Campus Alert Archive
SMC

Scam alert: flyers about missing students

AI-generated · every claim is source-linked
CAotherotherhigh confidence
Compare →

Santa Monica College Police Chief Johnnie Adams emailed a district scam alert about false missing-student flyers soliciting money. Full text recovered from the official SMCPD PDF of the district email.

Alerts
1
Response
—
Killed
—
Injured
—
Institution
Santa Monica College
Community College · CA
All SMC cases →
~30,000 studentsCorsair Alert / SMCPD Crime Alert
Official alert policy
Read when and how SMC says it will use Corsair Alert (LiveSafe app) + Rave / BlackBoard Connect mass notification: 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 verbatim1400 chars
Scam Alert: Flyers about Missing Students From Bulletins <Bulletins@smc.edu> Date Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM To DISTRICT <DISTRICT@smc.edu> Sent on behalf of Santa Monica College Police Department (SMCPD) Chief Johnnie Adams Scam Alert Today officers from SMCPD received a report of suspicious circumstances where flyers were being made about missing students on campus. This is false information and is used as a ploy to get money from unknowing victims. The flyers are associated with another flyer that has a QR code requesting money to assist with the search. Any additional information should be directed to SMCPD by calling (310) 434-4300 and ask for a supervisor referencing report 25-236. It is important to vet the information prior to sending and money or goods to unknown individuals. Please stay safe and download Corsair Alert, the official safer app of SMC and available for free on the Google Play and Apple stores. Johnnie Adams Chief of Police, Santa Monica College PD 1718 Pearl Street, Santa Monica CA 90405 Office - (310) 434-4302 Cell - (213) 304-8417 Past President, FBI National Academy Associates, Inc. For 24/7 emotional support for SMC students, please call (800) 691-6003
Verify this quote
Official SMCPD district email PDF, Oct 24 2025admin.smc.edufind archived copies
Verbatim from official SMCPD district email PDF preserved in crime-bulletins 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.

Scam Alert: Flyers about Missing Students From Bulletins <Bulletins@smc.edu> Date Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM To DISTRICT <DISTRICT@smc.edu> Sent on behalf of Santa Monica College Police Department (SMCPD) Chief Johnnie Adams Scam Alert Today officers from SMCPD received a report of suspicious circumstances where flyers were being made about missing students on campus. This is false information and is used as a ploy to get money from unknowing victims. The flyers are associated with another flyer that has a QR code requesting money to assist with the search. Any additional information should be directed to SMCPD by calling (310) 434-4300 and ask for a supervisor referencing report 25-236. It is important to vet the information prior to sending and money or goods to unknown individuals. Please stay safe and download Corsair Alert, the official safer app of SMC and available for free on the Google Play and Apple stores. Johnnie Adams Chief of Police, Santa Monica College PD 1718 Pearl Street, Santa Monica CA 90405 Office - (310) 434-4302 Cell - (213) 304-8417 Past President, FBI National Academy Associates, Inc. For 24/7 emotional support for SMC students, please call (800) 691-6003

  • Sourcepresent25/25

    Final assessment

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

    Final assessment

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

    Final assessment

    On campus / SMC district is the framing for the flyer activity.

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

    Final assessment

    Vet information before sending money; contact SMCPD; download Corsair Alert.

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

    Final assessment

    Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp 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: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Sender language is unambiguous.
    2. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Reads as official campus channel.
    3. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. No ambiguity on who issued it.
    4. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Judged present from named agency.
    5. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Agency or office is named.
    6. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Public safety sender is clear.
    7. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Official notice framing supports source.
    8. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Source element satisfies the bar.
    9. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    10. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    11. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Source present in opening framing.
    12. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Institutional voice is obvious.
    13. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Final independent coding concurs.
    14. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Independent review agrees.
    15. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Confirmed on re-read.
    16. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Based solely on the alert text.
    17. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. From the full message only.
    18. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. No outside context used.
    19. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Strict rubric application.
    20. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Element coded from wording alone.
    21. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Same conclusion on second look.
    22. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Matches the public-warning test.
    23. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Wording is decisive here.
    24. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Clear institutional sender cue.
    25. present: Fri 10/24/2025 11:05 AM email timestamp is stated. Source attribution is explicit.
  • Impactpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information.

    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: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Judged present from named agency.
    2. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Agency or office is named.
    3. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Public safety sender is clear.
    4. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Official notice framing supports source.
    5. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Source element satisfies the bar.
    6. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Re-checked against full paragraph.
    7. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Pass agrees with majority logic.
    8. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Source present in opening framing.
    9. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Institutional voice is obvious.
    10. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Final independent coding concurs.
    11. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Independent review agrees.
    12. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Confirmed on re-read.
    13. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Based solely on the alert text.
    14. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. From the full message only.
    15. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. No outside context used.
    16. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Strict rubric application.
    17. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Element coded from wording alone.
    18. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Same conclusion on second look.
    19. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Matches the public-warning test.
    20. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Wording is decisive here.
    21. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Clear institutional sender cue.
    22. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Source attribution is explicit.
    23. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Sender language is unambiguous.
    24. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. Reads as official campus channel.
    25. present: Flyers are false; report 25-236 referenced for further information. No ambiguity on who issued it.

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

About this analysis
Context

Background

Official SMC Police crime-alerts archive (district email PDF).
Analysis

Key Findings

Complete official district scam-alert email recovered.
Outcome
Flyers described as false; community directed to SMCPD report 25-236.
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
    Scam Alert: Flyers about Missing Students - SMCPD
    admin.smc.edu
    archived copy
Cite this case

Campus Alert Archive. "Santa Monica College: Scam alert: flyers about missing students." Incident of October 24, 2025. Added July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/santa-monica-college-missing-students-scam-alert-2025-10-24/

Download case JSON

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

Tags
community-collegescam-alertadvisorycaliforniaemail
Added July 2026Updated July 2026Via ingestion