Skip to content
Campus Alert Archive
DMC

False active-shooter call prompts a 19-minute shelter-in-place; confirmed as a hoax

AI-generated · every claim is source-linked
TXswattingemergency notificationmedium confidence
Confirmed HoaxDetermined to be a hoax. The institutional response is documented because it reveals how the alert system performed under a perceived real threat.

Del Mar College's Heritage Campus in Corpus Christi sheltered in place for about 19 minutes on April 13, 2023, after a hoax active-shooter call, one of at least eight Texas colleges hit by swatting that morning. A report of an active shooter came in around 10:23 a.m. CDT for the campus at 101 Baldwin; DMC sent a shelter-in-place alert at 10:28 a.m. CDT and issued the all-clear at 10:47 a.m. CDT after officers found no evidence of a threat.

Alerts
2
Response
Killed
Injured
Institution
Del Mar College
Community College · TX
All DMC cases →
~24,000 studentsDMC Alert
Documented Timeline

Alert Sequence

2 messages in sequence · 1 verified verbatim

Some messages in this sequence are documented (their existence, timing, and channel are sourced) but their exact wording is not preserved in the public record. Those entries appear as placeholders; only confirmed text is displayed.

INITIAL ALERTSMS
An emergency, possible active shooter, is reported at DMC Heritage Campus. While this is being verified, shelter in place or avoid the area until advised.
Exact DMC Alert text as quoted by KIII-TV; the message hedged with 'possible' and 'while this is being verified,' reflecting that the report was unverified when sent.
The alert went out at 10:28 a.m. CDT, five minutes after the 10:23 a.m. CDT hoax call, a fast turnaround for an unverified active-shooter report.
ALL CLEARSMS+19 min
Wording not preserved
A all clear message is documented at this point in the sequence, but its exact wording is not preserved in the public record. The public edition displays only confirmed alert text.
Message elements

How the first alert is built

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.

An emergency, possible active shooter, is reported at DMC Heritage Campus. While this is being verified, shelter in place or avoid the area until advised.

  • Sourceabsent0/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous: no sender, agency, or branded signature identifies who issued this message, so the source is absent.

    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. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature identifies who issued this message.
    2. absent: No sender, brand, or agency identifies who issued this alert.
    3. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature identifies the issuer.
    4. absent: No sender tag, college, or agency identifies who issues the alert.
    5. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature appears in the text.
    6. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature identifies who issued this alert.
    7. absent: No branded signature, sender tag, or named authority identifies who is sending the message.
    8. absent: No sender name, branded tag, or issuing authority appears in the text.
    9. absent: No branded signature, agency, or institution identifies the sender.
    10. absent: No sender, branded signature, or named authority appears in the text.
    11. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature identifies who is issuing this alert.
    12. absent: No sender, branded tag, or authority is identified in the text.
    13. absent: No sender, university name, or agency is identified in the message.
    14. absent: No sender tag, agency, or institution identifies itself in the text.
    15. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature is named in this message.
    16. absent: No sender, agency, or branded signature identifies who issued this alert.
    17. absent: No branded signature, agency, or institution names itself as sender.
    18. absent: No sender, signature, or issuing authority is named in the text.
    19. absent: No sender, branded tag, or named authority is identified in the alert.
    20. absent: No sender, university, or agency is named in the text.
    21. absent: No sender, authority, or branded signature is named in the text.
    22. absent: No sender tag, agency, or institution names itself in the text.
    23. absent: No sender, signature, or authority is identified in the text.
    24. absent: No sender tag, agency, or branded signature identifies who issued this message.
    25. absent: No sender, university, or agency is named in the text.
  • Hazardpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous: it names a possible active shooter, a specific threat.

    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: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    2. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    3. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    4. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    5. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    6. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    7. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    8. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    9. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    10. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    11. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    12. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    13. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    14. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    15. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    16. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    17. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    18. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    19. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    20. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    21. present: It names "an emergency, possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    22. present: Names a "possible active shooter".
    23. present: Names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    24. present: It names "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
    25. present: It names a "possible active shooter", a specific threat.
  • Locationpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous: it locates it at the DMC Heritage Campus, a stated location.

    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: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    2. present: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    3. present: It says "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    4. present: It says "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    5. present: It locates it at "DMC Heritage Campus".
    6. present: It specifies "DMC Heritage Campus", a location.
    7. present: It locates it at "DMC Heritage Campus", a specific place.
    8. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus" and "the area".
    9. present: It locates it at "DMC Heritage Campus".
    10. present: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    11. present: It specifies "DMC Heritage Campus".
    12. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus".
    13. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus", a specific place.
    14. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus", a specific place.
    15. present: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    16. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus", a specific place.
    17. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus", a specific place.
    18. present: It locates it at "DMC Heritage Campus".
    19. present: It locates it at "DMC Heritage Campus".
    20. present: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    21. present: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus", a specific place.
    22. present: Locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    23. present: Locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
    24. present: It names "DMC Heritage Campus", a specific campus location.
    25. present: It locates it "at DMC Heritage Campus".
  • Guidancepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous: it instructs people to shelter in place or avoid the area, protective guidance.

