Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Jurors Deliberating in Zimmerman Case

Aired July 13, 2013 - 16:00   ET

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

JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: I'm John King. This is CNN's special live coverage of the verdict watch in the murder trial of George Zimmerman. Are they close to a verdict? Only six women know the answer to that question. Right now they are deliberating in their tenth hour. How long this could take is anyone's guess.

But let's take a look at the deliberation in some other high profile cases. It took the Jodi Arias jury 15 hours to convict her with first degree murder of her ex-boyfriend, Travis Alexander.

In the Casey Anthony trial jurors took 10 hours and 40 minutes and then acquitted her in the death of her daughter. Conrad Murray nine hours to convict him in the voluntary manslaughter and the death of Michael Jackson. Scott Peterson jurors took a whopping seven days and then convicted him in the murder of his wife and unborn child and jurors way back in the O.J. Simpson murder trial took less than four hours to acquit him that was 1995.

One thing to remember here all of these juries had 12 members. There are just six in the George Zimmerman trial and they're all women. CNN's legal analyst Sunny Hostin joins me now along with defense attorney Danny Cevallos.

First, lets talk about jury deliberation. We're in the tenth hour now, Sunny, is there some sort of belief that the longer the deliberations go it favors acquittal, vice versa?

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, you know, when I was prosecuting cases they used to say a quick verdict was a guilty verdict and the longer the jury was out the more likely they were having trouble with the evidence and the more likely there would be some sort of acquittal. But I don't know. I think you've got to throw that out when you're talking about a case like this, a complex case, a complicated case, a case that's not a who done it, but was the person, you know, legally justified in doing so.

I think you've got to sort of throw all of that out and it's anyone's guess because you know that this is a methodical jury. There are only six of them. They're all women. They initially, John, asked, the first thing that they asked two minutes into their deliberations was for the inventory list of exhibits, so that tells you right there this is not your ordinary jury, they're not going to make a quick decision and they're going to look through each and every piece of evidence to come to a decision. They're going to be very deliberative. So I think it's anybody's guess at this point. KING: Six women, Danny, does that do anything to your thinking about how this will play out, not necessarily how it will end, but how it will play out?

DANNY CEVALLOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, it does. Here's why. I mean it's simple math, the more jurors you have or the more people to convince at least in terms of a trial strategy, the less jurors you have, the less as a defense attorney you can get to hang, so the idea of six jurors I think gives some defense attorneys concern.

Because in theory if you had 100 jurors all you need to hang the case is just one. So you have a better chance. When you reduce it down to six, it changes the dynamics of deliberations, now there are less people to convince and less likely for holdouts. The converse to that is that if there is a holdout he or she on one of six as opposed to one versus 11. So, it's really a question of math. In a case like this, however, there's - consider the possibility that Mark O'Mara told them all you have to do is consider self-defense first, and if you do, then you're done.

He dangled that sort of bone in front of them, so this may be a case where the traditional -- and Sunny's absolutely right, an earlier verdict traditionally tends to favor the prosecution at least that's the way the theory goes. But if they're considering that self-defense and they come back quickly, they may have taken Mark O'Mara's advice to consider self-defense first and that is their door out of the jury room quickly.

KING: If you are just joining us that jury is in its tenth hour of deliberating. Let's talk about sentencing. Sunny, to you first, the judge didn't tell the jury the guidelines for either second-degree murder or manslaughter. Is that standard practice in a case like this or would that information change the jury's minds do you know, if they know, OK, if we do this, this is the sentencing guidelines, if we do this, here it is?

HOSTIN: Yes, it is absolutely standard practice. The jury should not consider what the sentence will be, only what the crime is and, you know, I know that intuitively, most people know that second-degree murder probably carries more time than manslaughter, second degree murder is a minimum sentence of 25 years maximum with life in prison and there's no parole in Florida. But you know, you get convicted of manslaughter in Florida, you can get up to 30 years in prison and there's no parole in Florida.

And we know that George Zimmerman has not served any time. Some prisoners get credit for the time that they've served. Well, he wouldn't have that ability. He wouldn't have any credit because he hasn't served any time, so he's looking at stiff time, stiff penalties for either manslaughter or murder two. And hopefully that the jury will not consider that. Most people are thinking, well, do you know what, every jury considers that and they must know intuitively that manslaughter is lesser included of second degree so he might get less time but they really shouldn't be considering that.

