Package burglaries at 403 and 604 West 115th Street

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, Public Safety naming, and Columbia University Clery framing.

  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 reporting and tip-receiving authority.
  2. present: Clery Crime Alert branding identifies the official campus timely-warning product.
  3. present: Source is present via Clery Crime Alert and Public Safety contact 212-854-2797.
  4. present: The flyer attributes the notice to Columbia University Public Safety practices.
  5. present: Public Safety is named for tips and as the office that received the report.
  6. present: Columbia University appears in the Clery disclaimer as the required alerter.
  7. present: Who issued it is clear from Clery Crime Alert and Public Safety naming.
  8. present: Source satisfied by Department-style Public Safety references throughout.
  9. present: The alert credits Public Safety and Columbia University Clery compliance.
  10. present: Named campus public safety office counts as the issuing authority.
  11. present: Clery Crime Alert is an explicit official-product label at the top.
  12. present: Institutional source includes Clery Crime Alert title and Public Safety.
  13. present: Sender identity is Clery Crime Alert channel plus Public Safety content.
  14. present: Clear source: Clery Crime Alert opening and Public Safety tip line.
  15. present: Branded Clery Crime Alert header identifies the campus warning product.
  16. present: Public Safety is a named campus agency under the source rubric.
  17. present: The message identifies Public Safety as the informed campus authority.
  18. present: Source cue is Clery Crime Alert with Public Safety in the report language.
  19. present: Issuing body language includes Public Safety and Columbia Clery director contact.
  20. present: University and public safety naming together establish the originator.
  21. present: Columbia University Public Safety is explicit when the incident was reported.
  22. present: Clery Crime Alert and Public Safety together identify the campus channel.
  23. present: Source present because the text is a Clery Crime Alert with Public Safety paths.
  24. present: The text frames an official Columbia Clery timely warning from Public Safety.
  25. present: Both Clery Crime Alert branding and Public Safety naming establish source.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: burglary with package looting after intercom entry is a specific named hazard, not a vague incident.

  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, specifically package burglary via intercom entry.
  2. present: Burglary in the header names the crime threat type.
  3. present: The threat is package looting after random intercom pressing to gain entry.
  4. present: Named hazard: burglary at residential buildings on West 115th Street.
  5. present: Hazard present because burglary is explicit, not a bare emergency label.
  6. present: What happened is removal of items from packages into bags and a backpack.
  7. present: Burglary with package contents taken is the specific crime hazard.
  8. present: The alert reports burglary rather than a generic incident or situation.
  9. present: Specific crime language: burglary after intercom entry and package rifling.
  10. present: A similar crime at a second address the same day reinforces the burglary hazard.
  11. present: Hazard wording is burglary at 403 W 115th Street and 604 W 115th Street.
  12. present: The incident type is burglary with packages as the target of theft.
  13. present: Named crime burglary specifies the hazard clearly for recipients.
  14. present: Crime hazard is clear: residential building entry then package theft.
  15. present: Hazard is not generic; burglary is the stated Clery crime.
  16. present: Burglary is the named hazard on the flyer title line.
  17. present: The body states packages were opened and items placed into bags and a backpack.
  18. present: Hazard present: burglary pattern across two West 115th buildings.
  19. present: Readers learn the danger type is burglary of packages in lobbies.
  20. present: Specific hazard name burglary appears in the title and narrative.
  21. present: Intercom entry plus package looting are framed as burglary.
  22. present: The crime hazard is burglary involving packages at Morningside addresses.
  23. present: Named threat burglary satisfies the hazard element with concrete tactics.
  24. present: What the community is warned about is package burglary via intercom.
  25. present: Burglary is a concrete hazard label under Clery, not a vague emergency.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous agreement that 403 and 604 W 115th Street at Morningside Campus, with Broadway and West 116th subway last seen, 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 403 W 115th Street at the Morningside Campus.
  2. present: 403 W 115th Street places the primary burglary at a specific address.
  3. present: Where: 604 W 115th Street for the similar earlier crime the same day.
  4. present: Two West 115th Street addresses localize both package burglaries.
  5. present: Address-level locations plus Morningside Campus framing are present.
  6. present: Location present via 403 and 604 W 115th Street at Morningside Campus.
  7. present: Last seen entering the downtown side of the MTA subway at Broadway and West 116th.
  8. present: Named West 115th Street numbers locate each burglary event.
  9. present: Geographic detail covers two residential addresses and a subway station exit path.
  10. present: Morningside Campus plus West 115th Street addresses localize the warning.
  11. present: 403 W 115th Street is the first stated crime scene address.
  12. present: Place is multi-building on West 115th with Broadway and West 116th last seen.
  13. present: Readers are told the exact street addresses of both package burglaries.
  14. present: Location element met by two named residential street addresses.
  15. present: West 115th Street buildings and the 116th Street subway fully answer where.
  16. present: The warning scope is named West 115th Street buildings on Morningside Campus.
  17. present: Street addresses for both incidents give multi-point location.
  18. present: Where the thefts occurred is stated as 403 and 604 W 115th Street.
  19. present: Concrete location: two Columbia-area residential addresses on West 115th.
  20. present: Address-level places satisfy the location element without ambiguity.
  21. present: 403 W 115th Street and 604 W 115th Street are specific building sites.
  22. present: Location includes two numbered West 115th addresses and a subway last-seen point.
  23. present: The text situates the crimes at named West 115th apartment buildings.
  24. present: Named addresses on West 115th locate every listed burglary.
  25. present: West 115th Street addresses plus Morningside Campus are unambiguous place references.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All reads find guidance in Safety Tips: refuse unknown buzz-ins, timely package retrieval, anti-piggyback, and report broken doors or locks.

