In August 2011, he called to report a black male in a tank top and shorts acting suspicious near the development’s back entrance. “[Complainant] believes [subject] is involved in recent S-21s”—break-ins—“in the neighborhood,” the call log states. The suspect, Zimmerman told the dispatcher, fit a recent description given out by law enforcement officers.
Three days later, he called to report two black teens in the same area, for the same reason. “[Juveniles] are the subjs who have been [burglarizing] in this area,” he told the dispatcher.
On April 22, 2011, Zimmerman called to report a black male about “7-9” years old, four feet tall, with a “skinny build” and short black hair. There is no indication in the police report of the reason for Zimmerman’s suspicion of the boy.
Add this to Trayvon call, when Zimmerman apparently muttered a racial slur, and you have to ask if Zimmerman had a hang-up about young black men in the gated community.
Or hey, maybe you don’t have to ask. Over at her blog, Michelle Malkin mutters that “the Al Sharpton/New Black Panthers Party-led mob is forging ahead with its polarizing racial profiling narratives despite the fact that the alleged shooter is Hispanic and multiracial.”
What that has to do with anything, I cannot say. In recorded history, there are certainly examples of non-white people bearing animus against other non-white people. The Zimmerman situation might turn out to be one of those cases. The proper conservative strategy, if that’s not too crude a term, is the one employed by Rep. Allen West – focus on the facts of the case, and how a law meant for self-defense may have be incorrectly applied to defend a first-degree murderer. The dunderhead strategy is to make this yet another point-and-sputter rant about how the real racists, surely, are liberals who think that racism exists.