KING: Danny and Sunny will stay with us as we continue to watch these deliberations approaching the eleventh hour, the jury has been deliberating. The last 14 days in this trial has seen their fair share of unique witnesses, also props, theatrics and even some courtroom bickering.

Some would argue it's the final day that really matters, the closing arguments, they really have the power to sway the jury members entering deliberations perhaps still undecided.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK O'MARA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: (INAUDIBLE) He was wearing shoes. I have to show you, he had the hoodie on. On top of the hoodie, this is from the picture that we showed you. It's not in evidence. Just have you look at it. Don't even have to believe it's accurate. Take a look at it.

About two months, three months before Trayvon Martin passed away, that's what he looked like. He lost half his blood. We know that. So, on that picture, that we have of him on the medical examiner's table, yes, he 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 who George Zimmerman encountered that night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: It was at that point Martin's mother left the courtroom. The prosecution then took stage for its rebuttal.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN GUY, ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: Trayvon Martin is not, was not, will never be a piece of cardboard. 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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Joining me now our expert legal panel, Trent Copeland, criminal defense attorney, Paul Callan, CNN legal analyst, Susan Constantine, jury consultant and Holly Hughes, a criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

Susan, I want to go to you first before we get into reading the closing arguments, I want to ask you about this jury now, they're sequestered, 10, six jurors, four alternates. What is that process like now that they've been through the trial, there's some relief I would assume that the testimony and the arguments are over, but now they're getting to the hard part, can they stay in contact with their friends and family? How does a smaller jury affect deliberations?

SUSAN CONSTANTINE, JURY CONSULTANT: Well, first of all, the judge has already gone through the instructions, a lot of those questions were raised during or right after voir dire because the families were concerned they have kids and they want to connect with their family and the judge kept emphasizing it's going to be a limited contact. So, yes, they're going to see their family but I think it's going to be highly monitored because they don't want that outside influences because you never know if their family members are watching television or reading the news. So at this point in time, you know, they're tired, they've been sequestered for a long period of time, they've hung around with the same people now that they don't even know, they have met, for the last 30 days and, you know, relationships are building, so behind closed doors, you know, they're ready to get this thing over and done with.

KING: Holly, after the days of conflicting testimony, if you're pretty torn, still up in the air sort of maybe debating yourself and you get to the closing arguments, in your view, did either side, did one side, was there a lopsided advantage?

HOLLY HUGHES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, you know, I think that when you got to the final close, we saw Bernie de la Rionda, the lead prosecutor, start off the first day, and he basically just has one speed, very loud, very intense for about two hours. The problem with that, John, it's kind of like living next to a train station. When you first move in, you notice the rumbling noise, but after a while you tune it out.

So, I think we need to focus, you know, very clearly on what Mark O'Mara and John Guy did that second day. And they were both incredibly effective. I think Mark O'Mara probably connected better with the jurors who are going to take a very intellectual stance because he was very clear with the law. This is what the law is. This is how you analyze it, this is how you go back and deliberate, guys. Go to self-defense first.

John Guy got back up, was very powerful but in a very different way. He appealed to the emotional jurors, the ones who are sitting there who cannot divorce themselves from the fact that they're mothers and that there's a dead - and we heard some of those jurors were crying. They were emotionally moved. But I think it's a tie when you look at the presentation because O'Mara, he had to speak for three straight hours and you really did pay attention for three straight hours, weaving in the different media items that he used, sometimes a chart, sometimes a Powerpoint, sometimes a cardboard cut-out. He held their attention but he was more arguing to the intellectual aspects of what these jurors need to do.

KING: And, Paul Callan, the question is, you know, he was compelling as a speaker and he had all of his props and he was using his hands, he was using the cardboard, I guess the question is did he string it together in an effective way that makes the case or do sometimes some of the theatrics become distracting?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, you know, I kind of think of them as a sort of a skilled carpenter building, you know, a house of reasonable doubt. I mean, that's what he was trying to do. But there have been studies done on this and, you know, you really can't hold anybody's attention for more than, say, 30 minutes or so as a public speaker. And once you get beyond that, what you're really hoping is that an occasional concept will sink in with one of the six jurors. And despite the fact that lawyers have big egos and all think that their brilliant summation and presentation is going to turn the tide in the case, it's usually the facts of the case that really decide the case. The jury, they go back, they find their own little things here and there. They argue about them. And they reach a conclusion. So, lawyers sort of guide them, point them in a direction, but do you know something, in the end the real speeches are being made by the six women in the jury who are arguing about the evidence right now.

