this effort by the republican party across the country counts by reince priebus is an assault on black america that is historic, deliberate, unforgettable and you could say unforgivable. keep your eye on this one. and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. thanks, chris. and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, a divided jury. four days after george zimmerman was set free, cracks are appearing in the jury that brought back a unanimous verdict of not guilty. last night in an interview on cnn, the woman known as juror b-37 said she'd thought trayvon martin was partially responsible for his own death. >> i believe he played a huge role in his death.

he could have -- when george confronted him and he could have walked away and gone home. he didn't have to do whatever he did to come back and be in a fight. >> in an earlier portion of that interview, she also seemed to accept george zimmerman's account of what happened. >> i think george zimmerman is a man whose heart was in the right place. i think pretty much it happened the way george said it happened. george had a right to protect himself at that point. i had no doubt george feared for his life. >> immediately after that interview aired last night, four other jurors released a statement saying, quote, the opinions of juror b-37 expressed on the anderson cooper show were her own and not representative of the jurors listed below. they added the death of a teenager weighed heavily on our hearts, but in the end we did

what the law required us to do. juror b-37 responded this morning with her own statement. quote, for reasons of my own, i needed to speak alone. she went on to say quote, no other family should be forced to endure what the martin family has endured. my prayers are with trayvon's parents for their loss, as they have always been. tonight all this deepens the mystery surrounding the trial. what was going on in that jury room? how did they reach a verdict? and were they ever really on the same page? with me now is my all star panel legal prosecutor faith -- former prosecutor faith jenkins. defense attorney ken padowitz. thank you for all being here. let me ask -- >> absolutely. >> let me ask you, what do you make of these jurors releasing

their statements so soon after juror b-37's interview? >> well, i think b-37 spoke a lot about what happened in the jury room and their discussions in the jury room. and made some very strong statements. because based on what she said, they didn't just reject the fact that the prosecution didn't prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. she fully accepted the defense's story and george zimmerman's statements even though he didn't take the witness stand. for me it appeared she had a predisposition to believe the defense before she ever heard the evidence. or the defense did a really, really good job. i think only she knows the answer to that. but i thought the interview was very telling. >> ken, it was interesting to me that she said that trayvon could have gone home even after george zimmerman confronted him. what was interesting is she seemed to put the responsibility on trayvon martin. and she also conceded that she

believed that, in fact, zimmerman was the one that confronted him or started it which is very interesting given the verdict she came with. and when you deal with the fact that she cited stand your ground, i mean, didn't trayvon martin have the right then not to retreat if you're dealing with a stand your ground kind of thought which she gave in the interview? it was an interesting statement given other things she said in the interview. >> well, this juror clearly bought the hook line and sinker statements by george zimmerman. and she bought all of it. it's clear from her statements. we don't have to speculate. and based on those statements, she believed everything zimmerman had to say. so her belief was that therefore the responsibility or some of the responsibility lied with the kid who was just a few days earlier had been 16 years old and had been walking talking on his cell phone and had a bag of

candy. so the problem with this juror as we went back to jury selection, the fact this juror said peaceful protesting was rioting should have been a clear indication to the prosecution this juror had to be struck. but the juror was not. this is what happened in history, and we have this verdict. but clearly these statements are from someone who buys every statement by the defendant and that's one of the failings of the prosecution. that they put these statements into evidence on their side of the case. those statements should never have come in. they were hearsay statements. and not admissible. >> let me go to you, paul. i want to ask another thing. the jury has spoken and we accept the verdict. but she has come out and said things that i think we've got to discuss since she decided to discuss it. she said that trayvon martin played a huge part -- her words, not mine. her emphasis, not mine. a huge role in his own death.

