you laid out the case right there. it s really an insult to the victims in this case, 13 people that were killed and 32 some odd others that were injured. they should have got compensation. now they will through this bill. it shouldn t have taken this long, it should have been tried as a terrorist crime, it was not. it was cry tried as an act of violence in a workplace? come on, that s when somebody ods from aspirin and hits somebody. this is much more than that. jon: but, doug, you say this is trickier than it first seems to be. i do, and i ll tell you why. first of all, it wasn t tried as a workplace violence case, it was tried as a murder case. but the reason it s tricky is because military criminal procedure caused a really bad result, but i agree with lis, and you ll see why in one second. under military procedure juries, there s no terrorism crime you can charge, so the point is they were stuck with a straight murder prosecution. however, lis and i discussed that under what we
sunny hostin is just joining us now. you were there throughout this trial every day. you were, as i said earlier, probably the lone voice on the panel who believed second-degree murder conviction was actually possible. what was your reaction when you heard the verdict? what do you think happened? i was absolutely stunned. i think you could see that when i was onset. i was absolutely stunned. as a lawyer, as a prosecutor, i accepted the verdict and i accept the verdict. i still believe in the system. i think justice failed trayvon martin. i really do. i think that there was enough evidence for a second-degree murder prosecution. you think the prosecution proved its case? i do. i do. i think there was enough for a second-degree murder conviction. i think there was certainly enough for a manslaughter conviction. i did not believe the claims of self-defense. i think that there was a miscarriage of justice yesterday. we ve got to take a quick break. we got a lot more to talk about
us now. you were there throughout this trial every day. you were, as i said earlier, probably the lone voice on the panel who believed second-degree murder conviction was actually possible. what was your reaction when you heard the verdict? what do you think happened? i was absolutely stunned. i think you could see that when i was onset. i was absolutely stunned. as a lawyer, as a prosecutor, i accepted the verdict and i accept the verdict. i still believe in the system. i think justice failed trayvon martin. i really do. i think that there was enough evidence for a second-degree murder prosecution. you think the prosecution proved its case? i do. i do. i think there was enough for a second-degree murder conviction. i think there was certainly enough for a manslaughter conviction. i did not believe the claims of self-defense. i think that there was a miscarriage of justice yesterday. we ve got to take a quick break. we got a lot more to talk about. we re going to be on for the
throwing this case and they really don t want to win it because so far, i haven t seen anything that makes sense to me for a murder prosecution. i think it s it struck me of more of a wash because especially on cross-examination. this medical examiner said yes, it could have been repeated strikes. yes, it could have been multiple punches from trayvon martin. yes, it could have been several hits against the sidewalk, so she didn t know what happened. so i just don t think the jury can conclude much of anything based on her testimony. but jeff, jeff, isn t a wash in a criminal case where the prosecution is trying to prove the case? i always say, the tie goes to the runner, the tie goes at the defendant. this is more like defense evidence. it s notprosecutors are doing in normal courtrooms i think you re exaggerating i think you re exaggerating it was that bad. i m telling you based on my i want to talk more about this forensic evidence.
that s what i said about this case. they turned the law in the courtroom on it s head. this is like a defense witness who looks at a photograph and says, well i wasn t there but i m opining it wasn t a very big or a large impact. it s non-sense. i defended cases where my clients are charged with murder for one hit, hitting the sidewalk and the person dies with infinitely less photographic evidence than what we have here. this is non-sense. if i didn t know better, i would think the prosecution is throwing this case and they really don t want to win it because so far, i haven t seen anything that makes sense to me for a murder prosecution. i think it s it struck me of more of a wash because especially on cross-examination. this medical examiner said yes, it could have been repeated strikes. yes, it could have been multiple punches from trayvon martin. yes, it could have been several hits against the sidewalk, so she didn t know what happened.