Campus Alert Archive
Moody

Armed robbery/assault Walton and Wells near Lot B

AI-generated · every claim is source-linked
ILassaulttimely 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 verbatim1138 chars
Crime Alert - Aggravated Assault Thursday, January 17, 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 an Aggravated Assault incident that took place on the Chicago Campus. A small silver handgun was used. The victim was not part of the Moody community, but does live in the neighborhood. Reported Offense: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM a man was approached on the sidewalk by two men, one of whom pointed a small handgun at the victim while the other demanded the victim's personal items, including his coat. The men exited a blue 2018 Audi driven by a third man. This occurred at the intersection of W Walton St. and N Wells St., just east of Lot B. The vehicle was stolen earlier in the day. Suspect: Suspect 1: Male; 5'10-6"; Age 16-22; African American; 150-180 lbs; black hoodie; black pants, white shoes Suspect 2: Male: 5'8-5'10"; Age 14-18; African American; 120-160 lbs; light hoodie, light cap, whitewashed jeans, white shoes Suspect 3: Driver- Male; African American
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 - Aggravated Assault Thursday, January 17, 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 an Aggravated Assault incident that took place on the Chicago Campus. A small silver handgun was used. The victim was not part of the Moody community, but does live in the neighborhood. Reported Offense: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM a man was approached on the sidewalk by two men, one of whom pointed a small handgun at the victim while the other demanded the victim's personal items, including his coat. The men exited a blue 2018 Audi driven by a third man. This occurred at the intersection of W Walton St. and N Wells St., just east of Lot B. The vehicle was stolen earlier in the day. Suspect: Suspect 1: Male; 5'10-6"; Age 16-22; African American; 150-180 lbs; black hoodie; black pants, white shoes Suspect 2: Male: 5'8-5'10"; Age 14-18; African American; 120-160 lbs; light hoodie, light cap, whitewashed jeans, white shoes Suspect 3: Driver- Male; African American

  • 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

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

    Final assessment

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

    Final assessment

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

    Final assessment

    Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019.

    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: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Sender language is unambiguous.
    2. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Reads as official campus channel.
    3. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    4. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Judged present from named agency.
    5. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Agency or office is named.
    6. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Public safety sender is clear.
    7. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Official notice framing supports source.
    8. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Source element satisfies the bar.
    9. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    10. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    11. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Source present in opening framing.
    12. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Institutional voice is obvious.
    13. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Final independent coding concurs.
    14. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Independent review agrees.
    15. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Confirmed on re-read.
    16. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Based solely on the alert text.
    17. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. From the full message only.
    18. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. No outside context used.
    19. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Strict rubric application.
    20. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Element coded from wording alone.
    21. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Same conclusion on second look.
    22. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Matches the public-warning test.
    23. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Wording is decisive here.
    24. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Clear institutional sender cue.
    25. present: Thursday morning around 7:45 AM January 17 2019. Source attribution is explicit.
  • Impactpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects.

    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: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Judged present from named agency.
    2. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Agency or office is named.
    3. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Public safety sender is clear.
    4. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Official notice framing supports source.
    5. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Source element satisfies the bar.
    6. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    7. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    8. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Source present in opening framing.
    9. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Institutional voice is obvious.
    10. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Final independent coding concurs.
    11. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Independent review agrees.
    12. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Confirmed on re-read.
    13. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Based solely on the alert text.
    14. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. From the full message only.
    15. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. No outside context used.
    16. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Strict rubric application.
    17. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Element coded from wording alone.
    18. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Same conclusion on second look.
    19. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Matches the public-warning test.
    20. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Wording is decisive here.
    21. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Clear institutional sender cue.
    22. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Source attribution is explicit.
    23. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Sender language is unambiguous.
    24. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. Reads as official campus channel.
    25. present: Victim not Moody community member; stolen blue 2018 Audi used; three suspects. 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 robbery/assault Walton and Wells near Lot B." Incident of January 17, 2019. Added July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/moody-bible-institute-walton-wells-armed-assault-2019-01-17/

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