how do you react to that? i mean, how does that -- >> well, it makes it clear to me what her perspective and what her approach was in this case. i'm going to take it a little step farther than what we were just talking about and point out the fact that specifically about the stand your ground. that she says she used and the jurors used auz one of the tools to figure out the law. it wasn't just an issue that stand your ground law existed. it wasn't only applied to george zimmerman and not to trayvon martin at all. so it wasn't an indication that could have gone 50/50. and it wasn't just that she adopted the defense perspective. it was that perspective was excluded from association to trayvon martin. that he had no right to exercise stand your ground. that he had no right when confronted, her words, to do anything and then when -- and you hear her when she's talking

about trayvon martin in a very judgmental way from things that she inferred throughout the trial saying that he was mad. saying that he was responsible for his own death. it just makes it very clear to me the limbs she used as she listened to the evidence and she heard the testimony. and it makes it very challenging, i think, for that prosecution team to have broken through that perspective and broken through that approach to have really identified what the facts were in a way that would have been persuasive for a different outcome. >> let me bring in former prosecutor marcia clark. she's also author of "killer ambition." marcia, thank you for joining us. let me pose the same question to you. juror b-37 says trayvon martin played a huge role in his own death. how do you respond to that? >> i think it's really clear that she bought the defense hook line and sinker. she blames trayvon martin for

having fought with george zimmerman and believes george zimmerman had a right to shoot him. and it shows to me that she threw out so much of the prosecution's testimony especially that of rachel jeantel. what happened to that? rachel jeantel testified that she overheard trayvon martin say why you following me for. heard somebody else who had to be zimmerman say whag are you doing here. and later trayvon saying get off me, get off me. what does that mean to her? where did that go? that girl was completely dismissed by her as though it never happened, so it seems to me. of course if you do that, if you dismiss the prosecution's evidence especially key evidence like that, what else are you going to do? you're going to buy the defense. this juror struck me as somebody who came in with a defense bias from the start and stuck to that agenda all the way through the trial. >> and faith, what was interesting is she said after george confronted him.

she even said george zimmerman started the confrontation. why would she think he didn't have the right to respond? to say he should have just gone home. >> right. there's a certain level of denial in what she said. because she also said that race was not an issue here at all, it was not even discussed in the jury room. and george zimmerman had seen anyone of any race, he would have stopped them. and anyone looking at the statements he made and his history about the young black men he called the police on numerous times knows that's simply not true. so the view that the way that she looked at this trial and she looked at the evidence, there's a -- she accepted the defense outright and she also was in denial about certain things. >> now, ken, when you also hear juror b-37, she said she only had one option as a juror. and that was to acquit george zimmerman. watch this.

>> they gave us the laws and we went by the laws. and that's how we found him innocent. they would have given us manslaughter and everything that was attached to it, it would have come out the exact same way. it was just so confusing what went with what and what we could apply to what. and after hours and hours of deliberating of the law and reading it over and over and over again, we decided there's just no way -- other place to go. >> now, she said it was confusing. it was the law. i mean, was it bad law or bad lawyering, ken? >> well, a combination of both. and you have bad law. the stand your ground law is an abomination. it's a horrible law. it brings us back to the old west. shoot to kill and ask questions later. it's bad law and very bad

strategy on the part of the prosecution. by putting in george zimmerman's statements, by telling the jury that race had nothing to do with this, we have to respect this verdict. but clearly the juror did have another alternative. they could have given some weight or zero weight to george zimmerman. they didn't have to give him all the weight. that was their decision. that's what we give jurors. we give them the power to what weight goes with evidence. they could have come up with a different verdict. >> paul, how do you take the fact that when she said the statement about trayvon martin had a huge role in what happened that the other jurors, all but one, came out immediately denouncing her. does that say anything to you about -- >> it absolutely does. >> okay. >> it absolutely does. it says two things to me. one, it makes it very clear that those jurors felt strong enough they needed to be proactive in making sure they distanced themselves from the communications that she's made so publicly. and the fact that they are

emphasizing the fact that they were more sympathetic to the victim, i think that's very telling and important. because it's clear that that's part of what the message is that they want people to understand. that they were more sympathetic than what they heard their fellow juror communicating when she was on television. >> all right. my legal panel is going to stay with me. lots more to talk about. coming up, who is she? we've heard from five of the six jurors. but what happened the final one? was she the holdout looking to convict george zimmerman? plus my interview with rachel jeantel. she knew the zimmerman defense team for months before the trial. how she says they tried to fight her testimony. >> the defense never wanted me there. they had a plan for me. >> you're not going to want to miss the rest of what she has to

say. 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? we hope you will. today our facebook fans are eager to hear from rachel jeantel. herself. and i will tell you about the interview that is coming up. better still, we'd like to know what you think about the interview and let us know what you think by heading over to facebook and search "politicsnation." like us and join the conversation after you check it out join the conversation that keeps going long after the show. this is kevin. 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. ♪ 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.

