Clery notice for a reported strong-arm robbery later deemed unfounded

To check this alert, Claude Opus 5.5 (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 the source is present: "Campus Police" and "Duke Police" are named, with Duke citing Clery Act compliance.

  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: It names 'Campus Police' and 'Duke Police' as the reporting agencies and cites Clery Act compliance by Duke.
  2. present: It cites "Campus Police investigators" and the Duke Police contact number, identifying the Duke police as the issuing authority.
  3. present: It names Campus Police, the Durham Police Department, and Duke Police as the involved authorities.
  4. present: It cites 'Campus Police investigators' and asks readers to contact 'the Duke Police', identifying the issuing authority.
  5. present: It cites 'Campus Police investigators' and asks people to contact 'the Duke Police', identifying the issuing agency.
  6. present: It cites 'Campus Police investigators' and asks readers to contact 'the Duke Police', identifying the issuing authority.
  7. present: It cites 'Campus Police investigators' and Duke Police, and says the message is sent to all Duke students, faculty and staff.
  8. present: The notice cites Campus Police and Duke Police, and says it is sent to all Duke students, faculty and staff.
  9. present: It names 'Campus Police investigators' and 'Duke Police', identifying the reporting authority.
  10. present: It names 'Campus Police investigators' and asks readers to contact 'the Duke Police', identifying the source.
  11. present: It references 'Campus Police investigators' and directs contact to 'the Duke Police', identifying the issuing authority.
  12. present: It references 'Campus Police investigators' and directs contacts to 'the Duke Police', identifying the issuing authority.
  13. present: It names Campus Police and the Duke Police as the source and says the message is sent to all Duke students, faculty and staff.
  14. present: It names 'Campus Police' and the Duke Police as the investigating and contact authorities.
  15. present: It cites "Campus Police investigators" and directs contact to "the Duke Police".
  16. present: It references 'Campus Police investigators' and the 'Duke Police', naming the authority behind the message.
  17. present: It names Campus Police, the Durham Police Department, and Duke Police as the involved authorities.
  18. present: The notice refers to Campus Police investigators and asks readers to contact the Duke Police, which identifies the responding authority.
  19. present: It references 'Campus Police investigators' and 'Duke Police' and directs readers to duke.edu/police, identifying the source.
  20. present: The update credits 'Campus Police investigators' and directs readers to contact 'the Duke Police', identifying the issuing authority.
  21. present: It references Duke Campus Police investigators and gives the Duke Police number, which identifies the issuing authority.
  22. present: It references Campus Police investigators and gives 'the Duke Police' phone number, identifying the responsible authority.
  23. present: The message names 'Campus Police investigators' and 'the Duke Police' as the responding authority.
  24. present: The message references Campus Police investigators and directs contact to "the Duke Police," identifying the responsible agency.
  25. present: It names 'Campus Police investigators' and asks people to contact 'the Duke Police', identifying the responsible agency.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree the hazard is named: the original post reports a "strong-armed robbery" in which the victim's car was taken.

  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: The original post names a 'strong-armed robbery' in which the victim's car was taken.
  2. present: The original post names "a strong-armed robbery" in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime.
  3. present: It names a 'strong-armed robbery' in which the victim's car was taken, later deemed unfounded.
  4. present: It names a reported 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime.
  5. present: The original post reports 'a strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, though the update says it was unfounded.
  6. present: It describes 'a strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, later found unfounded.
  7. present: The original post names a 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime.
  8. present: It reports a "strong-armed robbery" in which the suspect took the victim's car, later updated as unfounded.
  9. present: It describes a reported 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime.
  10. present: It reports a 'strong-armed robbery' on Pettigrew Street, a specific crime, though the update later deems it unfounded.
  11. present: It describes 'a strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect 'took the victim's car', although the update later calls the case unfounded.
  12. present: It describes 'a strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, later updated as unfounded.
  13. present: It reports a 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime, later found unfounded.
  14. present: It reports a 'strong-armed robbery' in which a car was taken, a specific crime, even though later found unfounded.
  15. present: It names "a strong-armed robbery" in which the suspect took the victim's car, later ruled unfounded.
  16. present: The original post reports a 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime.
  17. present: It concerns a reported 'strong-armed robbery' involving a stolen car, later found unfounded, which is a specific crime.
  18. present: It describes a reported "strong-armed robbery" in which the victim's car was taken, a specific crime, though later ruled unfounded.
  19. present: It describes a reported 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect 'took the victim's car', a specific crime.
  20. present: It reports a 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime, later ruled unfounded.
  21. present: It describes a reported 'strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took a car, a specific crime hazard, even though later deemed unfounded.
  22. present: It describes a reported 'strong-armed robbery' and a stolen car, although the update later calls the case unfounded.
  23. present: It reports 'a strong-armed robbery' in which the suspect took the victim's car, a specific crime, later ruled unfounded.
  24. present: It reports a "strong-armed robbery" with a vehicle taken, later deemed unfounded, which is still a named crime hazard.
  25. present: The original post reports 'a strong-armed robbery' in which a car was taken, a specific crime, later updated as unfounded.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree location is specific: "on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies".

