Campus Alert Archive
Moody

Armed carjacking Walton St south of Solheim Center

AI-generated · every claim is source-linked
ILrobberytimely warninghigh confidence
Compare →
Under Investigation

Moody Bible Institute published a Clery timely warning. Full text recovered.

Alerts
1
Response
—
Killed
—
Injured
—
Institution
Moody Bible Institute
Private Liberal Arts · IL
All Moody cases →
~3,000 studentsMoody Alert
Official alert policy
Read when and how Moody says it will use Moody Alert: summarized, quoted, and analyzed.
Documented Timeline

Alert Sequence

1 message in sequence · 1 verified verbatim

Confirmed wording is transcribed character-for-character from a primary source. Use Verify this quote under each message to open that source in a new tab and compare the text yourself.

INITIAL ALERTEmail
Verified verbatim957 chars
Crime Alert - Robbery Monday, March 18, 2019 In compliance with the "Timely Warning" provision of the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act of 1998, Moody Bible Institute is giving notice of a Robbery incident that took place near the Chicago Campus. A small silver handgun was used. Reported Offense: Monday night at around 9:00 PM a man was sitting in his vehicle on Walton St. just south of the Solheim center, when two men approached, knocked on his window, displayed a weapon, told him to get out of the vehicle, and demanded he leave his cell phone. The suspects then fled west on Walton St. and south on Franklin St. in the stolen vehicle. No one from campus was involved in the incident. Suspect: Suspect 1: Male; 5'5-10"; Age 18-25; African American; 120-150 lbs; grey hoodie, ski mask Suspect 2: Male; 5'5-10"; Age 18-25; African American; 120-150 lbs; ski mask Vehicle: Chevy SUV 9928LY (IL)
Verify this quote
Official Moody crime alerts pagepublic-safety.moody.edufind archived copies
Verbatim from official Moody crime alerts.
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.

Crime Alert - Robbery Monday, March 18, 2019 In compliance with the "Timely Warning" provision of the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act of 1998, Moody Bible Institute is giving notice of a Robbery incident that took place near the Chicago Campus. A small silver handgun was used. Reported Offense: Monday night at around 9:00 PM a man was sitting in his vehicle on Walton St. just south of the Solheim center, when two men approached, knocked on his window, displayed a weapon, told him to get out of the vehicle, and demanded he leave his cell phone. The suspects then fled west on Walton St. and south on Franklin St. in the stolen vehicle. No one from campus was involved in the incident. Suspect: Suspect 1: Male; 5'5-10"; Age 18-25; African American; 120-150 lbs; grey hoodie, ski mask Suspect 2: Male; 5'5-10"; Age 18-25; African American; 120-150 lbs; ski mask Vehicle: Chevy SUV 9928LY (IL)

  • Sourcepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source.

    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: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Independent review agrees.
    2. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Confirmed on re-read.
    3. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Based solely on the alert text.
    4. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. From the full message only.
    5. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. No outside context used.
    6. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Strict rubric application.
    7. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Element coded from wording alone.
    8. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Same conclusion on second look.
    9. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Matches the public-warning test.
    10. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Wording is decisive here.
    11. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Clear institutional sender cue.
    12. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Source attribution is explicit.
    13. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Sender language is unambiguous.
    14. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Reads as official campus channel.
    15. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    16. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Judged present from named agency.
    17. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Agency or office is named.
    18. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Public safety sender is clear.
    19. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Official notice framing supports source.
    20. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Source element satisfies the bar.
    21. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    22. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    23. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Source present in opening framing.
    24. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Institutional voice is obvious.
    25. present: Moody Bible Institute Public Safety Clery timely warning is the source. Final independent coding concurs.
  • Hazardpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard.

    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: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. From the full message only.
    2. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. No outside context used.
    3. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Strict rubric application.
    4. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Element coded from wording alone.
    5. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Same conclusion on second look.
    6. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Matches the public-warning test.
    7. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Wording is decisive here.
    8. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Clear institutional sender cue.
    9. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Source attribution is explicit.
    10. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Sender language is unambiguous.
    11. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Reads as official campus channel.
    12. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    13. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Judged present from named agency.
    14. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Agency or office is named.
    15. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Public safety sender is clear.
    16. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Official notice framing supports source.
    17. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Source element satisfies the bar.
    18. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    19. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    20. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Source present in opening framing.
    21. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Institutional voice is obvious.
    22. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Final independent coding concurs.
    23. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Independent review agrees.
    24. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Confirmed on re-read.
    25. present: Armed carjacking / robbery with handgun is the hazard. Based solely on the alert text.
  • Locationpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named.