KING: Trent Copeland, maybe it's not what makes the final decision in the jury room, but if you go back to high profile cases often there is a signature line. I remember the first big trial I covered was the Von Claus trial, and (INAUDIBLE) was defense attorney and he said no insulin injection, making the point (INAUDIBLE) to make its case. In the O.J. trial, of course, it was the famous if the glove don't fit, you must acquit. Anything from these closings from either side that you think when the jury first went into the room was still ringing in their head they could at least start, set the early tone of the deliberations?

TRENT COPELAND, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I do. I think it's a great question, John. What I think it is is the words of John Guy, the prosecutor, said in his rebuttal, blood on his hands. I think they will remember that. They will remember those autopsy photos of Trayvon Martin, that lifeless body laying there on the grass. I think they're going to remember the prosecutor when he says that Trayvon Martin was walking home and that it was a child's worst fear.

I think it's important for this jury to remember those words because I think from the prosecution's perspective that's what they have to trade on, it's emotion. What they are essentially asking this jury is to remember the emotion, remember the emotional gravity of this case, to grab a hold of their hearts, to pull at their heartstrings and this is frankly, John, much more of a defense strategy by the prosecution than it is a more traditional prosecution.

Remember, prosecutors tend to me much more clinical, much more diagnosing in terms of how they review the evidence. In this case it's just the reverse. It's the defense that wants this jury to be more clinical. They want them to dissect this evidence more carefully as Paul Callan indicated, they want them to build that house of evidence, that house of reasonable doubt. But it's the prosecution that wants them to rely on emotion. They want to pull at the heartstrings.

Because, remember, they're women, most of whom have children, many of whom have children under the age of 18, so I think they're really hoping that this jury will connect to them on a more visceral, emotional level.

KING: Our experts with us throughout the day as we continue to watch the jury deliberations in the George Zimmerman case and there's already fallout in this case even as those deliberations go on. One of the pretrial witnesses has been fired. Ben Kruidbos was the I.T. director from the Florida State Attorney's Office, he testified the prosecution withheld information from the defense. He said the state didn't share a report from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement about Trayvon Martin's cell phone photos and his text messages.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN KRUIDBOS, FORMER STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IT. DIR.: I knew that the information existed. And I had been told two different things by Mr. De la Rionda, one that FDLE would redo the report and the information would be provided and then in a second one that only the source file would be provided. I knew at least one of those approaches was probably inaccurate or wrong. At that point the more that I thought about it, I was curious if I had any legal exposure, and, at that point I sought counsel.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: George Howell, one of our correspondents on top of this case in Sanford, Florida, George, was that damaging for the prosecution?

GEORGE HOWELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Potentially. And with regards to this case, let's talk about that, first. It could open the possibility of an appeal if there is a conviction. We're talking about discovery evidence that should have gone over to the defense as they say, as they suggest, they didn't get it in time, didn't get in a timely manner. So that could happen with regards to the case.

With regards to the prosecution, there's a possibility of jail time, that is not likely. It's more likely, John, that it could be a fine or even a penalty, a censure, basically, on the attorney, certainly something no attorney would want.

KING: George Howell.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HOWELL (on camera): We heard from your investigators at the time, Sereno and Singleton, both testified about that investigative process. Looking back at it, do you feel that they did their job to the letter?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I believe they did. You know, the investigation through the trial, I think, it's revealed itself that the Sanford Police Department was doing a proper investigation. And diligently trying to find the truth. And, you know, sometimes the justice system that we have, you know, the results of it, you know, at certain points do not sit well with people, maybe based on the position that they are. But the police department was looking at this information objectively. We wanted to find the truth and we wanted to seek justice.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HOWELL: So putting that interview there with (INAUDIBLE) into context, that's an exclusive interview that I had with the former Sanford police chief, when you talk him and you also talk about Ben Kruidbos, you heard two people throughout the course of this case who lost their jobs. You will remember that Bill Lee was the police chief but he went through the process of the investigation and got a lot of pressure, he says, and he believe he lost his job because he did not make an arrest in the case. He says that he upheld his oath in the case but the city of Sanford did give a vote of no confidence and he was later terminated from that position but you do see two people here throughout the course of this trial who lost their jobs.

