….. If there was one source of continuous animosity toward this site over the past 12 months it would honestly be defined around Mark O’Mara. You see, once we discovered his lies and then watched his excuses, we just got to the point where we could no longer carry a false advocacy.
It would be intellectually dishonest, and antithetical to everything we stand for.
We wrote about it in June 2012, and I have exhaustively requested all the O’Mara propagandists, those who would not believe their ears or eyes, to find an alternate discussion site ever since. We just cannot maintain the integrity of the Truthful research and constantly have the same circular argument about O’Mara’s character.
Defense attorney Mark O’Mara just gave the most watched and likely most scrutinized closing argument of his career. And now he’s been talking with our Martin Savidge, Martin joining me now from Sanford.
So, Martin, you spoke to George Zimmerman’s attorney for nearly an hour.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, yes. This was a very candid conversation.
Mark O’Mara has been no stranger when it comes to the media. But I think what makes this interview very unique, it was the fact that we conducted it with the idea that it was going to come out after the jury had gone into deliberations, in other words, after the defense and the prosecution had both rested.
This allowed Mark O’Mara to be the most candid I have ever heard him. There was nothing he would not talk about. And we talked about everything, whether it be race, whether it be about politics, whether it be about improprieties he saw from the side of the prosecution and about some of the witnesses, as well as some of the personalities including Judge Nelson.
So here is Mark O’Mara and our conversation.
SAVIDGE: Why did you take this case?
MARK O’MARA, ATTORNEY FOR GEORGE ZIMMERMAN: It’s what I do. People asked me that so many times. And I can’t come up with a better or different reason than this is what I do. When this case first became open to me, I looked at it and it just seemed to fit my skill set more than I could ever have planned or imagined.
SAVIDGE: What were the circumstances when you first met George?
O’MARA: Strangely enough, when I walked into the jail cell where George was waiting, I had a couple pictures in my mind. I had a picture of Trayvon Martin being a very young boy, maybe 13 or 14 years old. I had a picture of George Zimmerman being about 250 pounds with an attitude, because that’s the picture that I saw, 2005 picture, when he was very heavy.
And that’s OK. Those are the type of people that I represent, generally speaking. I walked into that jail cell, and one of the most amazing sights to me was this small, young, respectful, quiet, scared individual, half — literally half the size, that I thought he would be, not physically, but presentation.
And it really took me back. I spent a couple hours with him. And he was very respectful, very open, very concerned about his situation. But — and from that day forward, I knew, one, I would be representing him, and, two, where this case was going to go.
SAVIDGE: Was it a concern for you that he might have been a racist?
O’MARA: 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.
SAVIDGE: Whose fault is that, that imagery dichotomy? Because I think everyone knows what you’re talking about, that, at the beginning, the images were very different. You had the first pictures of George Zimmerman. He was in what looked like jail attire. And then you had a very, very young looking Trayvon Martin. Whose fault is that?
O’MARA: It was a wonderfully created and crafted public relations campaign by the people who are assisting the Martin family. That’s Ben Crump and other people.
I don’t — I don’t discredit what he did, as long as he acknowledges that’s exactly what happened.
SAVIDGE: Do you think that George Zimmerman would have even been charged had Ben Crump not been pulled into this?
O’MARA: No, Ben Crump or someone like him, because had Ben Crump not gotten involved in the case, maybe for some good reasons to begin with — if he believed that there was something here that was being swept under the rug, then get on into it. I’m very OK with that. I…
SAVIDGE: But you didn’t quite say it that way. You made it sound like it was Ben Crump, George Zimmerman would be free at this time and we would not be in a trial.
O’MARA: That’s correct. I think that it was a made-up story for purposes that had nothing to do with George Zimmerman, and that they victimized him. They complain about Trayvon Martin being victimized. George Zimmerman was victimized by a publicity campaign to smear him, to call him a racist when he wasn’t and to call him a murderer when he wasn’t.
SAVIDGE: And so Angela Corey and the governor and all of those that had a hand in bringing about this prosecution, they were all manipulated by Ben Crump?
O’MARA: Oh, I don’t know that it was Ben Crump doing all that manipulation.
But I’m very surprised that the prosecution team decided not to take this case to a grand jury, when one was sitting, impaneled and ready to take on the case for the state of Florida vs. George Zimmerman and determine whether or not there was enough evidence and enough information to charge him with any crime.
Rather than do that, which was the default position that could have happened, they decided to have a press conference, pray with the victim’s family, and then announce second-degree murder charges.
SAVIDGE: How much of this was politics?
O’MARA: It’s guesswork on my behalf.
But if I enter into this formula an element or ingredient of politics, a lot more makes sense, a lot more about the way the case was handled early on, the way it was turned into a racial event, when seemingly — and now positively — it wasn’t, when a special prosecutor was brought in, when there doesn’t seem to be any reason why — you know, Wolfinger, the sitting prosecutor, had the perfect opportunity to handle this case.
Matter of fact, I have deposed three of his assistants who were busting their butts on this case. So they were ready to go forward. And we had a grand jury set. So, when a special prosecutor comes in, then waives the grand jury, and then files charges that most good legal analysts, including Alan Dershowitz, say, that’s an abomination, you have to wonder if there’s not some outside influencing pressuring decisions.
SAVIDGE: Much has been made about race in this case. Where do you see race in this case?
O’MARA: I see race being injected into this case in the first week that it existed. And I see that it has never left this case, even though time and time and time again, race has been proven not to have been an element in George’s consideration that night.
