Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Live Coverage of the George Zimmerman Trial

Aired July 12, 2013 - 11:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


MARK O'MARA, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN'S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: The hands should have been bagged. And we'll talk about the hands in a little bit.

Miss Zimmerman told you that it was her son, as I'm sure you expected before she ever got on the stand.

Jorge Mesa, interesting, because that was unplanned by him, it would seem, if you believe his testimony, said he had a computer listening, and then hearing in the background a voice that he knew without question and immediately to be that of his nephew, George Zimmerman.

I think he came across very credibly. I think he came across a man of his oath and of his word, and I ask you to consider the testimony in that regard.

Mark Osterman, a buddy of his, talked about the weapon used, how you holster a gun. He's good at what he does. He was helping George figure out how to fire a gun.

Sondra Osterman, friend, definitely George Zimmerman screaming for help, and explained away some of what the state was trying to move to you through the non-emergency call about the anger and hatred and all of that that just isn't there.

Same thing with Miss Geri Russo, no question in her mind, it's George Zimmerman's voice.

Same thing with Leanne Benjamin, I've heard him scream and yell in campaigns, and that was George Zimmerman.

John Donnelly was interesting because I'm not sure that I could, if I had thought about trying to figure out who in the world talks to people they know, and then hears them scream for their life. I just -- there's no profession that does that. Maybe a corner man in a boxing ring, but they don't scream for help there.

A medic in Vietnam, a person who hangs out during the day with his buddies of 6.200 people, figures out who they are, what they are, who they left behind at home, when they want to go back, when they might go back, and you know what? That they might never go back because he's the guy who has the medic bag and the rifle, I think he said, and heads out towards the screams, and that even before he gets there, sometimes, he knows who it is that's screaming. Wow.

Didn't want to testify, I don't think a guy who's been in Vietnam wants to come before people and break down a bit, but I think his testimony was quite credible when he believed that it was Mr. Zimmerman.

Doris Singleton and, by the way, Chris Serino both say the same thing.

Unfortunately, when Mr. Martin did first hear the tape, he said what he believed to be true then, it would seem from the officers, and that is, that's not my son's voice. It just wasn't his voice to him, and his mind has changed now.

But it is interesting for you to consider when you're trying to figure out that issue of who said what, and what witnesses said what, because you're going to give him credibility, you're going to weight them, decide to dismiss their testimony or accept their testimony and try to figure out, remembering always, as we'll talk about in a moment, the benefit always goes -- or the doubt always go to my client's benefit.

Adam Pollack, animated, big guy, George is soft. He's a one. I don't care that he's been here for a year. I don't know that I would have actually advertised that I trained George Zimmerman for a year and brought him from point-five to a one, but he did.

Not a fighter, not (inaudible) a bag, so this MMA, you know, George, I think the state said it was 18 months that George was MMA training, three days a week! Really? Come on! Really?

In light of the testimony of the trainer who said, I wouldn't even let him do anything but shadow box for fear the shadow might win, and hit a bag?

Tracy Martin, we talked about.

Chief Bill Lee, he was there for the whole part of it, but most importantly, he was the officer who said, whatever you do, separate them. Don't infect witness testimony with other witness testimony. It is "Cop 101."

I understand the sensitivities of the (inaudible) family members listening to the possible voice of their son and definitely the gunshot that ended their son's life, but law enforcement, ongoing investigation, just put them in one at a time.

The way it was handled infected the evaluation of that testimony horribly, and who gets the benefit of that? George Zimmerman.

Vincent Di Maio, just a grandfather, he's done this his whole life. Came in and gave me some really good information about everything having to do with gunshots, really because he failed and refused to go beyond gunshots, even when I think we tried to take him a little bit, and he said, no.

And then the state tried to take him a little bit, and he said, no. I'm good at what I'm good at, but I'm only good at talking about what I'm good at. And he's good at gunshot wounds and suggesting that it made perfect sense that the hand in the jacket would do what it did.

Does it make anything less than perfect sense as to what happened? It's in there, and he's leaning over, and his loose, billowing shirt falls forward. And he gets shot. And it's contact to the fabric. It is not pressed against the chest.

I think that little play in opening statement has been dismissed.

