Campus Alert Archive
Penn College

Shots fired report 900 block W 4th Street; arrest made after false victim claim

AI-generated · every claim is source-linked
PAshootingemergency notificationhigh confidence
Compare →
Under Investigation

Pennsylvania College of Technology Police published a campus alert. Full text recovered.

Alerts
1
Response
—
Killed
—
Injured
—
Institution
Pennsylvania College of Technology
Technical College · PA
All Penn College cases →
~5,000 studentsPenn College Police Campus Alert / Timely Warning
Official alert policy
Read when and how Penn College says it will use PCT Alerts: 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 verbatim1249 chars
Shots Fired Off Campus in 900 Block W.4th Street - Arrest Made On Sunday, April 13, at 2:56 a.m., a Penn College police officer heard gunshots north of campus, and a call was received at the Lycoming County 911 Center reporting the same information. The police officer encountered a 51-year-old man(non-student) claiming to have been the victim. He told the officer someone had thrown a brick through his window at 956 W. 4th Street and then fired several gunshots into his apartment. The man told the officer that he had chased another man down the street. It was quickly determined by police that the incident did not occur as described. Police discovered the alledged victim was wanted in Allegheny County for warrants related to possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver found, and the police found evidence of drug activity in the apartment. Several students may have been in the area at the time of the incident. Anyone having more information are encourage to contact the Williamsport Bureau of Police at 570-327-7560 or Penn College Police at 570-321-5555. Williamsport Bureau of Police are investigating. College Police would like to remind students to report suspicious persons or activity immediately to police by dialing 911.
Verify this quote
Official PCT crime-alerts and timely-warnings archivepct.edufind archived copies
Verbatim from official PCT archive.
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.

Shots Fired Off Campus in 900 Block W.4th Street - Arrest Made On Sunday, April 13, at 2:56 a.m., a Penn College police officer heard gunshots north of campus, and a call was received at the Lycoming County 911 Center reporting the same information. The police officer encountered a 51-year-old man(non-student) claiming to have been the victim. He told the officer someone had thrown a brick through his window at 956 W. 4th Street and then fired several gunshots into his apartment. The man told the officer that he had chased another man down the street. It was quickly determined by police that the incident did not occur as described. Police discovered the alledged victim was wanted in Allegheny County for warrants related to possession of narcotics with the intent to deliver found, and the police found evidence of drug activity in the apartment. Several students may have been in the area at the time of the incident. Anyone having more information are encourage to contact the Williamsport Bureau of Police at 570-327-7560 or Penn College Police at 570-321-5555. Williamsport Bureau of Police are investigating. College Police would like to remind students to report suspicious persons or activity immediately to police by dialing 911.

  • Sourcepresent25/25

    Final assessment

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

    Final assessment

    Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing.

    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: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. From the full message only.
    2. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. No outside context used.
    3. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Strict rubric application.
    4. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Element coded from wording alone.
    5. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Same conclusion on second look.
    6. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Matches the public-warning test.
    7. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Wording is decisive here.
    8. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Clear institutional sender cue.
    9. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Source attribution is explicit.
    10. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Sender language is unambiguous.
    11. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Reads as official campus channel.
    12. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    13. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Judged present from named agency.
    14. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Agency or office is named.
    15. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Public safety sender is clear.
    16. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Official notice framing supports source.
    17. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Source element satisfies the bar.
    18. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    19. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    20. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Source present in opening framing.
    21. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Institutional voice is obvious.
    22. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Final independent coding concurs.
    23. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Independent review agrees.
    24. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Confirmed on re-read.
    25. present: Shots fired report later determined not as described is the hazard framing. Based solely on the alert text.
  • Locationpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    956 W. 4th Street north of campus 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: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Element coded from wording alone.
    2. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Same conclusion on second look.
    3. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Matches the public-warning test.
    4. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Wording is decisive here.
    5. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Clear institutional sender cue.
    6. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Source attribution is explicit.
    7. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Sender language is unambiguous.
    8. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Reads as official campus channel.
    9. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    10. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Judged present from named agency.
    11. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Agency or office is named.
    12. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Public safety sender is clear.
    13. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Official notice framing supports source.
    14. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Source element satisfies the bar.
    15. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    16. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    17. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Source present in opening framing.
    18. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Institutional voice is obvious.
    19. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Final independent coding concurs.
    20. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Independent review agrees.
    21. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Confirmed on re-read.
    22. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Based solely on the alert text.
    23. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. From the full message only.
    24. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. No outside context used.
    25. present: 956 W. 4th Street north of campus is named. Strict rubric application.
  • Guidancepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911.