we're back with an essential question from the george zimmerman trial. how did a jury that was divided at the start ultimately decide to set him free? juror b-37 said initially they were split right down the middle. three voted for not guilty. two voted for manslaughter. and one voted for second degree murder. but after hours of debate, juror b-37 told cnn that they convinced the woman who voted for second degree murder to shift her vote to manslaughter. >> it became very confusing.

we had had stuff thrown at us. we had the second degree murder charge, the manslaughter charge, then we had self-defense, stand your ground. and i think there was one other one. >> but the jury was still divided. and that one juror was still convinced of george zimmerman's guilt. >> there was a holdout. and probably -- well, we had another vote. and then everybody voted. put it in the little tin. we had a little tin, folded the papers and put in the vote. and she was the last one to vote. and it took probably another 30 minutes for her to decide. >> this holdout was the last to vote. but she finally gave into the

majority opinion and decided to return a verdict of not guilty. so paul, there was a split in the jury. your reaction? >> you know, as a prosecutor i know the prosecutors were shaking their heads in frustration. if they could have had that person hold out longer to have gotten to a mistrial and then had another chance at this case, i know that's got to sting knowing they had someone held down for so long. and i know that that's how they heard that information when the juror was talking about having someone on their panel that couldn't make a decision and that was holding out and that eventually changed their mind and voted with the rest of the jurors. >> marcia, juror b-37 also talks

about the tough jury deliberations and reveals one juror actually wanted to leave the jury room. >> it was tough. we all pretty much get along. as far as sometimes to let other people talk, you know, one time and then have somebody else talk. instead of adding your comments to whatever they were saying, trying to help figure out what we were trying to figure out. at times i thought we might have a hung jury because one of them said they were going to leave. and we convinced them, no, you can't leave. you can't do this. you have been in this too long to walk out now. >> and she said this juror wanted to leave because of a personal matter. i mean, is that of concern that a juror wanted to leave and they should have brought it to the judge? or is this normal? what do you make of that?

>> it's normal. it wouldn't surprise me if the juror that wanted to leave was a holdout juror and not appreciating the pressure and the situation. and wanted out of it. that happens actually pretty commonly that you have one on the other side of things with being pressured to going along with the group vote. and so that person is going to think of a reason to get out of that jury room. now, if she actually had really needed to go and really couldn't keep -- continue to deliberate, then she would have had to have been removed and an alternate would replace her. she obviously didn't need it that badly. didn't feel that badly enough that she was willing to actually leave. and she let them persuade her to stay. >> let me push you on that a little, marcia. >> sure. >> you're saying that possibly -- and of course we know we're speculating here -- that possibly the holdout juror might have been the one that was voting to convict zimmerman of

the top charge of murder two. >> right. >> and that maybe she wanted to leave because of her feeling bad about the decision and that's common. is that what you're speculation is? >> that is exactly my speculation. i'm guessing that's the one who wanted out because she didn't like the pressure she was getting. and i could be wrong. it could be somebody else entirely, but that seems logically like the most likely person to have wanted to get out. >> ken padowitz, what do you think of that theory? >> reverend, this confirms for me that my gut reaction and my opinion from the beginning of this case that this was overcharged. they had probable cause for second degree murder, but that standard the prosecutors have to use reasonable likelihood of conviction really was with manslaughter. this should have been a manslaughter charge from the beginning. they should have molded their entire case on manslaughter. and based on these comments from these jurors, i think there would have been a much better chance of getting a conviction in this case with a manslaughter