And it was four inches from his chest. As it turns out, the type of forensic evidence is fairly significant because it completely supports the contention that Mr. Zimmerman was on the bottom, Trayvon Martin leaning over the top when he got shot.

Now here's a theory of guilt for you. Are you ready? Because this is the state's presentation, so listen carefully. He might have been backing up. He could have been backing up. Could have been.

If I was arguing that, I would be arguing to you reasonable doubt. You know, it could have happened this way. It could have been that he was backing up.

Well, I don't know. I almost made light of it when I said, well, he could have been backing up to strike another blow, but the "could- have-beens" don't belong in this courtroom. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, consistent with a reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

He was leaning over him. Nothing to suggest anything else but that. He could have been leaning back? At some point, after 45 seconds of attacking George Zimmerman, for no other reason -- let's not forget he didn't back up when John Good told him to, right?

So for some reason just before the shot takes off, at that moment, the state wants you to believe that Trayvon Martin retreated. Really? Really?

One piece of evidence, just one, I ask for, just one piece of evidence that supports that contention. Where is it? Where is the eyewitness who said, I saw him back up? Where is the forensic evidence?

Well, he got all the way back up, chest and shirt are tied together and shot just through and through. Where is that piece of evidence? Where is one shred of evidence to support the absurdity that they're trying to have you buy? One?

Mr. Guy can tell you about it when he closes, if it's there.

Assumption, supposition, could have been.

Bonaparte, just part of the absurdity of how this thing happened with the phone call -- with the tape. I don't think it matters too much.

Miss Dilligard, nice lady, didn't want to bring her here sick, knows George Zimmerman, saw him that night, saw him beat up, saw the picture -- or hit, sorry. Saw him hit, and that he has a light voice and it sounded like it was his voice.

Dennis Root, you know, it's interesting, again, talk about the Bizarro case. Now we have prosecutors attacking, sort of -- impeaching lifetime law enforcement officers who have dedicated their life to the pursuit of perfection in law enforcement. Perfection, my god, he's trained in everything. He takes something on; he becomes a trainer. And now we have the state impeaching. Well, hold on a second here. It could have been this way, right? Not really.

Well, let me ask you this question, Mr. Guy says. At that moment, when George Zimmerman (inaudible) Trayvon Martin, what other options did he have? None. He had none, from a use-of-force expert who's been doing this his entire career and has become proficient in assisting others in learning how to use force, learning how not to use force, learning when and where to use force.

And they asked him the question of whether or not George Zimmerman had alternatives. Tell me the piece of evidence that contra-indicates that. Just give me one. Give me a shred of evidence that contradicts that he had any other option because now we have an expert who's qualified who gave you that opinion.

Dismiss it if you want. The judge will tell you just because they're experts doesn't mean it's gospel, that you have to listen to them, but if you believe him, you think they're well-qualified enough to give an opinion, if it's an area of inquiry which will help you, then accept it.

Miss Bertalan, I hope it does not come across that I was just seeking sympathy for this woman, but the reality is I think when you put a face on what was happening at Retreat View, she's it.

She really is because thank God nobody upstairs. I'm not sure the scissors would have really helped. But that's the face.

And I'll tell you this. I'll give you this much. That's the face of the frustration that I think George was feeling a bit of, you know? That's something that he wanted to help out with.

That's why he walked over and didn't say, I'm going to go beat that guy. No. That's why he said here's a lock for the back of your door. Here's my telephone number, and here's my wife's number. You need our help? This is what we do. We help.

Dad, you know. He said it early. You've got to give him this much. He said it right away. He went down to SPD to talk to them, Sanford Police Department. They put him under oath.

(Inaudible) They put him under oath and said, OK now you're under oath. You've got to tell the truth. Is that your son? Yes.

We -- talk about a few other points, if I might.

Oops. Because this -- it's not working for me. It might come back. If not, I'll just read it to you.

If there's any chance that it'll come back up, that would be great. If not, I'll just work without it.

Some of the things that you want to consider when you look at this case is the forensic evidence, what it does and doesn't support. Here was an interesting thing that I didn't make about a big deal in the trial, but I want you to focus on because a lot has been said about the lack of blood and what happened to the blood and, well, if Trayvon Martin was doing what George Zimmerman says Trayvon Martin was doing, where's the blood? Where's the anger? Where does it show up on the hands?

