The NYPD sent news organizations a statement of correction and apology. They don’t seem to have put it on their website. The most complete version we could find appeared in the New York CaribNews.

In reference to a fatal shooting at the 2024 West Indian American Day Parade in Brooklyn, it says:

The N.Y.P.D. identified a person of interest who was on the scene before, during and after the incident, which is supported by video evidence and witness accounts.

Social media posts in September mistakenly stated that he was wanted for the fatal shooting.

The N.Y.P.D. should have immediately corrected this misstatement.

We apologize for the error and will continue to seek justice for the victims of this shooting.

That statement was sent out on February 9, 2025. The shooting, which killed one person and injured four others, happened on September 2, 2024, so this apology comes 5 months afterward.

Oh, is that because they were still investigating that person of interest as the possible shooter? Well, no.

A “person of interest” might be a suspect, or they might be a witness. You, for example, or SorryWatch, if we happened to be at a marvelous parade looking around for some fritters, doubles, or jerk chicken.

Dancing. 2010 Parade.

This “person of interest” was 16-year-old Camden Lee, who did not shoot anybody. He went to the parade after football practice. One of the friends he was standing with was shot in the shoulder. But the NYPD put a “crisp” photo of Lee on social media saying he had fired a gun and was “wanted for the fatal shooting.”

When Lee saw the photo with its false accusation, he was shocked. He told the Associated Press, “I see the NYPD logo. I see me. I see ‘suspect wanted for murder. I couldn’t believe what was happening. Then everything went blurry.”

Lee and his mother got a lawyer and they met with the police. They had to wait until the following week for the meeting. The police agreed that he was not a suspect. “They conceded they got it wrong,” said attorney Kenneth Montgomery. NOT A SUSPECT. NOT. NOT WANTED FOR THE SHOOTING. INNOCENT. During the time the family were waiting to meet with the police, the WANTED image was going out to TV and other media outlets.

The NYPD took the WANTED picture down from their Instagram and X accounts, but did not go so far as to say that Lee was not a suspect.

And after the photo with the accusation was taken down, amateur sleuths kept reposting it.

Crisp.

And then, according to a CBS interview with Lee’s mother, the NYPD “mistakenly” reposted it in December.

Lee’s mother was frightened for his life. Friends of the person who was killed, or one of the ones who was injured, might come after Lee. Death threats were coming in. Death threats were coming in because of police actions. And the police said they suspected gang involvement. The family left town for several weeks, meaning Lee missed school.

Finally, after 5 months, they issued that terrible apology. Which shows why explanation is sometimes an important part of a good apology.

Marching band, 2008 Brooklyn West-Indian American Carnival.

What happened? Why did the NYPD leave the picture up for so long? Why did it take them 5 months to admit Lee wasn’t really a suspect? Why didn’t they “immediately [correct] this misstatement”?

We can imagine a lot of reasons. Maybe they hoped that Lee and a bunch of football pals would decide to clear his name and find the real killer for them. Unlikely – are we in the movies? Maybe they hoped someone would kill him to avenge the person who was shot, Denzel Chan, and then they could say “Must’ve been him after all, we were right all along.” That could be a little more likely. Maybe they had no interest in doing right by citizens who happen to be of West Indian descent. Also possible. Maybe the job of fixing the information fell between the cracks – everyone thought it was someone else’s job. Maybe it isn’t anyone’s job, because the NYPD isn’t really focused on correcting misinformation. Or maybe the person whose job it was left, and the position hasn’t been filled. Or, you know how they say not to ascribe anything to malice that can as easily be ascribed to incompetence? Maybe nobody knew how to do it and nobody cared enough to learn

Whatever it was, it should be fixed. But the fixes for these different possibilities are all different, and if we don’t know how it happened, we don’t know what fix to demand.

Happens? Happens to be wrong.