charge rather than overcharging which is what i think the prosecutors did here. >> no way. no way. absolutely not. >> they had the manslaughter charge. there was an option for them and they were presented with both. this juror said very clearly based on the law, they had no choice but to acquit of manslaughter and of murder. when jurors are supposed to vote their convictions based on the evidence. yes it's also their job to negotiate their point of view with other jurors. a lot of times when there's a split like this, it depends on the strength and personalities of the jurors. and you could see from the interview of b-37, she was very strong in her convictions and completely bought into george zimmerman's story. and she was a big part of convincing the other jurors. >> that's right. not only that, but she said b-37 said it didn't matter to her or any other jurors there was a second degree murder charge on the table. she specifically denied that. and actually that probably is

true. jurors have the array of charge choices they have and they make their decision. like faith said, this juror was very strong in her convictions about what should and should not happen. >> well, i will say this, marcia. this juror not only said that about those things, she kept quoting stand your ground which wasn't even in the trial. i mean, she was hearing instructions that weren't even given she was so determined to make a decision. but paul, let me ask you a question. since the verdict -- and i'm going back to marcia's theory for a minute. since the verdict, we heard from b-37 who's doing all these interviews. we heard a statement released from b-51, b-76, e-6, and e-40. but we haven't heard from b-29. b-29 is the one that we've heard nothing from. she's the one that is hispanic or black, has eight children, moved to the area from chicago,

and reportedly wiped away a tear during the prosecution's rebuttal. she's the only juror that has not released a statement or said anything publicly since the trial. and she possibly could be the holdout, paul? >> she possibly could. what i think is interesting is she did not join the other jurors who felt motivated to distance themselves from b-37 who didn't feel as motivated to articulate that she was more sympathetic to trayvon martin like the others. what i imagine from her is that she feels internally more of the pressure if he does come forward to address and talk about the race issue because she is a person of color. and so, you know, i don't know if that's keeping her away from the spotlight or keeping her away from releasing a statement. but as the only person on that jury that is a person of color, i'd have to imagine that she was aware and conscious of some of the theories that were presented

in that case that maybe other jurors may not have noticed and in fact pushed away and said that they were not relevant and not part of this case. and so i would imagine that all of that is creating more pressure on her and that's part of why she is not releasing a statement, she's not giving interviews. and none of the others either are really coming forward. >> no. they only did a written statement. >> exactly. they're still not giving a press conference. >> i want to thank all of you for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> thank you. still ahead, rachel jeantel speaks out right here on "politicsnation." my mother made the best toffee in the world. 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. and make your business dream a reality. 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. [ whirring ] [ dog barks ] i want to treat more dogs. ♪ our business needs more cases. [ male announcer ] where do you want to take your business? i need help selling art.

[ male announcer ] from broadband to web hosting to mobile apps, small business solutions from at&t have the security you need to get you there. call us. we can show you how at&t solutions can help you do what you do... even better. ♪

coming up, my interview with key witness rachel jeantel. she talks about the defense team, her critics, her relationship with trayvon, and reveals where she was the night of the verdict. that's next. what are you guys d? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. see, i knew testosterone could affect sex drive, but not energy or even my mood.

that's when i talked with my doctor. he gave me some blood tests... showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% testosterone gel. the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breast-feeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal.

talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%. 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. mhandle more than 165 billionl 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. ♪ 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. jurors heard 12 days of testimony in george zimmerman's trial. but one witness received more attention than any other. 19-year-old rachel jeantel. she was trayvon martin's friend. she was on the phone with him

moments before he was killed. over two days the defense questioned her. for more than five and a half hours total. she testified trayvon martin told her a man watched him and followed him. as he walked home that night. we sat down for an interview and talked about her testimony and how she's dealing with the attention. i'm sure these last few weeks have really been tough for you. how you doing, first of all? >> i'm doing great. i'm holding on. >> how have you been managing through all of these emotions the last couple weeks? >> i have supporters. i never hear the disappointments. i hear all the you did this, you did this judgment. but i stay with my supporters. i have my attorney. i have my family. so i kept holding on to them. >> you were the last one to talk

to him. i know that had to mess with you as it would anybody. and it seems like they didn't have that in mind at all when they were talking to you. but you were and you became critical. but at the same time they didn't want you to testify. when they talk about you don't want to testify, they tried to fight your testimony. >> yes. they -- are you talking about the state or the defense? >> the defense. >> the defense never wanted me there. they'll -- best way to say it. they had a plan for me. they was coming after me since october. >> really? >> yes. >> well, why do you think it was so important to them that they didn't want you there? >> phone records showed kind of proof, what george said on the 911 tape, she said it. and remind you, before the 911

