Timely warning for package burglaries on West 112th and 113th Streets

To check this alert, Claude (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree source is present via Clery Crime Alert branding, Columbia University Public Safety, and Columbia University naming.

  Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Columbia University Public Safety is named as the informed campus safety authority.
  2. present: Clery Crime Alert branding plus Public Safety identifies the institutional sender.
  3. present: Source is present: Public Safety and Columbia University appear in the body.
  4. present: The header Clery Crime Alert functions as a campus timely-warning source tag.
  5. present: Public Safety phone contact and Columbia University Public Safety name the issuer.
  6. present: Columbia University is identified as the required Clery Act alerter in the disclaimer.
  7. present: Who is sending includes Public Safety and Clery Crime Alert framing.
  8. present: Source satisfied by Columbia University Public Safety attribution in the lead.
  9. present: The alert credits Public Safety and references Columbia University compliance.
  10. present: Named campus safety office Public Safety counts as source.
  11. present: Clery Crime Alert title marks an official university timely warning channel.
  12. present: Institutional source appears as Columbia University Public Safety.
  13. present: Sender identification is Public Safety under a Clery Crime Alert header.
  14. present: Clear source from Public Safety naming and Columbia University Clery duty.
  15. present: Branded Clery Crime Alert plus Public Safety establishes the originator.
  16. present: Public Safety is a named campus agency under the source rubric.
  17. present: The message identifies Columbia University Public Safety as the informed authority.
  18. present: Source cue is Clery Crime Alert with Public Safety in the opening narrative.
  19. present: Issuing body language includes Public Safety and Columbia University.
  20. present: University and campus public safety are both stated as related authorities.
  21. present: Columbia University Public Safety is explicit early in the narrative.
  22. present: Clery Crime Alert and Public Safety together identify the campus channel.
  23. present: Source present via dual naming of Public Safety and Columbia University.
  24. present: The text frames an official Columbia Clery timely warning from Public Safety.
  25. present: Both Clery Crime Alert branding and Public Safety establish source.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: burglary and package theft are specifically named crime hazards, not bare emergency labels.

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Hazard is burglary and package theft, both specifically named crimes.
  2. present: Burglary/Package Theft in the header names the threat types.
  3. present: The threat is residential package removal labeled burglary and package theft.
  4. present: Named hazards: burglary and package theft of several packages.
  5. present: Hazard present because burglary and package theft are explicit, not bare incident.
  6. present: What happened is burglary plus package theft by the same individual.
  7. present: Package theft and burglary are the specific crime hazards.
  8. present: The alert reports burglary and package theft rather than a generic emergency.
  9. present: Specific crime language: burglary and package theft at residential addresses.
  10. present: An individual who took several packages is described under those named crime types.
  11. present: Hazard wording includes burglary and package theft throughout.
  12. present: The incident type is burglary with package theft of building deliveries.
  13. present: Named crimes burglary and package theft specify the hazard.
  14. present: Crime hazard is clear: burglary and package theft.
  15. present: Hazard is not generic; burglary and package theft are called out.
  16. present: Burglary and package theft are the dual named hazards.
  17. present: The body states a burglary and similar package crime as the events.
  18. present: Hazard present: burglary and package theft with video review of package removal.
  19. present: Readers learn the threats are burglary and package theft.
  20. present: Specific hazard names burglary and package theft appear in the title.
  21. present: Entry and package taking are framed as burglary and package theft.
  22. present: The crime hazards are burglary and package theft, not vague situation labels.
  23. present: Named threat burglary and package theft satisfies the hazard element.
  24. present: What the community is warned about is burglary and package theft.
  25. present: Burglary and package theft are concrete hazard labels under Clery.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous agreement that 542 West 112 Street, 511 West 113 Street, and entry at 545 West 112 Street locate the events.

  Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Location is 542 West 112 Street and 511 West 113 Street.
  2. present: 542 West 112 Street places the first burglary at a specific address.
  3. present: Where: 542 West 112 Street and later 511 West 113 Street.
  4. present: Entry detail also cites 545 West 112 Street for the unsecured door.
  5. present: Address-level locations on West 112 and West 113 Streets are present.
  6. present: Location present via 542 West 112 Street and 511 West 113 Street.
  7. present: The crime sites are concrete residential street addresses.
  8. present: Two West Side street addresses name the package theft locations.
  9. present: Geographic detail includes West 112 Street and West 113 Street addresses.
  10. present: Campus-adjacent street addresses localize the Clery timely warning.
  11. present: 542 West 112 Street and 511 West 113 Street name the crime scenes.
  12. present: Place is two named buildings on West 112 and West 113 Streets.
  13. present: Readers are told the exact street addresses of the package removals.
  14. present: Location element met by dual street addresses and a third entry address.
  15. present: 545 West 112 Street adds a third place point for the unsecured-door entry.
  16. present: The warning scope is named West 112 and West 113 Street buildings.
  17. present: Street addresses on consecutive blocks give multi-point location.
  18. present: Where the packages were taken is stated as two residential addresses.
  19. present: Concrete location: West 112 Street and West 113 Street buildings.
  20. present: Named addresses satisfy the location element.
  21. present: 542 West 112 Street is a specific building address on the block.
  22. present: Location includes two theft addresses plus the 545 West 112 Street entry site.
  23. present: The text situates the crimes at named West 112 and West 113 Street addresses.
  24. present: Two residential addresses and one entry address locate the events.
  25. present: West 112 Street and West 113 Street addresses are unambiguous place references.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All reads find guidance in Harm Reduction Strategies: do not buzz strangers, lock doors behind you, retrieve packages promptly, and use secure pickup options.