  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: Safety Tips instruct not to buzz people into a building unless you know them.
  2. present: Guidance includes retrieve your package in a timely manner.
  3. present: Do not allow people to piggyback into a building with you is protective action.
  4. present: Protective tips: refuse unknown buzz-ins, timely package pickup, anti-piggyback, report broken locks.
  5. present: Guidance present via Safety Tips with concrete resident-facing steps.
  6. present: Recipients are told to report broken doors, locks, or entrances to the building super.
  7. present: Call Public Safety as soon as you are able if piggybacking feels unsafe to stop.
  8. present: The alert directs people not to buzz unknown persons into buildings.
  9. present: Safety guidance lists anti-piggyback behavior, package retrieval, and lock repair reports.
  10. present: Safety Tips function as recipient-facing protective actions.
  11. present: Guidance is present: no unknown buzz-in, no piggyback, timely packages, report broken doors.
  12. present: Protective instructions appear after the narrative under Safety Tips.
  13. present: Readers are told what to do: refuse piggyback entry and secure building access.
  14. present: Guidance element met by anti-piggyback, buzz-in refusal, and package-retrieval instructions.
  15. present: Contacting Public Safety after unsafe piggybacking is protective guidance.
  16. present: The body tells people to know who they buzz in and why they are entering.
  17. present: Retrieve packages promptly is an actionable delivery-risk instruction.
  18. present: Actionable tips include reporting broken entrances to the building super promptly.
  19. present: Guidance is not only tip solicitation; Safety Tips instruct self-protection.
  20. present: Do not buzz strangers in is a clear personal protective action.
  21. present: The tips section instructs recipients how to reduce package-burglary risk.
  22. present: Protective action language covers piggyback refusal, locking issues, and timely retrieval.
  23. present: Safety Tips give multiple do-this instructions to the community.
  24. present: Recipients are guided to call Public Safety when stopping a piggyback feels unsafe.
  25. present: Guidance present through explicit anti-piggyback, buzz-in, and retrieval steps.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: April 28, 2025 at about 4:26 p.m. and 6:47 p.m., with 8:00 p.m. report time, supply calendar and clock timing.

  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 Monday, April 28, 2025, at approximately 6:47 p.m. for the first burglary.
  2. present: Date and clock time appear: April 28, 2025, about 4:26 p.m. at 604 W 115th.
  3. present: Temporal cues include 6:47 p.m. occurrence and 8:00 p.m. report time.
  4. present: The alert states approximately 6:47 p.m. on Monday, April 28, 2025.
  5. present: Time present via full date plus afternoon and evening clock times.
  6. present: When: April 28, 2025, around 4:26 p.m. and 6:47 p.m. at two buildings.
  7. present: Clock times 4:26 p.m., 6:47 p.m., and 8:00 p.m. mark the incident window.
  8. present: A calendar date and approximate hours are both given.
  9. present: April 28, 2025 anchors when the two package burglaries occurred.
  10. present: Time element met by date and multiple p.m. timestamps.
  11. present: The narrative includes approximately 6:47 p.m. as the primary event time.
  12. present: Report time of 8:00 p.m. is an additional temporal marker.
  13. present: Date April 28, 2025 plus 4:26 p.m. and 6:47 p.m. satisfy time.
  14. present: Readers learn both crimes occurred the same Monday at stated approximate hours.
  15. present: Explicit clock times and a calendar date convey when.
  16. present: Occurrence timing is approximately 6:47 p.m. on April 28, 2025 at 403 W 115th.
  17. present: The similar crime at 604 W 115th is timed to 4:26 p.m. the same day.
  18. present: Time is not missing: date and p.m. times are written out.
  19. present: April 28, 2025 and 6:47 p.m. are clear temporal references.
  20. present: Two event times plus a report time bookend the same-day pattern.
  21. present: The alert timestamps the incidents at about 4:26 p.m. and 6:47 p.m. that day.
  22. present: Date and approximate times of occurrence are both present.
  23. present: Temporal language includes April 28, 2025 and approximately timed p.m. hours.
  24. present: When is answered by date plus 4:26 p.m., 6:47 p.m., and 8:00 p.m. report.
  25. present: Full date with afternoon and evening times satisfies the time element.
• Impactabsent5/25

  Final assessment

  Majority absent (20 of 25): package-item theft without injury or severity wording 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 is named without separate severity or harm-to-people wording.
  2. absent: No line states injuries, danger level, or life-threatening consequences.
  3. absent: Impact is absent beyond naming burglary and taking items from packages.
  4. present: Clery disclaimer says serious or continuous threat to the community, which is severity language.
  5. absent: Package looting is described factually without consequence phrasing such as dangerous.
  6. absent: The text does not say the offender is armed or that residents were assaulted.
  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: Intercom entry and bagging package contents are events, not severity statements.
  10. absent: No injuries, no dollar loss amount, and no life-safety severity phrase appear.
  11. absent: Suspect description is identification detail, not impact severity language.
  12. absent: Naming burglary does not by itself satisfy impact under the rubric.
  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 stating how severe the outcomes were.
  16. absent: Items removed from packages describes property loss as a fact of the hazard.
  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 property damage severity appear.
  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 the crime type name.
  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-item theft names alone do not equal impact under the rubric.
  25. absent: No explicit statement of potential injury, danger, or damage severity.