  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 the incident 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  2. present: It locates the reported robbery "on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies".
  3. present: It locates the report 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  4. present: It locates the report 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  5. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  6. present: It gives 'Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies' as the location of the reported robbery.
  7. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  8. present: The reported robbery was on "Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies", a specific location.
  9. present: It places the incident 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies.'
  10. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  11. present: The incident is placed 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  12. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  13. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  14. present: It locates the report 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  15. present: It locates the report "on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies".
  16. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  17. present: The original report places the incident 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  18. present: It locates the report "on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies", a specific place.
  19. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  20. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies', a specific location.
  21. present: It places the report 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies', a specific location.
  22. present: It places the reported robbery 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  23. present: It places the incident 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies'.
  24. present: It places the reported robbery "on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies."
  25. present: It says the robbery was reported 'on Pettigrew Street near the Center for Documentary Studies', a specific place.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree guidance is present: readers are urged to "be aware of your surroundings, travel with others" and "keep your car locked".

  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 urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked', protective steps.
  2. present: It urges readers to "be aware of your surroundings, travel with others" and keep cars locked, which are protective actions.
  3. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and keep cars locked.
  4. present: It tells people to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked'.
  5. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked', protective actions.
  6. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked'.
  7. present: It urges people to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked', which are protective actions.
  8. present: Readers are urged to "be aware of your surroundings, travel with others" and keep cars locked, which are protective actions.
  9. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked', protective actions.
  10. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked'.
  11. present: It tells readers to 'Continue to be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked'.
  12. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked', which are protective actions.
  13. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and keep cars locked, which are protective actions.
  14. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and keep cars locked.
  15. present: It advises readers to "be aware of your surroundings, travel with others" and keep cars locked.
  16. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked', protective actions.
  17. present: It urges people to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and keep cars locked.
  18. present: It urges readers to "be aware of your surroundings, travel with others" and keep cars locked, which are protective actions.
  19. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked', which are protective actions.
  20. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked', protective actions.
  21. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and keep cars locked, which are protective actions.
  22. present: It urges readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked'.
  23. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others' and 'keep your car locked'.
  24. present: It tells readers to "be aware of your surroundings, travel with others" and keep cars locked, explicit protective advice.
  25. present: It advises readers to 'be aware of your surroundings, travel with others when possible and keep your car locked', which are protective actions.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree timing is present: the update is stamped "Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m." and the original cites "Monday afternoon".

  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: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original references 'Monday afternoon'.
  2. present: The update header reads "Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m." and the original notes Monday afternoon.
  3. present: It carries an update stamp of 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and references Monday afternoon.
  4. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the incident is placed 'on Monday afternoon'.
  5. present: It includes '[Update: Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.]' and refers to 'Monday afternoon' for the original report.
  6. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original references 'Monday afternoon'.
  7. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the incident is placed on 'Monday afternoon'.
  8. present: The update is dated "Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m." and the original incident was "on Monday afternoon".
  9. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original cites Monday afternoon.
  10. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original cites 'Monday afternoon'.
  11. present: The update header reads 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original references 'Monday afternoon'.
  12. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original post cites 'Monday afternoon'.
  13. present: It gives the update stamp 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and says the original incident was Monday afternoon.
  14. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original cites 'Monday afternoon'.
  15. present: The update is stamped "Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m." and cites "Monday afternoon".
  16. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original cites 'Monday afternoon'.
  17. present: The update is timestamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the report mentions Monday afternoon.
  18. present: It carries an update stamp "Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m." and says the original incident was Monday afternoon.
  19. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original cites 'Monday afternoon'.
  20. present: It includes '[Update: Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.]' and says the robbery occurred 'on Monday afternoon'.
  21. present: The update is dated 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the incident 'on Monday afternoon', conveying time.
  22. present: The update is stamped 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and the original references Monday afternoon.
  23. present: It carries an update stamp 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and says the robbery was 'on Monday afternoon'.
  24. present: The update is stamped "Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m." and the original refers to "Monday afternoon."
  25. present: It carries an update stamp 'Tuesday, Sept. 27: 2:40 p.m.' and says the event happened 'on Monday afternoon'.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree impact is absent: no weapon was displayed, the case was later "unfounded", and no harm or severity is stated.

  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: It notes no weapon was displayed and later calls the case 'unfounded', giving no statement of harm or severity.
  2. absent: It says no weapon was displayed and later that the case is unfounded, conveying no consequence or severity.
  3. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no harm or severity.
  4. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and never states any danger or consequence to readers.
  5. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no harm or severity from the reported robbery.
  6. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no potential harm or severity for the community.
  7. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and later the case was unfounded, with no stated severity or harm.
  8. absent: It notes the suspect "did not display a weapon" and gives no injury or severity statement about the alleged robbery.
  9. absent: It notes no weapon was displayed and later says the case is unfounded, with no statement of consequences or severity.
  10. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no harm or severity, so impact is absent.
  11. absent: It notes 'He did not display a weapon' and never describes injuries or any potential harm to others.
  12. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and never states any potential harm or seriousness to readers.
  13. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no possible harm or severity from the incident.
  14. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no injury or severity.
  15. absent: It notes no weapon was displayed and never states any injury or potential danger to readers.
  16. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and never describes danger or potential harm to the community.
  17. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no injury or other consequence; the update calls the case unfounded.
  18. absent: It notes the suspect "did not display a weapon" and gives no statement of danger or possible harm to others.
  19. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and later that the case is unfounded, with no stated harm.
  20. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no injury or danger, so no consequence or severity is conveyed.
  21. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and never describes injury or danger, so no consequence is conveyed.
  22. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and states no injury or consequence, and the case was unfounded.
  23. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and gives no statement of injury risk or severity.
  24. absent: It notes the suspect "did not display a weapon" and never states any harm or severity the incident poses.
  25. absent: It notes the suspect 'did not display a weapon' and never describes injury or danger, so no consequence is conveyed.