  The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Harm Reduction Strategies instruct not to buzz strangers into a building.
  2. present: Guidance includes making sure the door locks behind you on every entry or exit.
  3. present: Retrieve packages in a timely manner is a protective property-security action.
  4. present: Protective tips: do not buzz unknown people, lock doors, use secure pickup options.
  5. present: Guidance present via Harm Reduction Strategies with concrete safety steps.
  6. present: Recipients are told not to buzz people in unless they know who they are.
  7. present: Make sure the door locks behind you is an explicit building-security instruction.
  8. present: The alert directs people to retrieve packages promptly and use carrier offices.
  9. present: Safety guidance lists access control, door locking, and secure package handling.
  10. present: Harm Reduction Strategies function as recipient-facing protective actions.
  11. present: Guidance is present: refuse unknown buzz-ins, lock doors, secure package pickup.
  12. present: Protective instructions appear after the narrative under Harm Reduction Strategies.
  13. present: Readers are told what to do: control entry, lock doors, and fetch packages promptly.
  14. present: Guidance element met by do-not-buzz, door-lock, and secure-delivery instructions.
  15. present: Using UPS or FedEx offices for safe pickup is protective package guidance.
  16. present: The body tells people to lock the door behind them every time.
  17. present: Access protocol: do not buzz people in unless you know who they are and why.
  18. present: Actionable tips include timely package retrieval and partnered local business delivery.
  19. present: Guidance is not only tip solicitation; harm reduction steps instruct self-protection.
  20. present: Do not buzz unknown people in is a clear personal protective action.
  21. present: The strategies section instructs recipients how to reduce package-theft risk.
  22. present: Protective action language covers access control, locking, and secure delivery.
  23. present: Harm Reduction Strategies give multiple do-this instructions to the community.
  24. present: Recipients are guided to secure building entry and package handling practices.
  25. present: Guidance present through explicit lock, refuse-buzz-in, and package-security steps.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: January 13, 2026, at 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m., plus January 14 notice at approximately 12:30 p.m., are explicit temporal cues.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Time is January 13, 2026, at 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m.
  2. present: Date and clock times appear: January 13, 2026, at 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m.
  3. present: Temporal cues include January 13 occurrence times and January 14 notice at 12:30 p.m.
  4. present: The alert states 1:54 p.m. on January 13, 2026, for the first burglary.
  5. present: Time present via full dates plus afternoon and evening clock times.
  6. present: When: January 13, 2026, around 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m. at the two addresses.
  7. present: Clock times 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m. mark the incident windows.
  8. present: A calendar date and approximate hours are both given.
  9. present: January 13, 2026, anchors when the package burglaries occurred.
  10. present: Time element met by date and two p.m. timestamps plus notice timing.
  11. present: The narrative includes 1:54 p.m. as the first event time.
  12. present: 6:08 p.m. at 511 West 113 Street is an additional temporal marker.
  13. present: Date January 13, 2026, plus 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m. satisfy time.
  14. present: Readers learn the crimes occurred on a stated date with clock times.
  15. present: Explicit clock times and calendar dates convey when.
  16. present: Occurrence timing is 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m. on January 13, 2026.
  17. present: Notice was received Wednesday, January 14, 2026, at approximately 12:30 p.m.
  18. present: Time is not missing: dates and p.m. times are written out.
  19. present: January 13, 2026, and 1:54 p.m. are clear temporal references.
  20. present: Two minute-level times bookend the same-day package crimes.
  21. present: The alert timestamps the first burglary at 1:54 p.m. that afternoon.
  22. present: Date and approximate times of occurrence are both present.
  23. present: Temporal language includes January 13, 2026, and approximately 12:30 p.m. notice.
  24. present: When is answered by date plus 1:54 p.m. and 6:08 p.m.
  25. present: Full dates with afternoon and evening times satisfy the time element.
• Impactabsent5/25

  Final assessment

  Majority absent (20 of 25): naming burglary and package theft without separate severity language fails impact. Minority treat Clery serious or continuous threat boilerplate as impact.

  What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: Burglary and package theft are named without separate severity or harm wording.
  2. absent: No line states injuries, danger level, or what the crimes could do to people.
  3. absent: Impact is absent beyond naming the crime types themselves.
  4. present: Clery disclaimer says serious or continuous threat to the community, which is severity language.
  5. absent: Package removal is described factually without consequence phrasing such as dangerous.
  6. absent: The text does not say the offender is armed or that residents face personal injury risk.
  7. absent: Impact element fails under a strict reading that hazard names alone do not count.
  8. present: Serious or continuous threat in the Clery notice conveys community-level impact.
  9. absent: Property entry and package taking are events, not stated consequences or severity.
  10. absent: No injuries, no property loss amount, and no life-safety severity phrase appear.
  11. absent: Harm reduction tips imply risk context but do not state impact severity.
  12. absent: Naming burglary and package theft does not by itself satisfy impact.
  13. present: The disclaimer frames the crimes as a serious or continuous community threat.
  14. absent: Impact is not conveyed with words like dangerous, life-threatening, or may cause harm.
  15. absent: The body reports what happened without saying how severe the outcomes were.
  16. absent: Took several packages and exited describes sequence, not impact severity.
  17. absent: Strict rubric: hazard labels without consequence language yield I absent.
  18. present: Serious or continuous threat language can be read as explicit community impact.
  19. absent: No secondary effects such as injuries treated or trauma severity are described.
  20. absent: The alert stops short of stating what the hazard could do beyond naming it.
  21. absent: Consequence language for people is missing outside crime type names.
  22. absent: Impact absent: no severity adjective and no harm-to-people clause in the narrative.
  23. present: Clery serious or continuous threat clause states why the community faces impact.
  24. absent: Burglary and package theft names alone do not equal impact under the rubric.
  25. absent: No explicit statement of potential injury, danger, or property damage severity.