On Friday, most news reports made it seem as though Max and his mother, who was injured and survived, ran into the path of a truck driver responding to a disabled vehicle on the Triborough Bridge. Here's how the Post first relayed information from police on the scene :
A 7-year-old boy was struck and killed by antowtruck in East Harlem as he jaywalked across an entrance ramp to the Triboro Bridge with his pregnant mother, police said.
As more details have come to light, the story has changed. On Saturday, the Post  reported that the truck driver was disembarking from the sidewalk, and that Max and Lorenza were not in the roadbed:
Max Mendez, a second-grader at PS 197, and his mother were holding hands on the sidewalk near 124th Street at around 9 a.m. when the truck slammed into them...
Cops said the yellow MTA Bridges and Tunnels truck was parked on the sidewalk and started moving to respond to a disabled vehicle on the bridge, police at the scene said.
Some witnesses told the Post that the truck driver was on his phone at the time of the collision. And the Journal  reports that he didn't check in front of him before pulling out from the sidewalk:
Witnesses said it appeared that the driver, who hasn't been identified, looked behind him to make sure he wasn't pulling out in front of traffic. In doing so, they said, he failed to see the two pedestrians in front of him.
There are discrepancies between accounts of the collision, but there seems to be a significant likelihood that the truck driver failed to exercise due care in a situation that demanded extreme caution. Still, from the earliest reports onward, including this ABC 7 piece  filed while the driver was still being interviewed, police have told reporters that they "suspect no criminality." Why?
NYPD's public information office (DCPI) hasn't returned Streetsblog's query about why the police don't think this was a criminal act. But I can say from experience that when you do get an answer out of DCPI  about a fatal crash, most of the time it won't stray much from this rote response: "The driver wasn't intoxicated, he stayed at the scene, no criminality is suspected." Nothing about recklessness or carelessness. No mention of whether the driver may have been speeding, using a mobile device, or on the sidewalk. In almost every case, sober drivers who stay at the scene get the all clear.
From the evidence so far, it seems too soon to rule out criminal negligence  in the death of Max Mendez. And maybe investigators are still trying to piece together what happened. You'd just never know it from reading the paper or watching the news. The case may still be open -- in which case, good luck prying the crash report out of NYPD  -- but it is apparently never too soon for police to write off a fatal collision in the media by telling reporters that "no criminality is suspected."
In addition to NYPD's silence on the matter, the MTA is not commenting, aside from a short statement released last Friday . No word on whether the driver has been disciplined or if the agency is changing the way it stages responses to distress calls on the Triborough. Manhattan DA Cy Vance's office is not commenting either, citing a blanket policy of not discussing cases. We can't say, for instance, whether investigators have subpoenaed the driver's phone records.
So, while we've known for some time now that the NYPD suspects no criminality, we may never know why.