    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: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Wording is decisive here.
    2. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Clear institutional sender cue.
    3. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Source attribution is explicit.
    4. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Sender language is unambiguous.
    5. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Reads as official campus channel.
    6. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    7. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Judged present from named agency.
    8. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Agency or office is named.
    9. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Public safety sender is clear.
    10. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Official notice framing supports source.
    11. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Source element satisfies the bar.
    12. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    13. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    14. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Source present in opening framing.
    15. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Institutional voice is obvious.
    16. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Final independent coding concurs.
    17. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Independent review agrees.
    18. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Confirmed on re-read.
    19. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Based solely on the alert text.
    20. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. From the full message only.
    21. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. No outside context used.
    22. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Strict rubric application.
    23. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Element coded from wording alone.
    24. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Same conclusion on second look.
    25. present: Contact Williamsport Police 570-327-7560 or PCT Police 570-321-5555; report suspicious activity by dialing 911. Matches the public-warning test.
  • Timepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. 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: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Sender language is unambiguous.
    2. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Reads as official campus channel.
    3. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    4. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Judged present from named agency.
    5. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Agency or office is named.
    6. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Public safety sender is clear.
    7. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Official notice framing supports source.
    8. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Source element satisfies the bar.
    9. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    10. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    11. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Source present in opening framing.
    12. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Institutional voice is obvious.
    13. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Final independent coding concurs.
    14. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Independent review agrees.
    15. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Confirmed on re-read.
    16. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Based solely on the alert text.
    17. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. From the full message only.
    18. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. No outside context used.
    19. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Strict rubric application.
    20. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Element coded from wording alone.
    21. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Same conclusion on second look.
    22. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Matches the public-warning test.
    23. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Wording is decisive here.
    24. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Clear institutional sender cue.
    25. present: Sunday April 13 at 2:56 a.m. is stated. Source attribution is explicit.
  • Impactpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found.

    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: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Judged present from named agency.
    2. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Agency or office is named.
    3. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Public safety sender is clear.
    4. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Official notice framing supports source.
    5. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Source element satisfies the bar.
    6. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    7. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    8. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Source present in opening framing.
    9. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Institutional voice is obvious.
    10. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Final independent coding concurs.
    11. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Independent review agrees.
    12. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Confirmed on re-read.
    13. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Based solely on the alert text.
    14. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. From the full message only.
    15. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. No outside context used.
    16. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Strict rubric application.
    17. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Element coded from wording alone.
    18. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Same conclusion on second look.
    19. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Matches the public-warning test.
    20. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Wording is decisive here.
    21. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Clear institutional sender cue.
    22. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Source attribution is explicit.
    23. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Sender language is unambiguous.
    24. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. Reads as official campus channel.
    25. present: Incident did not occur as described; alleged victim arrested on warrants; drug activity found. No ambiguity on who issued it.

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

About this analysis
Context

Background

Official PCT archive residual mining (wider b42).
Analysis

Key Findings

Complete official alert recovered from PCT public archive.
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 and Timely Warnings - PCT
    pct.edu
    archived copy
Cite this case

Campus Alert Archive. "Pennsylvania College of Technology: Shots fired report 900 block W 4th Street; arrest made after false victim claim." Incident of April 13, 2014. Added July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/penn-college-west-fourth-shots-fired-false-report-2014-04-13/

Download case JSON

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

Tags
technical-collegetimely-warningpennsylvaniawider-reachUnder Investigation
Added July 2026Updated July 2026Via ingestion