[I’ve got to jump in here with a comment and draw your attention. Do you see how conflicted about the TRUTH Mark O’Mara is? He sees race as “injected”, but somehow he disconnects from the question only a few moments earlier about he, himself, presuming Zimmerman was racist on day one. Can you see the internal conflict at the center of his advocacy. THAT CONFLICT is the nucleus of his lack of advocacy from the outset…. /SD]
SAVIDGE: This case to many is a cause. It’s not just a case.
These would be people who are very much in support of Trayvon Martin who believe that there was great wrong here and, in essence, that this is a civil rights case. And I mean that in the full sense of advancing civil rights.
You are perceived as the man standing in the way of this civil rights case.
SAVIDGE: How do you handle that?
I have represented young black males for 30 years. I know better than most people, better than most of the people who are complaining how young black males are treated in the criminal justice system. And we need to fix it. We need to address those problems. It’s not just in the system. It’s in the schools, it’s in the churches, it’s in the families, it’s in the homes. We need to address it.
Get your crosshairs off George Zimmerman, and I will join you. Keep your crosshairs on George Zimmerman, and don’t tell me that I’m getting in the way, because you are, because you’re the one who’s sitting back telling me that this is a civil rights case, when George had nothing to do with civil rights. This was an unfortunate event between two people.
SAVIDGE: You took I think what some might consider risks during the trial, one of them being that you cross-examined a grieving mother.
SAVIDGE: Any regrets on that?
I hope that people think — or I think that I handled it properly and respectfully. I have handled, I think, 40 or so murder cases. And in every one of those murder cases, you’re going to have some interaction with the victim’s family.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O’MARA: You certainly would hope that your son Trayvon Martin did nothing that could have led to his own death, correct?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SAVIDGE: And you did Tracy Martin as well.
SAVIDGE: And that one didn’t seem to go quite so well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O’MARA: So your words were, “I can’t tell.”
TRACY MARTIN, FATHER OF TRAYVON MARTIN: Something to that effect. But I never said, no, that that wasn’t my son’s voice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O’MARA: Well, I think that the state should have put Tracy Martin on. That’s their witness. I think it was strange that they decided not to call the father of the victim.
But they did so because of the very reason that I had to call him, which was that Tracy Martin told two cops who testified, four who were present, that when he listened to that tape, it was not his son.
SAVIDGE: But that’s not what he said on the stand.
O’MARA: That is not. But it is what two cops said and two other cops who were available to say that he said, no, that’s not my son’s voice.
Now, it’s got to be extraordinarily difficult to be in Tracy Martin’s shoes and Sybrina Fulton’s shoes. They have to be able to go through life believing in their heart and in their soul that that is Trayvon Martin’s voice.
SAVIDGE: Rachel Jeantel, what did you think of her as a witness?
O’MARA: Here’s how I think about Rachel Jeantel myself. I think that she was a reluctant witness who didn’t want to be there. I think her mom and Ms. Fulton got together and said something like, you need to go tell this woman what happened to her son and do it now. And I think that’s what happened.
SAVIDGE: And how much was actual fact do you think from her testimony?
O’MARA: I think what happened was, once she was put in the position of having to talk, we know that what she did was — was smooth over a lot of the rough spots of what Trayvon was talking to her about.
We know that she didn’t talk about the racist terms that may have been used or the colorful language that he may have used. And I think what she did was just give a sanitized version to mom, because, after all, I think she was being sensitive to Ms. Fulton having just lost her son.
I think Ms. Jeantel came across as being not wanting to be there. I think she had a bit of an attitude because she was there. I don’t think she took very kindly to the way Mr. West was examining her.
SAVIDGE: Oh, I think you’re quite right, yes.
O’MARA: And I think that showed. And I give her, her due in that she didn’t want to be involved in our system.
SAVIDGE: Do you think that George Zimmerman, your client, if he’s acquitted, what kind of life will he have?
O’MARA: Not a good one.
I think he has to live mostly in hiding. He’s got to be able to protect himself from that periphery that still believe that he’s some racist murderer or acted in a bad way, and that you don’t know who they are. You don’t know if they’re down the street or you don’t know if they’re across the country. I think that he’s probably concerned about living still in Central Florida, and never having a normal life.
SAVIDGE: Is this the case you want to be remembered for?
O’MARA: Well, I would like to wait until an acquittal happens before I’m remembered for it, but, yes, I’m OK with that, for this reason. I think that I have handled myself well.
I think that I have looked at a case that’s very difficult in a number of different facets, media, racial issues, the fact that it’s a murder, vocal family, other attorneys involved, and I think that I have handled it in a way that has maintained my respect for myself, which I guess is very important to me, but much more important than that, is that I have respected or maintained a respect for the system.
And I have been able to sort of juggle all of those sensitivities without compromising my client’s right to a fair trial or my zealous representation of him. So, I’m feeling pretty good about what I have done so far, to be honest, and not to sound egoist.
SAVIDGE: And as that jury deliberates, are you nervous? Are you anxious? Do you have some ritual that calms you? What will be happening?
O’MARA: I can’t eat. I can’t work. I just have to wait.
It is the worst thing. I guess it’s sort of like waiting for a child to be born or something. You’re just waiting, and you just don’t know. You’re anticipating it, fearing it at the same time, of course. But, no, you don’t do anything but wait. I don’t think there’s anything else you can do.
SAVIDGE: And that waiting is under way. It began at 2:30 for Mark O’Mara, and certainly for George Zimmerman. By the way, Mark O’Mara, no surprise here, says, yes, he will be writing a book — Brianna.
I can’t find the transcript to the entire 9 part series – But I strongly urge you to watch it in its totality. CLICK HERE