State 28, gunshot wound, see the blood, trickling down and across the chest? You see that three-inch swath of blood, all the way over there?

State 95, it's gone. Not there. Yet everybody here handled that body, said they didn't touch it or they didn't wipe it. They may say, well, that was when we moved the sweatshirt up and moved it back down and the blood is all gone, but let's not forget it was there when they moved it up, so (INAUDIBLE) down. And there's actually saluting (ph) in this photograph.

So oh, some big moment proving my case? No, for the idea, they want you to assume that they want you to believe just connect the dots? That there was no blood, because there's no blood when they fail to properly preserve items like the sweatshirts? Items like the body, it seems, items like the hands that were to be bagged, but weren't?

They don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they bagged the hands. That's not an element they have to prove, but if they're going to try to come up with conclusive evident that supports no other reasonable hypothesis of innocence or guilt, then they have to have a better case. This is just some evidence of it.

So let's talk about other things they have to consider about the event. A couple of graphics. George Zimmerman, the way he was. Trayvon Martin the way he was. Now those two have left sides (ph).

Trayvon Martin that night, he's wearing shoes (ph) I have to show you, he had the hoodie on. We talked about the hoodie. This is from the picture we showed you. It's not in evidence. Just to have you look at it. Don't even have to believe it's accurate. Just take a look at it. Remember how much taller I was than Andrew Gaugh when I was standing next to him. He testified that he was 5'10. And then there's George Zimmerman and how tall he is. Take a look at him compared to my height.

Could you stand up for a moment, please? Relative physical abilities. That's what you have to look at to determine in a self-defense case. So you look at this guy that night, don't look at it today. There's been testimony all over the place as to how much weight he gained. It doesn't matter, what matters is how he was that day and how Trayvon Martin looked that day.

(INAUDIBLE) In evidence, just so you get a clear -- an indication, November 15th, 2011, about two months, three months before Trayvon Martin passed away. That's what he looked like. He's a young kid, nice kid actually, you look at the picture, not bad. The problem with it is that when we show you autopsy photographs, there are two things to show you about autopsy photographs, one, they're horrific, and meant to have negative impact. I did, when I was a prosecutor, prosecutors do it all the time. A dead person on a slab has an impact on you.

I would say that maybe one of you, maybe have looked at a picture like that before this trial. Maybe one. It has an impact.

The other thing about autopsy photographs, is that there's no muscle tone. Because there's no nerves, there's no movement, he's lost half his blood. We know that, so on that picture that we have of him on the medical examiner's table now, it does look emaciated.

But here's him three months before that night. So it's in evidence. Take a look at it. Because this is the person and this is the person that George Zimmerman encountered that night. This is the person who all of the evidence was attacked, or attacked George Zimmerman, broke his nose or something close to it. And battered him on something, and the state now may say, oh, maybe it was a -- and no intent to hurt there by Trayvon Martin because it was just coincidence that he was bashing his head on something hard. It was a drain box.

Really? C'mon. Really? Those injuries?

You know I (INAUDIBLE). You've seen this before, it was out of this darkness that Trayvon Martin decided to stalk, I guess, plan, pounce, I don't know. All I know is that when George Zimmerman is walking back to his car, out of the darkness, be it bushes or darkness or left or behind, or somewhere, Trayvon Martin came towards George Zimmerman. Out of this.

And we know what happened. That the picture is what happened. And it's supported by evidence.

You know you know, I talked a moment ago about ignoring George's statements. You know what? (INAUDIBLE) listen to him. Find the inconsistencies, see what you think about them. Take them in connection of what he was going through that night and how voluntarily he gave those statements, and decide whether or not as Dennis Root said, as Chris Serino said, as I believe Singleton said, if anyone is giving me the same exact story twice, they're probably lying. They're probably pathological liars. Because when you lie, I guess since you're making up a fantasy, you can tell the fantasy twice the same exact way. But getting your nose smashed, your head smashed, and you answered every question they asked of you then, yes, okay. Deal with the inconsistencies however you want to.

