of a strange man following him, first in his car, and then on foot. and did that child not have the right to defend himself from that strange man?

did trayvon martin not also have that right? >> faith, why did the prosecution think this was so important for the jury to think about? >> because they're focusing on who was the initial aggressor here. they're not trying to tell this jury exactly what happened when george zimmerman and trayvon martin met. they're trying to show this jury george zimmerman was the initial aggressor from the very beginning. in fact, it started months before he ever saw trayvon martin with his mind-set, with these people always getting away, referring to all the young black males that he previously called the police about. so the prosecutor wants to focus on who the initial aggressor was, and based upon george zimmerman being the initial aggressor, so what he got punched? so what he has these injuries. trayvon martin had every right to defend himself. george zimmerman was the one following him. >> you know, reverend al, faith is right. the problem is the prosecution didn't argue that. they fought so hard to get into evidence those prior events

where george zimmerman called about african-american males in the community. 100% of the calls he made about suspicious people in the community were about african-american males. they got it in, and then they didn't argument it in closing argument. so what the jury heard was the defense version of well, it's very reasonable that he was suspicious because it was raining and he was walking around. and the prosecution didn't say -- i didn't frankly in my opinion have the guts to say that's not what this was about. i mean really, we can look at autopsy photos. we can look at the deceased remains of a 17-year-old, and we don't have the guts to talk about race? i think that's what is really underlying this case, the failure of the prosecution, among other things to talk about race and say of course he was profiled because he is african-american. we have the statistics. >> didn't he argue that he was profiled, marcia, and the fact that they didn't bring in race and have the defense say that there is no evidence of race here, and let me bring in three

of his black friends. the profile statement they made, the fact that they used over and over about him calling people a-holes, doesn't that really give the jury the picture that he had some hardened feelings without giving a layup shot to the prosecution? >> i totally think so. i have to say i really agree. and here is the thing. they got those calls in. the calls were there, and they were pretty good evidence of a mind-set that predated him ever seeing trayvon martin. and that was a good thing to do. you have to walk the line of the race card very, very carefully, and you don't want to overplay this, because you can really turn a jury off. you have to be careful what you're doing here. and i thought the prosecution did. they said number one that he was profiled. they did say that. and everybody knows what they're talking about. the jury understands what that means. they're not stupid. and then on top of, that don't forget, you don't want to alienate your jury by leaning too heavily on it, so they didn't.

but they put it out there for sure. having had the calls, you never remember to say everything in closing argument. i've never seen a prosecutor or a defense attorney remember every single point. they don't have to. you don't have to. this is not about everything they needed to say. they certainly made all of the strongest points. lisa, they heard those calls. they're not forgetting it. this is not a year-long trial. it's only a three-week trial. they remember it. >> but joy, let me bring joy in. joy, you and i and others may have our feelings. the question is what you want to put in front of a jury and make sure that it is something you can back up. do you think that the defense was prepared to try if they had played race? and clearly in my opinion, when i don't bring up profiling, everyone knows what they mean. don't you think they had some scenario set to bring in black friends of zimmerman to answer that? >> well, probably. so but i think also more importantly that mark o'mara, if they could have gotten it in, was also prepared to bring in text messages, pictures from trayvon martin's cell phone,

other things that if you combined them with that grainy 7-eleven photo, the photo of trayvon with the shirt off and the gold takeaway grill in his mouth, all of that was painting the picture of a scary black man. and recall, defense are the one that put on the stand a woman who had her home broken into. they were the ones who said who was breaking into homes? these young black men. so race was brought into the trial. it's just that -- listen to john guy's accent. this is a southern man. he understands he is trying a case in the south. people sometimes forget florida is still the south. and that there are attitudes about race that pre-exist that could also exist in the jury. i think they might have been afraid to bring it up in fear of alienating the jury, but there is no doubt that racial profiling is what this case is about. i think everyone understands it. but i think the prosecution might have been afraid to say it. >> can i add something to that? they were sut until bringing it up, and i think they were right to do that in this circumstance. they don't want the jury to feel

pressure that they have to make a race-based statement with their verdict. they want the jury to make a humanity-based statement and that's what john guy was doing there. >> i got to stop it there. thank you to the panel, and thank you for your great analysis. we'll be right back with my final thoughts on this trial. stay with us. ♪ unh ♪ ♪ hey! ♪ ♪ let's go! ♪ [ male announcer ] you can choose to blend in. ♪ ♪ yeah! yeah! yeah! or you can choose to blend out. ♪ oh, yeah-eah! ♪ the all-new 2014 lexus is. it's your move.

to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? o123w45r9

yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap. it's delicious. so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side.

this case is in the hands of the jury. six women who heard from more than 50 witnesses. they will begin deliberations again at 9:00 a.m. eastern time tomorrow morning. i'm in birmingham, alabama, headed home around that time. i will be thinking about a 17-year-old kid that i know. what protects him if he feels he is being followed by someone not in law enforcement? i will also be thinking about those that are feeling threatened, feeling that someone is doing something wrong. what protects them against unforeseen criminality, even if it's in their own head?

that's what this trial is about. and how the law protects both of them and not violate either one of them. if one of them were violated, the other one is the one that should come out of this trial with the jury saying the other one was the one whose rights we must protect. this is what this is all about. that's where your opinion and my opinion must be based on. thanks for watching. i'm al sharpton. have a good weekend. see you back here on monday. the jury gets the case. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews. the fate of george zimmerman is in the jury's hands now. this morning mark o'mara made his closing argument saying that