KING: That's remarkable, George, the central question, of course, before the jury but so many fascinating subplots to this case, this trial, as well, George Howell on the ground for us in Sanford, thanks so much.

Up next our expert panel takes a look at the witnesses in the Zimmerman trial. Who were the most effective and the least?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: I'm John King, you're watching special coverage of the verdict watch in the George Zimmerman trial. The defense and prosecution called a slew of witnesses to the stand over the course of this trial. During his closing arguments the defense attorney Mark O'Mara reminded jurors about the witnesses using the slide show. He talked about the 7-11 clerk and Trayvon Martin's friends and neighbors among others. Who was the most effective, back with our legal panel now, Trent Copeland, criminal defense attorney, Paul Callan, CNN legal analyst, Susan Constantine, a jury consultant and Holly Hughes, criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

Paul, let's start with you, you say George Zimmerman's neighbor was most effective for the defense, why?

CALLAN: Well, actually, I got two ones. One's John Good, the neighbor, and the reason I think he was the most effective because he's the only one that really didn't have a relationship to Trayvon Martin or a relationship to George Zimmerman, he just happened to be in the condo unit that was right next to the scene.

He comes out and he really provides important information because he says, "a," it was, in fact, Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman and, "b," that it was Zimmerman who was screaming for help and ironically I think the second most effective witness was a stopwatch and that was when O'Mara sat there in court for a full four minutes of silence to show that there was plenty of time for Trayvon Martin to circle back and attack George Zimmerman rather than going home if he was, in fact, a child afraid of a man pursuing him. So, a stopwatch and john good, those are the two most effective witnesses in the case.

KING: And least effective?

CALLAN: Well, least effective I would have to say were a whole series - all of those witnesses who were trying to identify the scream and saying they're positive it was either Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman, I really pretty much discount them all. The sound of the scream through the telephone line was so bad that even experts couldn't figure it out, and everybody there was clearly just trying to help family members. And I think in the end, the scream's going to be discounted in terms of that testimony. And I think that will prove to be a pretty ineffective witness testimony.

KING: Trent, most effective and why?

COPELAND: Well, you know, I think the most effective oddly enough, John, was a witness that didn't testify but the witness did give incredibly powerful testimony and that was George Zimmerman himself. Look, he never went on the witness stand. He was never cross- examined, but we heard every version of his story. I mean, George Zimmerman was allowed to give the reenactment the following day after the incident. He gave an interview at the jail station that was recorded. He gave audio statements.

He was given the opportunity to give all these statements, John, all these statements that I thought were incredibly helpful that are self- serving statements, they seem to be consistent with his narrative of self-defense, he gave all of this without having to face what would have been a rigorous cross examination by John Guy or Bernie de la Rionda, so I think he was probably his best ally and he didn't have to take the witness stand to do it.

I think the converse of that is I think for the prosecution their worst witness happened to also be very good witnesses for the defense. Look, it was Detective Serena, it was Officer Singleton, these were some of the people who interviewed George Zimmerman, these are some of the people who had to go after George Zimmerman's statement and they came to the witness stand on behalf of the prosecution and they said, "Hey, listen, we used every tactic at our disposal, we used every police technique that we knew to try to shake his story and we couldn't do it."

And so I don't know that I've ever heard or I've ever seen on the witness stand the chief detective say to a jury that I think I believe his version of the story because it seems to have held up. And I think this jury's going to remember that. Remember, these are the front line guys, these are the people if any one is going to carry the water for the prosecution, it's going to be their lead detectives and they did just the reverse.

KING: Holly?

HUGHES: I've got a reason for what I'm about to say. It's what I'm going to call sleeper witnesses, the two you don't expect to make the difference, but, remember, John, this entire defense is based on self- defense and the charge to the jury says what was it reasonable in George Zimmerman's mind and the two witnesses, the best one for the prosecution to tell you what was in George Zimmerman's mind was John Manolo one of those neighbors who come out there and he takes George Zimmerman's cell phone and Zimmerman says "Call my wife."

