0 discharging his firearm? >> yes. >> did you hear him refer to the person he ended up shooting, trayvon martin, as an asshole? >> i do know that, yes. >> so the term -- >> i think that people like to give too much weight. if you look at it in the con e text in which it was stated, his reference in that statement was addressing his -- clearly addressing his frustration from previous calls in which the individuals got away. his verbiage chosen may not be the most appropriate but i don't necessarily mean just because somebody has said that means they mean ill will. >> but the target of his frustration, you understand, was trayvon martin. >> owe would have to say the comment, in my opinion, the comment, that frustration was being voiced at the fact he's made numerous calls. the fact that he -- i mean the other alternative is to go, wow, these fellows always get away. i don't know what his general speech pattern is like in regards to how he refers to everybody else. in and of itself, i don't see that variable as showing ill will. >> let me ask you, you had a conversation with the defendant, did you not? >> i did. >> i don't recall if he was asked specifically about that. >> in his conversation -- >> he did not call me that. >> did i understand you to say that the most important factor about the safety of the -- of any firearm is the responsibility of the user? >> sure. >> so an irresponsible person can be really, really dangerous? >> absolutely. any person that is reckless with their firearm can be dangerous, sure. >> i want to talk for a moment about your connection with this case. you told the jury that you actually reached out to the defense? >> correct. >> tell the jury when you started your consulting company, what you're doing now. >> i started doing consulting work at the -- i want to say it was 2011. 2012 through tactical advantage solutions. in 2013 i started dennis root and associates which is a private investigations, an expert witness firm. >> dennis root and associates you started earlier this year? >> yes. >> you understood when you contacted the defense in this case that this case was getting national, if not worldwide attention? >> of course. >> and you understood that there would be live coverage of this trial if you testified, is that right. >> yes, sir. >> you're on live television, assuming those cameras are working. >> yes. >> and the name of your company is on live television, right? >> i believe so, yes, sir. >> so that's good for your company. you would agree with that, right? >> i see where you're going. it's good for my company but there wasn't really other options as far as approaching the state in the same way. >> didn't you think that you being a witness might do your company some good, you might get your name out there. >> there is no question anybody that's seen anything about this case would be aware of the fact that it's getting media coverage. anybody did that their home work about me knows the fact i'm dedicated to finding the truth and supporting the truth. when i approached mr. o'mara about it, it's because i knew that the state would be able to gain access to somebody just like me with no issue. if i had approached the state about this, and let's say i determined whatever that it wasn't going to be supported for the state or it would be, let's say for instance, i found that i wouldn't be supportive, i now could not be in any way of assistance to the defense. however, if i reached out to the defense and i provided them with the opportunity and i found that, whoa, wait, i can't be of assistance to you, i have not hindered the case in any way and i could walk away without any problems affecting either way. the fact that i gained some kind of media coverage from it isn't my fault because those of us that are dedicated to the truth, those cameras are here. that's not why i'm here. >> and isn't it true you've advertised the very fact that you are a witness in this case? >> yes, sir. >> i mean you've tweeted that out, right? >> tweeted. i haven't tweeted it. >> how did you advertise it? >> when i was put on the case every attorney that i know knew about it. obviously in the fields that i go in, the attorneys just like every other profession talk. and then just this morning, i let -- i texted my friends to let them know i would be testifying here today. >> in fact, you haven't been paid yet, have you? >> no, sir. >> your agreement is you may get paid, you may not, is that right. >> that's correct. >> that's not your normal practice, right. >> actually, sir, depending on the case that comes through, you would know i've done some things for free. i've done some things for some people for $20 an hour and i've gotten paid up to $175 an hour. i really base it on the case that's presented to me. >> didn't you provide me with an invoice sheet or the way you bill clients? >> for the expert witness, sir? >> right. >> yes, sir. >> that's what you're doing here today. >> yes. >> it's $1,500 initially and then $125 an hour after that? >> yes. the way it breaks down basically is if i'm hired in as an expert, my general fee schedule is there's a $1,500 deposit. and my hourly rate is $125 an hour. that is for a case prep and review. then on the dates that i testify either by deposition or i testify in court, my hourly rate is $175 an hour and that includes travel time and wait time. >> and actually you've never testified before a jury before, have you? >> excluding -- >> in a court like this. >> you mean grand juries? >> correct. >> yes. this is the first time i've actually testified before a jury in a criminal case. in expert capacity. i've testified, obviously, as an officer in a criminal case numerous times. >> you've testified against police officers, right? >> testified against police officers? >> yes, sir. >> i have been presented with cases that i found that the officer was wrong, yes, sir. >> you've testified to that? >> that went through deposition, not trial. >> correct. i mean under oath. >> oh, yes, sir. >> all right. but you've never testified in a case like this where one person -- i mean in court -- where one person shoots another and the shooter is claiming self-defense? >> no, this was the first time i was ever presented with something like this. >> and you yourself have never been involved in a police shooting, have you? >> i'm fortunate enough, no, i've never had to shoot anyone. >> in fact you've never had to discharge your firearm in the course of your career, have you, other than at a range. >> other than training sessions, scenario-based training, i've never had to discharge my firearm in the line of duty. >> you've never had to use any other type of deadly force in your career, have you. >> explain deadly force. i've caused injury, things like that. >> you've never caused someone else's death during the course of your career? >> no, sir. >> all right. >> the classic cross of an expert witness. you are paid to do this. you came looking for the fame here. this happens all the time. does the jury believe it? or does the jury believe what he said? all of this we're going to continue with this expert witness, dennis root, a use of force expert. fascinating stuff. back right after this. my mantra? 