NPYD: Bronx cop believed to have died after 1999 shooting is alive |

NPYD: Bronx cop believed to have died after 1999 shooting is alive


NEW YORK — A cop believed to have died some time after he was shot 20 years ago in the Bronx by a man arrested Friday actually survived the shooting, the New York Police Department said Monday.

Law enforcement authorities, including NYPD Commissioner James O’Neill in a tweet Sunday, had said Officer Vincent Ling eventually died of his wounds.

Lester Pearson, 43, was arrested Friday in Jacksonville, Fla., for allegedly shooting Pearson. A bullet lodged in his spine left him paralyzed, according to media reports at the time.

On Monday, police officials said Ling is alive and that a misreading of the attempted murder charge on Pearson’s arrest warrant led to the confusion.

“He’s very much alive,” uncle Thomas Ling told the New York Daily News. “I saw him last year.”

Vincent Ling, now 47, has not been reachable for comment. The uncle declined to comment further and other family members declined to put a reporter in touch with Ling.

Pearson had been living in Jacksonville under the name Michael Davis with his girlfriend and several children. He performed as a rapper named Monsta Kodi and has more than 100,000 Instagram followers.

He was arrested driving out of his garage and cops found a gun in the car.

In December 1999, Pearson and Ling, then with the NYPD for five years, got into an argument over Ling’s sister, who Pearson used to date. Pearson opened fire and Ling fired back in a gun battle that left the off-duty cop with a bullet lodged in his spine and Pearson’s girlfriend shot in the thigh. At least 11 shots were fired.

Pearson initially turned himself in to Bronx prosecutors in 2000 but then skipped bail. He left behind a trail of other arrests, including a drug case in Louisiana where he was accused of assaulting a state police officer.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.