And so as John Manolo was attempting to explain to Shelly Zimmerman what happened, he said, "Look, there's been a shooting and George interrupts him and says "Just tell her I shot someone." And the prosecution, for the prosecution that is an excellent peek into George Zimmerman's mindset. He's cold. He's disconnected. He doesn't care, "ah, just tell her I shot somebody."

On the reverse and I'm going to respectfully disagree with Paul Callan, one of those scream witnesses that the defense called was a medic in Vietnam, and he has a skill set that probably nobody else in the world has. He says "I know what it's like to listen to my buddies speak in a normal voice and then I know what it's like to hear that same person screaming for their life, screaming in terror, screaming in pain."

And so I think he brought a little bit of credibility that nobody else could. Because who else has experienced that. And he listened to the tape and he said to me that's George Zimmerman, and if you believe him, John, if you believe that skill set, gives him unique knowledge. If Zimmerman is the one screaming for help, then the self-defense claims stands, because if he's so panicked that he's screaming for his life, he thinks the only way to react is to shoot Trayvon Martin.

KING: Interesting perspective. I'll ask our experts to stand by as we continue to watch the jury in the George Zimmerman case. Mr. Zimmerman's attorney expressed concern that his client might be a racist but he changed his mind after he met him. We'll talk about the race factor in this trial, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Live look at the courthouse in Sanford, Florida, our special coverage of the George Zimmerman trial continues, but first, let's check in on other stories making headlines today.

Edward Snowden requesting temporary asylum from Russia as he tries to figure out how to get to Latin America. Snowden met with human rights activists and lawyers in that transit zone of the Moscow airport and the White House criticized Russia for giving Snowden what it called, "a propaganda platform." President Obama also spoke about the issue by phone with the Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Egypt's ousted president is being investigated on claims of killing protesters and spying, that's according to two state news agencies. Several leaders and supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood also are under investigation by the state prosecutor. Meantime, the United States is calling on Egypt's army to free President Mohammed Morsy, the former president. It's not clear where he's being held.

The Texas State Senate has approved one of the strictest anti-abortion measures in the country. That bill bans abortions after 20 weeks and requires abortion clinics to meet standards that could force many or most to close. The Republican Governor Rick Perry is quick to call another special session of the legislature to get that bill through. You might remember it died last month following a nearly 11-hour filibuster.

Now, back to the Zimmerman case. In an interview you're going to see first right here on CNN, his closing arguments behind him Zimmerman's lead defense attorney opened up to CNN's Martin Savidge. Mark O'Mara talking about his early concerns of taking on a client who was being called the most hated man in America.

JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: -- closing arguments behind him, Zimmerman's lead defense attorney opened up to CNN's Martin Savidge. Mark O'Mara talking about his early concerns of taking on a client he was being called the most hated man in America.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN ANCHOR: Was it a concern for you that he might have been a racist?

MARK O'MARA, ZIMMERMAN DEFENSE ATTORNEY: When I saw the 12-year-old Trayvon Martin picture and the 270-pound George Zimmerman picture, yes, no question. And strangely enough, I think that's why most of the people who believe that George Zimmerman is a racist today got their belief when they saw those two pictures 16 months ago. And you can't not have that thought. You can't look at 12-year-old Trayvon Martin and the size of George Zimmerman and say there's any reason why Trayvon Martin should have lost his life that night.

When you look at the reality, it's completely different.

I see race being injected into this case in the first week that it existed. And I see that it's never left this case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Let's consider the race factor now with two legal veterans on the scene right there, my CNN colleague Don Lemon and criminal defense attorney Jeff Gold, live in Sanford -- Don.

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you very much, John.

Let's talk about the race factor in this.

Why do you think -- you were standing here when I interviewed Benjamin Crump an hour or so ago, why do you think race has been -- besides the obvious, that came up in the beginning. What do you think race has been such a factor in this case?

JEFF GOLD, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I think it's a factor because we know that Tracy Martin, Trayvon's dad, called Benjamin Crump the day after the killing.

So, he was already suspicious, he was already concerned. Was his son getting the treatment that a white person would get? Whether that's true or not, it was in his heart. It is something that black men feel.

LEMON: Is that legitimate, though, for him to feel that? GOLD: It's legitimate to the degree that you don't get charged with driving while white and you can get charged driving while black in America. Race still exists. It's a subconscious subtext of things that go on. You know, whether this is about race is another matter, but it was in at least his heart, what was going on here.