tape came out, i'm the one. my voice came out before the 911s, all that. and i told them listen to his 911. it matched what i said. >> so when you had told the story even before the tape had come out about what he was saying, screaming, and all of that, the tape came out after you told the story. it really corroborated what you had already said. >> yes. and the state just hold me like you're my strongest witness. so they called. i went to jacksonville. they went back and forth with me. and the defense which is asking me question, question trying to figure who i am. trying to figure out the bad in me. oh i want your twitter, facebook, your family.

this don't have nothing to do with me. it's not about me. it's not about my character. it's not about trayvon character. it's about that night. it's what happened that night. who caused the situation to happen. >> and you kept going back, kept answering their questions. >> i never stopped. i never ever stopped. >> i think, you know, coming up as i did, i thought you basically handled being attacked a lot cooler than a lot of young folk i know. because, i mean, at some points it was like almost -- well, let me show you one question that don west. tell me how you felt about it. >> are you claiming in any way that you don't understand english? >> i understand you. i understand you. i understand english. >> my question is when someone

speaks to you in english, do you believe that you have any difficulty understanding it because it wasn't your first language? >> i understand english really well. >> i mean, the way you kind of looked at him and then you kind of went ahead was like what are you talking about? >> that day i know -- well, the day before i had to deal with don. i already know what he was coming after, so i had to show him more respect. that's when the yes, sirs started. and when don asked me that question and i had been talking english with him for that long, i felt disrespected. i felt he disrespect me. i couldn't nothing. i had to hold on. i was thinking why are you asking me this question? i'm speaking english to you. >> and have had conversations

with him leading up to this. and this never came up. >> this never came up. >> if you were preinterviewed by the defense and the prosecutors and it didn't come up, why does he come up and bring it in the trial? did you think he was trying to -- >> attack me. >> and for what? to try to rattle you on the stand? >> yeah. to try to get me angry. to just show the jury, look at her. she got angry. if she angry, you should imagine how trayvon is. >> as you sat there, you knew and saying this by your statement that you were representing trayvon. that in many ways being the friend that you were to him, they were going to judge trayvon's character by you. which was a real burden that you had to carry that you didn't ask for. >> yes. yes. >> how did you feel when you saw that instagram photo of don and

his daughter's spoofing on you? >> well, you know what? at first i was angry. that's an adult. you shouldn't act that way to a teenager. he was coming after me. right now i'm over it. that don't hurt me at all. but that was disrespectful. and i'm better than that. don is don. he will do what he want. so i'll do what i want. so he can post all he want. to me, i won. >> you won? >> i won. >> how'd you win? >> i'm a teenager. don -- how the jury think of a african-american teenager, they supposed to be cussing. i did not even curse don. i didn't show him a lot of respect because he was acting

childish. he was acting ridiculous questions back and forth back and forth. but i kept my ground. i stand strong. i never cursed. i know the first day was oh, my god. i couldn't deal with him no more. but i still held on to him. you not going to break me. we went through so much, you think you're going to break me now? i'm going after you. but the nice way. >> joining me now is msnbc contribut contributor goldie taylor. they didn't break her after all she's been through. remarkable. what's your reaction hearing her words? >> i think it is remarkable. she is 19 years old. i don't know many 19-year-olds

who could have withstood that kind of pressure, months of deposition, months of inspection into your personal life, into your social media, into your family's life. you know, that kind of picking apart and then to be on a witness stand on literally a world stage when every cable network is on you to withstand that kind of scrutiny. and still maintain your sense of respect and integrity to continue to answer the questions as forthrightly as possible. i think that in itself is a remarkable thing. she's a young woman. i -- >> i have more i'm going to show, goldie so i want you to stay with me. >> sure. >> but i was struck by how when i would just ask her certain questions, she would come forcefully and sometimes cut me off because she wanted to explain herself. this was a very determined, very direct young lady that we saw

