. >> let's bring in jamie floyd. welcome jamie. >> hi john. >> what do you make of these dueling 911 phone calls? >> i think we are living in the age of reality tv, rnd we? it felt very much like watching a reality television show. and people are beginning to as juan carlos pointed out, try their case in the court of public opinion, on social media, perhaps with the 911 dispatchers before we set foot in the courtroom. >> what does that mean for the legal system? >> perhaps we need to rethink the value of evidence. perhaps our rules of evidence are now considered in a different context. you know there are all kinds of rules related to the admissibility of the 911 tapes as indicated in the piece. they are admissible in trial. traditional reply the prosecution will admit a 911 call, usually it's coming from a victim. increasing reply we do see them introduced by defendants. but a judge has to allow the 911 call to be admitted. they don't just come in as a matter of course. and perhaps courts will begin to pull back from

joining us now is jamie floyd, and jamie this case is being compared to the trayvon martin case.he homeowner is white, the victim is black. is it fuelling the same type of anger? >> our criminal justice system so often raises race as a reason for tension in america. but this homeowner was in his home. and in the trayvon martin case, those two gentlemen were not. they were out and about although in a gated community. that was a stand your ground case, which meant that you could stand your ground anywhere in your home. although he was not at close range in this case, and that's a key fact. >> but don't you have to feel threatened? >> yes. and the jury will have to determine whether he was reasonable in his actions. even if you are in your home, was it reasonable to fire in this case? and he wasn't even at close range according to the evidence. so that will be a key question. >> we are also hearing she may have had alcohol and drugs in her system. does that complicate matters? >> the defense will want to talk about that issue. but the toxicology of the victim is only relevant insofa

it is a racially charged case and joining us, is al jazeera's legal contributor jamie floyd. welcome jamie. >> hello john. >> let's talk about the law. he was charged with second degree murder today. what does prosecutors have to prove? >> it is not first degree murder, of course that would require planning and lying in wait so that would be the top charge. but this of course requires intent to kill. and he's also charged with the lesser manslaughter. so first degree murder is off the table but second degree murder is a murder charge and it does carry a possible life sentence. and the manslaughter if they go for the lesser, the jury goes for the lesser, carries a 15-year sentence. there's also a weapons possession charge, that's the third charge on the table. so he's facing three criminal charges. >> what's the likely defense? >> well, he could claim it was an accident that he fired and that was the original suggestion here when initially the police were alerted that he fired accidentally. or he could claim that he was justified, that he was defending his castle as we've alwa

. >> joining me now, is al jazeera legal contributor, jamie floyd, now, jamie, if i remember inning fromy law classes i know that press debit matters, so with the settlement with the related lawsuit between the nfl and its former players how will that have any bearing on this lawsuit. >> well, you stole my thunder, because i wanted to use that word. you used it first, we have that word in law, and there is something called precedent, but there isn't one here, because precedent really refers to those precedents set down by courts. courts like the u.s. supreme court, and we don't have that, but you are right, michael, that this is a piggy backing off of that previous nfl settlement. the nhl players and they are thinking well, if they have a big settlement, maybe we can too. of course, football is much bigger in the united states than is hockey. multibillion dollars sport, very as multimillion dollar sport. but the potential here is by fold. so i think we have a lot to look forward to in this lawsuit, and possibly another big settlement. >> what is the burden of proof? >> you know, when we

. >> let's bring in jamie floyd, our legal contributor. what do you make of the 911 duelling phone calls? >> i think we are living in the age of the reality tv. listening to that piece, and watching - it felt like watching a reality television show. people are beginning to, as juan carlos molina pointed out, try their case in the court of public opinion and social media and with the 911 dispatchers before we set foot into a court room. >> what does that mean for the legal system? >> it means we have to rethink the value of the evidence, perhaps it means our rules of evidence a considered in ta dirnt context. >> there are different rules as indicated in the piece. they are admissible in trial. the prosecution will admit a 911 call. usually it's from a victim. they can be introduced by a defendant. the judge has to allow it. perhaps the court will pull back if they feel it's staged. >> plenty of people were upset with the decision the court made in the trayvon martin case saying, "we told you so." look at what happened again. there has been

. >> i spoke with al jazeera legal contributor jamie floyd about the challenge ahead for air b & b. have a listen. >> what the attorney general is saying we're not targeting the little guy who wants to occasionally-- >> you don't believe that, do you? >> i don't believe the a.g.? >> you don't believe that the a.d. doesn't want everybody or just the big fish? >> what he says is he wants the person who has turned this into a commercial enterprise. >> it is lucrative for some people. >> and those some peoples say look, what i do with my home, my property, even if it's becoming a commercial property, is my business. >> what is the problem with that? is there something to that argument? it is my home. >> well, it is. home is home, and business is business. and we have zones. we have zones for a reason. we have commercial zoning. we have residential zoning. we have hotel zoning. testifand we have b & b zoning. and we have laws that were passed in 2010, laws that are at issue here. and things change if people in communities start to rent out over a long period of time. >> it's the holiday

now let's bring in jamie floyd.here are up to 40 lawsuits from companies asking to be spared from the affordable care act. >> it would potentially unravel the affordable care act because as suggested you could pick and choose what portions of the act offended you as a corporation. what the obama administration is saying is that this is not a burden on individuals who own or run a corporation, but a requirement under the law of the corporation as an entity. and that is what they will argue in march when they go before the supreme court. >> isn't birth control coverage -- there are something like ten different coverages companies have to abide by starting in january. it is possible for the supreme court to carve out something religious because one person's idea that while birth control violates my religious freedom, somebody else may say i'm a capitalist, and that's my religion and i should haven't to pay for somebody else's emergency room visit. >> that's absolutely right. you could carve out things you are uncomfort