LEMON: Yes. You mentioned to me, you said that he feels no different than many men in America, Tracy Martin does?

GOLD: You know, look, identify just don't think you can take race out of it. Sometimes I go into a courtroom in a predominantly white county and they bring in defendants that are going to get bail, have been arrested and get bail, and I see 80 percent black men. I don't know why that is, but there's something in America that black men still get treated differently than white men.

So I don't blame them for feeling that. That doesn't mean I think this case is about race. It really doesn't. It's about what's in people's hearts.

LEMON: Yes, there are people saying maybe the black men are committing most of the crime in that area.

GOLD: They may be. It may be. They may be committing them on other black men, too, not -- you know, this idea that it's blacks and whites.

I'm is just saying that race in America is not gone. The president of the United States I don't think helped things by putting himself into a local criminal case saying Trayvon Martin looks like he could be his son or whatever else. You know, that -- you know, traditionally the president may get involved in a civil rights case. So, by commenting on this case, he was elevating its status to perhaps a several rights case and I wonder if that aggravated the situation.

LEMON: How is it -- how is it -- how is the president bringing race into it he's saying he could be my son? The president is a man of color, Trayvon Martin is a man of color, how is it --

GOLD: He's the president of the United States, and he hasn't given a speech or said anything about any local criminal case other than this one that I can remember and one which also invites --

LEMON: He talked about the shootings in Chicago. He talked about the young lady who was shot in Chicago and killed. This was after Trayvon Martin. His wife talked about the young lady as well in Chicago who --

GOLD: It elevates -- it elevates the status of it, you know, it reminds one of presidents that spoke about civil rights cases.

LEMON: Yes.

Listen, and just -- I have to play devil's advocate here because when the president talked about that, he said -- when he talked about it, he said he would be a son he would look like me, and he mostly talked about the family. Any parent hates losing a child.

He didn't mention black -- a black child. He didn't mention racial profiling. He talked about on the human level as a family.

I think that's a talking point really for people who want to find some fault with the president. I don't think that there was -- that elevated this to some sort of racial discussion in the country.

GOLD: Well, look, I'm not making a political --

LEMON: For people -- for people who are looking for that.

GOLD: I'm not making a political comment whatsoever. It's an observation. I am a criminal defense attorney, a former prosecutor and I don't hear the president of the United States commenting on local criminal cases very much. So it's interesting to note he's not commenting on it now.

LEMON: Right, yes, yes. And I heard Jay Carney the other day saying the president said what he said, absolutely.

GOLD: Look, it was in his heart as well. I think it was from the president's heart as well, I don't, you know, it's just a matter when the president speaks, everyone listens.

LEMON: I agree with you, but I think the president was speaking as a parent.

GOLD: Well, he's the president, too.

LEMON: The president of the United States.

Again, you said race as far as you're concerned is --

GOLD: Look, I don't think race --

LEMON: -- an overriding --

GOLD: The media has made it a black/white issue, and a lot of people will tell you now that Mr. Zimmerman is Hispanic or part Hispanic, and that if it was played in the beginning as Hispanic shoots a black man, it might have been a very different case. It's taken on its own story line.

LEMON: I appreciate your perspective. Thank you, Mr. Gold.

GOLD: Pleasure.

LEMON: John King, back to you.

KING: Great conversation, Don, appreciate it. And just to button up on that at the end of the press secretary Jay Carney said the president has no plan -- no plan -- to issue a statement if there is a verdict.

Coming up a CNN report that's getting a lot of buzz. A look at the African-American women on the George Zimmerman defense team and their thoughts on this case. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: There are those who say she's sitting with the wrong lawyers. The African-American law student on the George Zimmerman defense team has drawn attention in a case riddled at times with racial overtones.

Our David Mattingly sat down with Channa Lloyd and asked her if her client is a racist.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In a case so inflamed by racially charged opinion, it was almost impossible not to notice the young African-American woman on George Zimmerman's otherwise all-white defense team. Channa Lloyd tells me she just had one question for Mark O'Mara.

CHANNA LLOYD, ZIMMERMAN DEFENSE INTERN: Last time I said, is George a racist. He said, no, I wouldn't work for him if he was.

MATTINGLY (on camera): Why was that so important to you?