here. not at all like her critics claimed and strategically understood what the other side was doing. like i had no idea that she met with the defense. and they knew how she speaks or knew all of the things. yet they got her on the stand and acted as though this was some stranger. saying oh you have a problem with english. no wonder she was taken back. >> she certainly had more grace than i would have had, i'll tell you that. there is something called a communicative complex where you communicate differently depending on the form you're in and who you're speaking to. how she may have addressed you to maybe an adversary like don west. how she maybe would have addressed the family's attorney or sybrina fulton. all of that is different in different settings. some people i saw especially online took her to be maybe less intelligent because of the cadence of her speech. not understanding that this

young woman speaks three languages. i don't know many of us who can say such a thing. there are studies out there that says if i see you as beautiful, i am more inclined to trust what you say. if i see you as something less than beautiful, i believe you're less than credible. i saw an awful lat of that online and on the networks. it's disappointing. >> she's very intelligent. stay with me because part two of my interview is coming. up next, rachel jeantel responds to all of her critics and reacts to the verdict in the george zimmerman trial. more from my interview straight ahead. and we want to hear what you think about rachel jeantel's interview. please visit our facebook page. that's facebook.com/politicsnation. let us know what you think. [ brent ] this guy's a pro, herbie.

[ herbie ] there's no doubt about it brent, a real gate keeper. here's kevin, the new boyfriend. lamb to the slaughter. that's right brent. mom's baked cookies but he'll be lucky to make it inside. and here's the play. oh dad did not see this coming. [ crowd cheering ] now if kevin can just seize the opportunity. it's looking good, herbie. he's seen it. it's all over. nothing but daylight. yes i'd love a cookie. [ male announcer ] make a powerful first impression. the all-new nissan sentra. ♪ a friend under water is something completely different. 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. she's been attacked because of the way she talks, judged because of testimony. but now rachel jeantel has something to say to all of her critics. her surprising response is next. this is so so soft. hey hun, remember you only need a few sheets. hmph! [ female announcer ] charmin ultra soft is so soft you'll have to remind your family they can use less. ♪ charmin ultra soft is made with extra cushions that are soft and more absorbent. plus you can use four times less. hope you saved some for me. mhmm!

you and the kids. we all go. why not enjoy the go with charmin ultra soft. so you can capture your receipts, ink for all business purchases.ids. 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.

what does rachel jeantel have to say to her critics? just watch. do you feel as you say you talk to your supporters, you feel that a lot of people may have attacked you, but you know a lot of people are standing up supporting you as well. >> yes.

and people who are attacking me, they're not in my place. they got to imagine if that was them. my age. would they do it? the whole world watching you. so nobody felt how i felt. day before i testify, i did not sleep at all. trying to figure out how am i going to do this. what he going to ask me. because i know don. when they said our, i didn't believe that. i believe it was going to be three hours. it became five hours. so i don't understand where people say she lying. if that was you, would you do

it? >> you got up and testified and zimmerman didn't. >> no. and people over the whole world judging me. you're judging me. and the person who shot trayvon did not even testify. >> what do you think about that? >> that's not a real man. if you were not guilty, you'll come up and tell your story. this what happened. this what happened. you just not stand there, just look like oh, i didn't do nothing wrong. >> did you think there was a cultural disconnect where they just didn't understand? because what you were saying to me, i understood when you testified. people i know understood. i mean, i couldn't understand what they were talking about. i mean, that you know i've always been against young folk including my daughters using the "n" word.

although i used it when i was younger. but we understood that wasn't trying to make a race statement. that's just the way some of y'all talk though we kind of tell y'all not to. >> it is our culture. i'm not saying teenagers use it every time. teenagers use it with teens. but they don't use it with they parents. that don't have nothing to do with the case. >> you knew trayvon. people see him as a symbol, ohs see him as a caricature. tell people what kind of person was trayvon? >> trayvon was a laid back person. >> and was he a guy that got into mischief? was he a guy that you would be afraid of? did he look suspicious? you hung out with him to some

