Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Very into staying a presentation at this morning.
By George government's attorney mark -- -- as he begins to close his argument in this case.
What we just witnessed was a four minute.
Moment of silence if you want to call it that after which.
Mark O'Meara pointed out something on the timeline he said that's how long trade -- Martin had.
Two run to escape.
What was he doing during those four minutes.
Very interesting question that the jury will have to ponder here in terms of what he deliberated.
During that time and what transpired next want to bring in -- Mac -- boy.
And Bradford Cohen who I have been watching this case on -- off with us throughout the course of it.
-- let me go to you first as a defense attorney.
How do you think he's doing today.
You know -- you seem very.
Different styles between the prosecution.
And the defense and generally the roles are reversed.
Number one -- usually see the prosecutor be very methodical go through facts don't throw things up against the wall don't ask questions like why -- could -- supposed.
And you usually see the defense they're always accused of hey we're trying to muddy the waters in this one it's -- direct opposite.
The defense is going down the facts very methodically.
I usually like to see a little bit more -- because I get emotional during closing in I try to grab their attention and hold their attention.
I don't know if he's gonna go the full three hours like this or he's gonna try to turn it up a little bit but I think he's effective in terms of the facts that he's portraying.
I don't like when he's putting kind of the onus on him about him proving innocence beyond a reasonable doubt he keeps saying that not -- the law.
And he saying you know that's dangerous to say and it is dangerous -- -- -- this state has the burden of proving those things and you should always keep the onus on the state but overall I think he's doing a nice job.
He continues to remind the jury of that fact he's saying it is the State's responsibility.
To prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman.
Did not act in self defense because that's what George -- is sitting there essentially saying I acted because I thought I was gonna die that night and that is why I did what I dead.
In -- praising his front.
I think it's going very well.
I think it was an interest seeing.
Way he did the act the explanation and the demonstration actually of how long -- on -- hat.
That is a tremendous amount of time when you look at it four minutes and you just say four minutes doesn't sound like much -- -- he demonstrated.
-- being quiet in the courtroom for all of that time it showed there was a lot that could have happened during that time he could have moved around he -- -- Glad there's so many things he could have gotten into those pot a spot where he could have attacked and perhaps that is in fact what it what the jury finds happened.
But it it raises the fact that.
The the state has failed to show what happened they have to show the -- from the start to the end at least.
Some explanation of it takes away the reasonable doubt and think defense is doing a very good job.
Of showing demonstrating.
There's a lot of -- here so that they shouldn't be able to convince.
If -- -- that trial lawyers used the time lapse of silence in front of a jury.
Pretty often because it's incredibly.
Effective I wouldn't call it a -- but when you tied down a witness to a timeframe.
And they so just a couple of minutes -- three or four minutes and then you say well.
Let's look at our watches and sit in silence and see how long that really feels it's incredibly demonstrative.
As was there any computer animation now.
Computer animation it's not evidence but boy it's in the minds of these jurors Brad let me go to you on that.
How do you think the defense did -- that did it work.
I think it that you know it's -- it's always tricky when it comes computers and putting on animation.
And I always like to get their very early to make sure all my stuff works everything's ready to go I just plug it in go.
So the little awkward at first winning -- fumble around with it but once -- got going it's extremely.
If you look at people's attention span especially nowadays with FaceBook and Twitter and all these different things.
There attention spans like thirty seconds you know you can't capture them in thirty seconds they're gone they love to watch cartoons and and animation and they -- late when you see animation like that they can relate to that even though they can't take it back into the jury room they're going to see things never associated with those calls.
I think it's a very effective tool I try to use it as often as possible I think it was used very well in this case.
-- a million times in court.
I never used it myself but you know maybe some -- I'll try it.
But listen I want to play a sound bite here because this was from close to the beginning market -- the defense attorney.
-- says ladies and gentlemen of the jury -- -- go back there and deliberate and you cannot figure out what happened that.
Fundamentally in legally equals reasonable doubt because all the prosecution has presented.
Take a listen to this.
-- -- -- Case of bizarre case they didn't in my practice because sometimes -- -- -- to improve upside down to me.
No decision agreement purchases perspective that I had this case -- We couldn't do his heavy burden from the state.
Me what else have you heard from state in this case.
A little I don't think -- -- -- didn't get to ask you that.
I don't think they get to say to you.
What do you think.
-- through to.
We're trying to convince you beyond a reasonable doubt occur in this case so much so that you don't have any reasonable doubt.
I -- those issues that -- presented to you.
There are supposed to use words like certainty and definite.
And without question.
Beyond a reasonable doubt.
No other explanation.
These -- the words and phrases and -- prosecutors.
I used to -- -- I know.
-- -- -- -- aren't good words after prosecutors.
-- you be rewarded.
I hope so you can figure it.
Could have been.
Because there -- any assumptions that pleased you know it.
Do not -- and you -- Role in this case but doing anything about some holdings into a burden that they said in the beginning in case they would gladly accept an improved to.
Shortly thereafter and -- Mac avoid heat then pulled out this very large sort of visual.
Almost want to applied for the jurors.
How incredibly difficult.
The burden of proof is for the prosecution a good move.
I think so because it's really again it it showed to the jury in a very demonstrative way.
That on it's not as simple as well he probably did it and it's hard for insurers to understand -- for any of us to really understand what is a reasonable doubt.
You can have doubt and you can have many levels of doubt and that's basically what -- -- did is he laid out for them.
You're the levels of talent and here's the level.
That you have to get to before you can find that he's actually guilty and it was a very good way to make them see it.
In a very concrete way because it's a very amorphous idea how to try to figure out what actually is reasonable doubt.
And by pointing out that the prosecution is really having to stretch.
And having to you know kind of it and come up with things but the reality is it could still be a conviction I mean we have lots of cases where there isn't even a body.
Here we have a lot more evidence in there isn't a lot of cases there's always if you had a homicides either one of your witnesses is dead because that's why we have a homicide did a case here.
So you know prosecutors can certainly overcome that that Max Ameristar and a very good job of laying out.
That there is a lot of doubt -- -- at least in his mind and certainly.
You know when you think about what we might expect in terms of a bottle we're about halfway through.
And you think about what the state would have to do to convince this -- and Bradford I would suggest that you know they need to convince them that.
That was George Zimmerman had.
No -- solid reason to fear that he was gonna die that night.
That when he stood up he read he said he didn't inning at a hospital he walked over to the police car he tried to basically convinced that he that he was -- -- so.
If you can convince this jury that he had no fear for his life.
That would be -- pivotal moment in terms of what their argument would be would it not.
-- -- 100% if he had no fear for his life I I just you know it's a very very tough uphill battle for the state.
And people are saying well they did a nice job with what they had but.
You have to remember they were the ones who brought this case they were the ones who decided they had enough.
So you know to me.
I think it's a huge burden for them to overcome I don't know if -- I don't think second degrees even going to be considered I think they're gonna argue over manslaughter.
If anything and that's based on emotion and emotion of the prosecutor they're -- they keep saying he got out of the car he shouldn't of got out of the car shouldn't have followed him -- it's he's the reason why this kid is that.
Filter by section