LLOYD: Being an African-American, even if he was a client in need of representation, I don't know that I would have been able to divorce that and you have to have proper representation and people that can do that.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): If you find Lloyd's involvement surprising you might be even more surprised to find out she's a volunteer working for free. Channa Lloyd is a third-year law student in Orlando, a 34- year-old intern working a case of a lifetime.

(on camera): Have you had to explain what you're doing to any of your friends?

LLOYD: Sure. Some of my friends debate with me all the time about it.

MATTINGLY: What do they say?

LLOYD: Some of them think, doesn't matter, he's guilty. Some of them say, well, I'm willing to hear the evidence. They span the range.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Observations span the range online as well. Most are just curious, who is she? Why is she there?

LLOYD: Kind of what our position is, what our role is, am I only there because I'm black, those kind of things. I've seen more curious questions than anything.

MATTINGLY: But some comments are clearly judgmental and personal.

(on camera): There was one that caught my eye this tweet. "Black woman seated with Zimmerman defense team is on wrong side of the courtroom and wrong side of history." What would you say to that person?

LLOYD: I would say that they're not really aware of what history is if they think that this is a completely racial issue, I would tell her to go back, or him or her, to go back and revisit the case. I think it's misplaced.

MATTINGLY: Is this case about race?

LLOYD: I don't think the case is about race. I think that was the way it was presented initially and I think that might have been erroneous.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): In the courtroom for the most part, she sits silently with other interns. For the last year, though, Lloyd's provided support and research, spending long hours and getting to know George Zimmerman.

(on camera): Is he a racist?

LLOYD: No.

MATTINGLY: How do you know? How did you come to that opinion?

LLOYD: You can just kind of tell. I've been African-American, you encounter people who are racist and I just know that he's not.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): And at the end of this trial, Lloyd sees only a beginning of a career in criminal defense.

David Mattingly, CNN, Sanford, Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: Up next, if you watched the closing arguments, you may have noticed Trayvon Martin's walked in late and his mother walked in early. Would that have any impact on the jury? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Relatives of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman sat quietly in the courtroom for most of the 14-day trial. On Friday Trayvon Martin's parents arrived as defense attorney Mark O'Mara was delivering his closing argument.

Later that day, Martin's mom Sybrina Fulton caught O'Mara's attention when she left the courtroom, she got up when they were talking about photos taken during her son's autopsy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O'MARA: The other thing about autopsy photographs is that there's muscle tone, because there's no nerves, there's no movement. He lost half his blood. We know that.

So, on that picture that we have of him on the medical examiner's table, yes, he does look emaciated. But here's him three months before that night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Let's bring back CNN legal analyst Sunny Hostin and defense secretary Danny Cevallos.

Let's start with that moment, Sunny. Sybrina Fulton leaving the courtroom, Mark O'Mara looks over, seemed to catch her going out. He noticed it.

Does the jury notice it? And does it send any kind of a message? Do you think it has any impact?

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, I was looking at the jury when Sybrina Fulton did get up and walked out. I didn't see any of the jurors, John, looked in her direction. They were pretty riveted on Mark O'Mara.

But I do think that the jury is aware of where Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin have been sitting. They're also aware of where George Zimmerman's family has been sitting and they have looked around the courtroom. I mean, I've made eye contact with several of them as well.

And so, I didn't see them notice it, but if they did, I do think that that could have some sort of impact, because again, out of the six women, five are mothers. And, Sybrina Fulton did testify and I can't imagine that this jury doesn't understand how difficult it must be for a mother of -- to listen to a description of her son on a morgue table. They must identify with that.

KING: No question, Danny, you can understand as a human being. You can understand the reaction. I just can't sit here, I can't listen to this.

In terms of how the process it, though, do you agree with, Sunny? Do people come in to this and say, OK, the families are here, they just need to understand they obviously have biases? Or when a moment like that happens, even if you've tried to train yourself, does that change it?

DANNY CEVALLOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, one thing, juries watch everything. It's why you have to train your client, the defendant in the art of sitting still and not overreacting. Even though his entire job is to sit there and do nothing. There's an art to that. Can't shake their head, I mean, the jury is truly watching everything. So, there's no question that they notice that.