degree. >> i want to say -- if you look at trayvon, you could know that was a teen. and he was not a violent person. he was so quiet, you wouldn't notice him. the only thing was he was tall. you would look at his height. >> were you surprised when you started seeing them characterize him in the media? >> yes. i felt that that was disrespectful to him and his parent. that's the victim. he died. he didn't ask for that. >> where were you saturday night when you heard the verdict? i was at my auntie house. >> what'd you think? what'd you feel? >> 16 months, well, i think 17 months. work hard. trying to make sure this is a case -- guilty case. trying to show trayvon was the

good guy. trayvon was minding his own business. six jurors i had told my story, told the fact, and you didn't believe it? you judge my character. you judge the kind of person i am. and i was trying to be honest to you. i was honest with you. that's how we talk. i kept it honest with you. you wanted to know what were you talking that night. and you did not take nothing serious. you just listening to two attorneys. listening to a person who don't want to stand on the stage where i was standing. so you say not guilty. are you serious? >> back with me now is goldie

taylor. some tried to mock her. but rachel jeantel came across as a strong person in that interview, goldie. >> she certainly did. and to me she really came across as a strong person on the stand. i think the difference here is really a cultural resentivity. whether or not those jurors were able to identify with her. >> we asked about the cultural disconnect, what do you think? >> absolutely. i think there was a clear disconnect. that these six jurors could not see themselves in rachel jeantel. they could not see themselves in trayvon martin's shoes. but they did seem to have a connection with george zimmerman. and i think the case really did turn on that. >> now, was language -- do you think it has anything to do with the case? >> i think language had a lot to do with the case. but i think it was just cultural perspective. i heard the juror on another network last night say that -- she kept referring to "those"

people, how "they" live. not about how this part of our community lives. it was never about us and we. it was "them," "those." that's where the disconnect showed itself. >> is that also why those who had had raised questions about diversity on the jury, so you had people in the jury that understood the culture and the environment of both the accused and the victim? >> well, i think -- and i've heard this said a number of times. that this case may have been over right after jury selection. because you really may not have had anyone or more than one person on that jury that could have any -- that could make themselves have any connection, any cultural connection or empathy which rachel jeantel, trayvon martin, with trayvon's parents. that they could not see themselves living similar lives. and so i think that was a real problem in the jury selection. and it permeated itself

throughout this trial and has shown itself up in the statements afterwards. >> goldie taylor, thank you for your time this evening. >> thanks very having me. >> we'll be right back with reply al and the effort to turn tragedy into action. having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. [ woman ] hop on over! how can i help you? oh, you're real? you know i'm real! at discover, we're always here to talk.

good, 'cause i don't have time for machines. some companies just don't appreciate the power of conversation! you know, i like you! i like you too! at discover, we treat you like you'd treat you. get the it card and talk to a real person. i tthan probablycare moreanyone else.and we've had this farm for 30 years. we raise black and red angus cattle. we also produce natural gas. that's how we make our living and that's how we can pass the land and water back to future generations. people should make up their own mind what's best for them. all i can say is it has worked well for us. it's been that way since the day you met. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph

like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. grant writes now i need your help. to move beyond my sadness. because i've been there myself. i know what sybrina fulton and

tracy martin feel. those are powerful words. we do need to make sure this never happens again. today at the naacp conference in florida i talked about what we can do next. >> just like we raised the temperature to get the trial, we going to keep raising the temperature to get civil rights legislation and to turn around stand your ground. we cannot have our sons and daughters lives on the line for anybody that wants to pursue them, follow them, and kill them and say it's in self-defense. >> the national rifle association said today attorney general holder is exploiting this tragedy to push an agenda. as we look forward, we must look to the past. 50 years ago today, dr. martin luther king jr. wrote a letter about the upcoming march on

washington then. he wrote the demonstration will be peaceful and nonviolent at any point. why? because their objective was more important than their anger. as we go in a hundred cities this weekend against stand your ground. as we go with his son to washington in august, we must not let our anger outrule our need for action. those that can't control themselves ought not come. thanks for watching. i'm al sharpton. "hardball" starts right now. is stand your ground a call to arms? let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening, i'm chris matthews out in san francisco. let me start tonight with this. stand your ground. what's this law all about? is it a statement that you don't have to avoid trouble? is it a call to arms? and what part did it play in george zim