    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: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Element coded from wording alone.
    2. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Same conclusion on second look.
    3. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Matches the public-warning test.
    4. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Wording is decisive here.
    5. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Clear institutional sender cue.
    6. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Source attribution is explicit.
    7. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Sender language is unambiguous.
    8. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Reads as official campus channel.
    9. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    10. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Judged present from named agency.
    11. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Agency or office is named.
    12. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Public safety sender is clear.
    13. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Official notice framing supports source.
    14. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Source element satisfies the bar.
    15. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    16. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    17. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Source present in opening framing.
    18. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Institutional voice is obvious.
    19. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Final independent coding concurs.
    20. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Independent review agrees.
    21. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Confirmed on re-read.
    22. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Based solely on the alert text.
    23. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. From the full message only.
    24. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. No outside context used.
    25. present: Walton St just south of Solheim Center is named. Strict rubric application.
  • Guidancepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness.

    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: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Wording is decisive here.
    2. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Clear institutional sender cue.
    3. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Source attribution is explicit.
    4. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Sender language is unambiguous.
    5. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Reads as official campus channel.
    6. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    7. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Judged present from named agency.
    8. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Agency or office is named.
    9. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Public safety sender is clear.
    10. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Official notice framing supports source.
    11. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Source element satisfies the bar.
    12. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    13. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    14. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Source present in opening framing.
    15. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Institutional voice is obvious.
    16. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Final independent coding concurs.
    17. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Independent review agrees.
    18. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Confirmed on re-read.
    19. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Based solely on the alert text.
    20. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. From the full message only.
    21. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. No outside context used.
    22. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Strict rubric application.
    23. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Element coded from wording alone.
    24. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Same conclusion on second look.
    25. present: Suspect and vehicle descriptions published for public awareness. Matches the public-warning test.
  • Timepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated.

    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: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Sender language is unambiguous.
    2. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Reads as official campus channel.
    3. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    4. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Judged present from named agency.
    5. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Agency or office is named.
    6. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Public safety sender is clear.
    7. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Official notice framing supports source.
    8. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Source element satisfies the bar.
    9. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    10. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    11. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Source present in opening framing.
    12. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Institutional voice is obvious.
    13. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Final independent coding concurs.
    14. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Independent review agrees.
    15. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Confirmed on re-read.
    16. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Based solely on the alert text.
    17. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. From the full message only.
    18. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. No outside context used.
    19. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Strict rubric application.
    20. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Element coded from wording alone.
    21. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Same conclusion on second look.
    22. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Matches the public-warning test.
    23. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Wording is decisive here.
    24. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Clear institutional sender cue.
    25. present: Monday night around 9:00 PM March 18 2019 is stated. Source attribution is explicit.
  • Impactpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle.

    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: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Judged present from named agency.
    2. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Agency or office is named.
    3. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Public safety sender is clear.
    4. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Official notice framing supports source.
    5. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Source element satisfies the bar.
    6. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    7. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    8. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Source present in opening framing.
    9. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Institutional voice is obvious.
    10. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Final independent coding concurs.
    11. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Independent review agrees.
    12. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Confirmed on re-read.
    13. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Based solely on the alert text.
    14. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. From the full message only.
    15. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. No outside context used.
    16. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Strict rubric application.
    17. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Element coded from wording alone.
    18. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Same conclusion on second look.
    19. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Matches the public-warning test.
    20. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Wording is decisive here.
    21. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Clear institutional sender cue.
    22. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Source attribution is explicit.
    23. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Sender language is unambiguous.
    24. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. Reads as official campus channel.
    25. present: No campus community involved; suspects fled west then south in stolen vehicle. No ambiguity on who issued it.

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

About this analysis
Context

Background

Official Moody crime-alerts archive.
Analysis

Key Findings

Complete official timely warning recovered.
Outcome
See official alert.
Provenance

Sources

Every claim on this page is meant to be checkable. Open the links below (and the Verify this quote control under each confirmed alert) to read the original university, news, or archive page yourself. Hostnames are shown so you can see where you are going; archived copies survive when live pages move or disappear. See also our methodology.

  1. Official
    Crime Alerts - Moody Bible Institute
    public-safety.moody.edu
    archived copy
Cite this case

Campus Alert Archive. "Moody Bible Institute: Armed carjacking Walton St south of Solheim Center." Incident of March 18, 2019. Added July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/moody-bible-institute-walton-street-armed-carjacking-2019-03-18/

Download case JSON

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

Tags
private-liberal-artstimely-warningillinoismoodyUnder Investigation
Added July 2026Updated July 2026Via ingestion