But maybe I would suggest you begin by dealing with him the way Chris Serino did, which is his case, and what he said to you, yes, there were inconsistencies. He said he got hit 25 times, yes, I don't believe it. It seems he didn't get hit 25 times. Did it feel like he was getting hit 25 times? Maybe. Is that the embellishment, the exaggeration the state is talking about, when they say to you, he's exaggerating, he's a liar. He's a liar? Really? C'mon. Those are lies -- if you lie, it's not only with the intent to deceive, isn't it? Isn't that the essence of a lie? If George Zimmerman had the intent to deceive, why would he give six statements? If you're going to give him credit, if anything about going to school and going through legal studies, here's one. Miranda. He knew it was self-defense, he knows stand your ground. He knows whatever the state wants you to think he knows, but he doesn't know Miranda? No, no, he knows Miranda, but he was such the mastermind that he could, without knowing any of the evidence, who was watching him? Who was videotaping him? Who was doing anything -- we don't know any of that. He had it al sussed. He had it all figured out. Really.

It defies explanation. What doesn't defy explanation is this. The mud on the knees evidencing the mounting. What doesn't defy explanation is officer Tim Smith's testimony that George Zimmerman's back was wet, more wet than the front, and he had grass all over his back. Evidencing, I would believe, that he was on his back, in the grass. He was getting beat up. Tim Smith, Wagner, everybody else who saw those injuries.

Okay. You don't get grass stains, but you do still get me going over some of the instructions with you.

Reasonable doubt. What is it? Can't tell you any more that what you have. The judge has read it a couple times. You're going to get it again. Reasonable doubt, don't start with the premise, presumption of innocence, sticks and stays until it is taken away by evidence that convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt that it is no longer appropriate to consider Mr. Zimmerman innocent. Then and only then do you get to convict my client of anything.

Reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt. If you've got to make it up, it's not a reasonable doubt. We talked about me proving my case, as though I had to. It's not a speculative doubt or imaginary doubt or forced doubt. If you have a doubt, and you say to yourself, I don't buy this doubt, I'm going to force myself to believe it. That would be a forced doubt and isn't reasonable, but a reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, speculative or imaginary. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty.

If you do have an abiding conviction of guilt. On the other hand, and this is where -- this is the meat of it. If after carefully considering preparing and weighing all the evidence, there's not an abiding conviction of guilt or having that conviction, is one which is not stable, one which wavers and vacillates, then the choice not proved beyond a reasonable -- every reasonable doubt, and you must find George Zimmerman not guilty because the doubt is reasonable.

I almost wish, and I have never said this in a criminal trial before, I never heard it being said before, I almost wish that the verdict had guilty, not guilty, and completely innocent. Because I would ask you to check that one. You've got to check the not guilty, but check the innocent then, too.

Reasonable doubt as to George Zimmerman's innocence may rise to the evidence, conflict in the evidence, or a lack of evidence. If you have no -- if you have a reasonable doubt, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty, if you had no reasonable doubt, you should find George Zimmerman guilty.

Weigh the evidence, you will have all this before Judge Nelson will read it to you, she's going to give it to you, but just to focus on these witnesses, the question is whether or not they had the opportunity to see and know the things they're telling you about, obviously. That's that vantage point concern, how they really can look at it. Perception you have to see (ph).

For example, somebody came in, wasted off their mind, then that would give them less credibility. We don't have that here, but you have to look at it and decide whether or not they had an opportunity to see what they're talking about, if they have an accurate memory. We know that memory is affected by traumatic events. I think Ms. Sudeika (ph) is a good example of that. She was frantic about what she perceived was happening outside, and I think it may have impacted on her ability to recall. Not calling her anything but a person affected by the circumstances.

Were they honest and straightforward? I would put up on that pedestal, Ms. Bahadoor. Your call, but as to whether or not she presented in a way that made sense. (INAUDIBLE) Ms. Mora (ph) who just seemed to be saying what she remembered and very willing to show you.

Did it have an interest in the outcome? Well, let me tell you something. When George Zimmerman gave those statements to law enforcement, he didn't know it, I don't think, didn't seem normal that he would have been charged in this case, but in his mind at that time, I presume you could say he had an interest in telling the story, as good he could for himself. So sure was he interested in the outcome? Absolutely. These people trying to take away his liberty? Absolutely. Consider that when you look at those statements as well.

And does the witness's testimony agree with other testimony? That's the global view. Dennis Root kept saying to you, well you have to look at it in the totality of the circumstances. Don't just give me one sheet and go, well what do you think now?