The defense spent a lot of time on the subject of race on Day Four implying it was Trayvon Martin who injected race into the confrontation with George Zimmerman by using the term “cracker,” just before their fatal encounter. Former prosecutor Sunny Hostin and Defense Attorney Danny Cevallos debate the role of racial terms in the Zimmerman trial.
Hostin says it, “didn’t make a whole lot of sense. . . especially given the fact that the defense tried so hard to keep the prosecution from saying racial profiling.”
“They’ve taken what was the elephant in the room,” she says, “and painted it bright pink and now everyone is talking about it.” She also believes the star witness’s use of the term makes her sound more credible, because she’s using Martin’s exact words instead of sugarcoating it.
But according to Cevallos, it’s all about relatibility for the jurors: “At the end of the day, jurors look for relatibility,” he says. “And when you relate to someone, you find them credible.” He goes on to say, “The jurors are going to ask themselves whether they’re aware of it or not, is this somebody that at a cocktail party, would I use that language? Do I view the word cracker the way this person views it?”