    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: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    2. present: It instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    3. present: It instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    4. present: It instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    5. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    6. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area", protective actions.
    7. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area", protective actions.
    8. present: It instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    9. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    10. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    11. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    12. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    13. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    14. present: It instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area until advised", protective actions.
    15. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    16. present: It instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area until advised", protective actions.
    17. present: It instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area until advised".
    18. present: It instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    19. present: It instructs recipients to "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    20. present: It instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    21. present: It instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area", protective actions.
    22. present: Instructs "shelter in place or avoid the area".
    23. present: Instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area until advised".
    24. present: It instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area", protective actions.
    25. present: It instructs to "shelter in place or avoid the area until advised".
  • Timeabsent5/25

    Final assessment

    Strong consensus: no clock time, date, or recency cue appears, so timing is absent; a few read until advised as recency.

    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. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    2. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    3. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    4. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    5. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    6. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    7. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears; "active" is part of the hazard.
    8. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    9. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    10. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    11. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    12. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    13. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the text.
    14. present: It says "is reported" and "until advised", recency cues.
    15. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears; "active shooter" is hazard, not time.
    16. present: It says "is reported" and "until advised", recency cues.
    17. present: It says "until advised", a recency cue.
    18. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    19. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    20. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    21. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears in the message.
    22. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
    23. present: Says "until advised", and "is reported", conveying recency.
    24. absent: No clock time, date, or recency cue appears; "active" is part of the hazard.
    25. present: It conveys recency with "is reported" and "until advised".
  • Impactabsent10/25

    Final assessment

    Absent by a narrow 15 to 10 majority: it reports a possible, still-unverified active shooter with shelter or avoid guidance but states no explicit harm; dissenters read the active-shooter label as conveying lethal danger.

    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. present: It reports a possible active shooter described as an emergency and says shelter or avoid the area, framing it as a dangerous situation.
    2. present: This reports a possible active shooter and explicitly labels it a dangerous situation with shelter or avoid guidance, stating the danger.
    3. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter or avoid guidance but states no explicit harm.
    4. present: It reports a possible active shooter and directs shelter or avoidance for safety until advised, framing it as a danger to people.
    5. absent: Possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no harm or consequence.
    6. absent: This reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter or avoid guidance but states no explicit harm or severity.
    7. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no actual harm or confirmed danger.
    8. present: Reports a possible active shooter described as a dangerous emergency, explicitly framing the threat as dangerous.
    9. present: Calls it an emergency and possible active shooter described as dangerous situation language with shelter guidance; the labeling of a dangerous situation conveys threat severity.
    10. present: It reports a possible active shooter with shelter or avoid instructions, conveying a potential lethal danger.
    11. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no explicit harm or severity.
    12. absent: It reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no explicit harm or consequence.
    13. present: A possible active shooter report with shelter in place implies a lethal danger to people.
    14. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no explicit harm beyond naming the hazard.
    15. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter or avoid guidance but states no explicit harm yet.
    16. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified and to shelter or avoid, naming the hazard without stating consequences.
    17. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no explicit harm or severity.
    18. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified and to shelter, but states no explicit harm or confirmed danger.
    19. absent: Reports a possible active shooter and shelter guidance but states no injury or harm.
    20. absent: Reports a possible active shooter with shelter or avoid guidance but states no resulting harm.
    21. present: Reports a possible active shooter emergency and to shelter or avoid the area, conveying implied lethal danger pending verification.
    22. present: Reports a possible active shooter and urges shelter or avoiding the area, conveying a clearly implied lethal danger.
    23. absent: Reports a possible active shooter with shelter or avoid guidance but states no harm or consequence.
    24. absent: Reports a possible active shooter being verified with shelter guidance but states no confirmed harm or danger.
    25. present: A possible active shooter report with shelter guidance implies a deadly threat to people.

Systematic AI judgments with visible reasoning, not human-validated codings.

About this analysis
Context

Background

On the morning of April 13, 2023, at least eight Texas colleges and universities were hit by hoax active-shooter calls, a coordinated swatting wave that also struck Tyler Junior College, Texas Wesleyan University, Collin College, Lamar Institute of Technology, Galen College of Nursing, Texas A&M, and Baylor. At Del Mar College's Heritage Campus, located at 101 Baldwin in Corpus Christi, a report of an active shooter came in around 10:23 a.m. CDT. The college sent a shelter-in-place DMC Alert at 10:28 a.m. CDT and issued the all-clear at 10:47 a.m. CDT after officers found no evidence of a threat. It was the second hoax call at the campus in about a month. The caller faced a Class A misdemeanor false-alarm charge, and the FBI later opened an investigation into the statewide swatting pattern.
Analysis

Key Findings

Del Mar College's Heritage Campus sheltered in place from 10:28 to 10:47 a.m. CDT on April 13, 2023, a 19-minute window
The incident was one of at least eight Texas campus swatting hoaxes the same morning
It was Del Mar's second hoax call in roughly a month, and the caller faced a false-alarm charge
Outcome
Police found no shooter and no evidence a shooting occurred. The call was confirmed as a hoax and the all-clear was issued at 10:47 a.m. CDT The caller faced a Class A misdemeanor false-alarm charge.
Provenance

Sources

  1. News
  2. News
  3. News
Cite this case

Campus Alert Archive. "Del Mar College: False active-shooter call prompts a 19-minute shelter-in-place; confirmed as a hoax." Incident of April 13, 2023. Added May 2026; last updated July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/del-mar-college-swatting-2023-04-13/

Download case JSON

Alert text quoted on this page remains the work of the issuing institution; the archive is a secondary source.

Tags
swattingactive-shooter-hoaxtexascommunity-collegecorpus-christishelter-in-placeemergency-notificationconfirmed-hoax2023-texas-swatting-waveHoax
Added May 2026Updated July 2026Via ingestion