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. welcome back. that's because we're under cross-examination right now. there is this masterful cross-examiner. the prosecutor going after the defenses expert witness. a use of force expert. he's had a lot to say about the discharge of weapon, about the physicality of the two people involved in that fight that night trayvon died. and now he's been taken to task. have a listen. >> the evaluation of the case, just like the gentlemen said, i can't base it off somebody that may make self-serving statements. the concept of time that everybody constantly gets hung up on is the fact whether it's 15 seconds, 30 sections, a minute, whatever the case might be, everybody's concept of time is different. i don't make a huge deal out of what his perception of time would be for this given period. the only person that you interviewed that had first-time information from this event from the start to the finish was the defendant, right? >> yes, sir. >> he was the only one that i actually spoke to in person outside of mr. pollock. unfortunately our schedules were such that i had to do it over the phone. i called him and spoke to him over the phone. >> you listened to a bunch of other statements. you read their written statements, right. >> yes, sir. >> nobody other than the defendant had a firsthand account from start to finish, did they? >> no. there was only one person there that is unfortunately here with us that can do that. >> are you aware that it was actually two minutes? between the time he hung up with the dispatcher and the time that trayvon martin's phone went down? were you aware of that fact. >> object, your honor. that would be a mischaracterization of the evidence. >> okay. rephrase your question. >> did you know what time trayvon martin's phone went dead? >> can you explain to me what you mean by went dead. >> cut off. did you see the phone records. >> when the call ended? >> that's right. did you see that. >> the phone records from trayvon martin's phone. that one i can't -- i think i saw them but i don't know that i saw that particular variable. i don't want to say i saw something i didn't see. >> you thought you were provided everything. >> yes, sir. >> do you know if you were provided trayvon martin's cell phone records? >> there were cell phone records there. again, the cell phone itself to me when i was doing my evaluation, the actual cell phone, i didn't see the wait that it had when using the actual use of force event. the time line that's waiting to me, i can't speak directly to. >> did you have the testimony of a woman named rachel gentile? >> rachel gentile? >> a young girl from miami was on the phone with trayvon martin. >> your honor, just not to interrupt, i don't know if he'd know her by that name. >> to the extent that that's an objection, overruled. >> okay. i'll rephrase it. >> yes, sir. >> did you hear the testimony of the woman who claimed to have been on the phone with trayvon martin. >> yes, sir. >> did you hear her say in her testimony that the phone went dead shortly after -- right after she heard a bump when she was talking to trayvon martin. >> yes, sir. >> okay. and create your time line. you said time lines are important. >> yes, sir. >> did you put together it was two minutes from the time the defendant hung up with the dispatcher and the time that trayvon martin's phone went dead? >> using those time lines and evaluating on time lines, there's a lot of questions that that time line creates and bean able to compare when the dispatcher's phone went. i can't comment on how they were geosynced or gps'd or anything like that. there's a lot of things that miss gentile said were taking place during that time that don't seem to line up either. i want to be cautious how i restrict myself to your time line or that two minutes where if there's other variables if they were played out as they were elisted from her -- >> i'm asking you did you take note of the fact that there was a two-minute gap between the end of each of those calls? >> i did not give that weight, no, sir. >> all right. and your conversation with the defendant, he described this whole event. you didn't have a diagram where he claimed or an aerial photograph where he claimed the confrontation began. >> no, sir. >> and you didn't have them marked how it progressed from where he claimed it started to where it ended. >> i didn't require mr. zimmerman to create any kind of drawings or mark on a picture or anything. >> the defendant did not describe for you from what direction he claimed that trayvon martin approached him. >> as far as the direction, that would have been my failure not to ask. if you mean by direction, north, south, east west, that would have been my failure not to ask that. >> i'm not talking about geography. i'm talking about front, back, side. >> it was pretty clear that he approached him from the front. >> you didn't ask the defendant what hand trayvon martin used to punch him, right? >> no, sir. >> you didn't ask him how long it was between the time he got punched as he claims and the time he went to the ground. >> i didn't ask him for specific times. again, i reference back to what i already said. when i interview somebody for force event, time is so fluid, was it five seconds, ten seconds. there's a period of time that took place. it's fluid, movement, evolving. the presumption that once it begins their concept of time becomes less relevant. so i don't lock anyone, anyone, into a specific time line in that regard. >> i know. the time line is important to you, right? >> the overall time line, yes, sir. >> the defendant didn't describe for you how it was they moved from where he claimed the confrontation started to where they ended up? >> no. there was no explanation as far as how they transitioned. >> that fact doesn't speak to you about the level of the confrontation. >> understanding the dynamics of a combat event or a fight, you know, there's a lot of things that spoke to me about what he said and the other witnesses said in this case. and when you evaluate it and look at it and how did you get from here to here, how did you end up on your book, why weren't you on top, the evolution of the event itself and the imperative part is when the actual physical confrontation began or when it intensified. where they transitioned being in combat events myself, being in fights, how did you get there? >> i apologize. >> we were involved in this person-to-person conflict. how they transition from one spot to the other spot given there was no major event that took place at that point, i didn't try to narrow him down on a time for that. >> you didn't ask him, not this time, how they got there, what happened in between? >> the fight started here and ended up on the ground there. i did not inquire from him specifically how he got from this point to this point. >> right. as in whether or not they were rolling or whether or not they were fighting standing up to get over there, right? >> i would presume based on the physical evidence, i wouldn't presume they were rolling over there. whatever the struggle took place i personally didn't inquire about that, no, sir. >> okay. you were asked -- is that true? says here that cheerios has whole grain oats that can help remove some cholesterol, and that's heart healthy. ♪ [ dad ] jan?