As you said, you have to have a lot of sympathy for this mother who lost the son. However, I can imagine that Mark O'Mara is still frustrated, or maybe he doesn't mind it, he's so seasoned. But that does send a message to the jury, and you have to wonder. Look, as attorneys, we rarely interrupt during closings and openings, because it's just understood that throws off their message of the attorney and it's not the right thing to do. So, while there's an overwhelming sympathy for the mother, on some level, that is an interruption of the closing. And I think that something that had occurred before. So, while there is a lot of sympathy, I understand, it probably was too painful for her to bear, whether unintended or intended, it probably did have some effect with the jury.

But, then, again, Sunny was in the courtroom, she saw their own eyes.

KING: Well, Sunny, you're in the courtroom, we talked about the family members here. What about the attorneys, the lead prosecutor at one point snarled during O'Mara's closing statement there? Does that have any kind of an impact?

HOSTIN: Well, I'm sitting behind everyone. So, I wasn't able to see his face. But the jury, I agree with Danny, wow, juries watch everything. I was always surprised when I was prosecuting cases at some of the comments that the jury would make about what I had warned, one day, or what my hair looked like. I mean, they were really, they watched just about everything.

And I don't think it helps if the jury believes there's true animosity between the parties. And so, I'm surprised that someone is seasoned as these attorneys are, are allowing the jury to see that kind of emotion. You can use emotion in your arguments, we saw plenty of that in closing, but you can't make faces at opposing counsel when you're seated in front of the jury, or you shouldn't.

KING: Sunny and Danny, thanks. Stay with us as we continue to watch this jury.

You've heard from Mark O'Mara, just a short time ago, right here on this show. The attorney for Trayvon Martin's family shared his thoughts on a possible verdict and you want to listen to this because he doesn't hold back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: "We're going to be OK." Those words spoken from Trayvon Martin's mother to her attorney, the family attorney Benjamin Crump. Now, Crump has been criticized at the beginning of this case and most recently by the Zimmerman lead defense attorney Mark O'Mara. In the CNN interview, Mr. O'Mara saying Crump has exploited from the very beginning the race card.

Crump just spoke a short time ago to CNN's Don Lemon and rebutted those claims.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BENJAMIN CRUMP, MARTIN FAMILY ATTORNEY: Respectfully to attorney O'Mara, they seem to just disregard the fact that you have Trayvon Martin who was unarmed walking home from the store when he was profiled and pursued and followed by his client for whatever reason.

We will never know, I don't know if George Zimmerman is a racist or not, but he profiled Trayvon Martin for something, whether the way he looked or his ethnicity, we will never know, but I know that he got out his car. He made the decision to pursue Trayvon Martin. We have objective evidence.

So if this was your child, would you just say, OK, police tell me I'm not going to arrest the killer of my unarmed son, this is very personal to many people and that's why the whole world is watching this case because you cannot have people kill unarmed teenagers walking home legally whether they're black, white, brown or gray.

LEMON: Basically what Mark O'Mara is accusing you, I've heard many people say you are a charlatan, of being a race baiter, profiting on race and on the Martin family on this case.

CRUMP: You know, Don, when we got involved in this case, my law partner and I talked about it, I do a lot of civil rights cases, and we have far too many cases where little black and brown boys are killed, dead on the street, and nobody says a word. You know, we -- Trayvon Martin got a lot of attention, Martin Lee Anderson (ph) got a lot of attention, other cases got a lot of attention, but every Trayvon Martin, we have 100 little black boys that get killed and nobody says a word.

When we took this case my law partner said, you know, Crump, we're probably going to spend a lot of time, we're going to spend a lot of time and resources and it ain't going to happen. Do you know what we said? We went to law school to try to make a difference in our community to try to have equality for everybody.

And so, we took the case thinking we were not going to profit a penny.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Mr. Crump also telling CNN that in the event George Zimmerman is acquitted, he said the Martin family will accept that verdict.

When we come back, the jury now done with 11 hours in deliberations, entering hour 12. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: This is the verdict sheet here. A jury in Sanford, Florida, has three choices they can find George Zimmerman guilty of murder in the second degree, they can find George Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter, or they can find -- jury find George Zimmerman not guilty. Those deliberations now beginning their 12th hour in Sanford, Florida.

I'm John King in Washington. Thanks for watching.

After a quick break, our continuing coverage with Don Lemon in Sanford, Florida.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)