Known-perpetrator sexual assault at Eighth College

To check this alert, SuperGrok Heavy 4.5 (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree UC San Diego Police Department is named as the sender.

  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: The header names the UC San Diego Police Department as the issuing agency.
  2. present: UC San Diego Police Department is identified as the sender of this timely warning.
  3. present: The notice is issued under the UC San Diego Police Department letterhead.
  4. present: Campus police at UC San Diego are named as the source of the alert.
  5. present: The byline attributes the message to the UC San Diego Police Department.
  6. present: Sender is the UC San Diego Police Department addressing academics, staff, and students.
  7. present: The police department at UC San Diego is the stated author of the warning.
  8. present: This timely warning comes from the UC San Diego Police Department.
  9. present: The opening block identifies UC San Diego Police as who sent the notice.
  10. present: UC San Diego Police Department is credited as the issuing office.
  11. present: The alert is sent by the UC San Diego Police Department to the campus community.
  12. present: Authorship is the UC San Diego Police Department on the January 27 letter.
  13. present: The sender is clearly the UC San Diego Police Department.
  14. present: UC San Diego Police Department is named at the top as the agency issuing this timely warning.
  15. present: Authorship is explicit because the UC San Diego Police Department signs and investigates the notice.
  16. present: The sender is the UC San Diego Police Department, which received the report and is running the investigation.
  17. present: This notice originates from the UC San Diego Police Department as the listed author and contact.
  18. present: Header credit goes to the UC San Diego Police Department as the official sender.
  19. present: Police authorship is unmistakable in the UC San Diego Police Department masthead and byline.
  20. present: The issuing body is the UC San Diego Police Department, not an unnamed campus office.
  21. present: Source identity is satisfied by repeated UC San Diego Police Department attribution.
  22. present: The UC San Diego Police Department is the named sender and investigative contact.
  23. present: Issuance is credited to the UC San Diego Police Department throughout the warning.
  24. present: Sender coding hits because UC San Diego Police Department authors and signs the timely warning.
  25. present: The warning is from the UC San Diego Police Department as stated in the heading and investigative line.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree a sexual assault by a known unaffiliated acquaintance is a specific named threat.

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The warning specifies a sexual assault by an acquaintance known to the victim.
  2. present: A sexual assault by a known unaffiliated acquaintance is the named threat.
  3. present: The threat is a reported sexual assault by a known perpetrator.
  4. present: The specific hazard is sexual assault committed by an acquaintance.
  5. present: Readers are warned of a sexual assault by a known unaffiliated suspect.
  6. present: The incident type is a sexual assault by an acquaintance of the victim.
  7. present: A known perpetrator sexual assault is the concrete threat described.
  8. present: The threat is a sexual assault by an acquaintance who is not affiliated with the university.
  9. present: Sexual assault by a known acquaintance is the specific crime threat.
  10. present: The warning names a sexual assault by a known perpetrator who remains uncaptured.
  11. present: The hazard is a reported sexual assault by an acquaintance of the victim.
  12. present: The specific threat is sexual assault by a known unaffiliated acquaintance.
  13. present: A sexual assault by a known perpetrator is the threat the warning flags.
  14. present: The hazard is a sexual assault by an acquaintance perpetrator who is unaffiliated with the university and not in custody.
  15. present: A specific known-perpetrator sexual assault, with the suspect still free, is the threat disclosed.
  16. present: Community members are warned about a sexual assault committed by a known unaffiliated acquaintance.
  17. present: The concrete threat is an acquaintance sexual assault whose suspect remains at large.
  18. present: Sexual assault by a known unaffiliated perpetrator is the particular crime the campus is being warned about.
  19. present: The alert specifies a sexual assault by an acquaintance who is not a university affiliate.
  20. present: A still-uncaptured acquaintance sexual assault is the specific threat on the page.
  21. present: Readers learn of a sexual assault by a known unaffiliated suspect who is not in custody.
  22. present: The threat is particular: sexual assault by an acquaintance perpetrator unaffiliated with campus.
  23. present: A known-perpetrator sexual assault with the suspect still free is the hazard called out.
  24. present: The specific danger is a sexual assault committed by an acquaintance who remains unaffiliated and unarrested.
  25. present: Community risk is specified as a sexual assault by a known unaffiliated perpetrator who is not in custody.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree Eighth College locates the event.

  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: The crime is placed at Eighth College on the UC San Diego campus.
  2. present: Eighth College is given as the location of the assault.
  3. present: The event is located at Eighth College.
  4. present: Where it happened is Eighth College.
  5. present: The assault site is Eighth College.
  6. present: Location is specified as Eighth College.
  7. present: Eighth College is the place named for the assault.
  8. present: The where element is Eighth College.
  9. present: The location given is Eighth College on campus.
  10. present: The assault is located at Eighth College.
  11. present: Where is Eighth College.
  12. present: Eighth College is the site of the reported assault.
  13. present: The place of occurrence is Eighth College.
  14. present: The assault is placed at Eighth College on the UC San Diego campus.
  15. present: Eighth College is the named site of the reported assault.
  16. present: Location is specified as Eighth College rather than a vague campus-wide area.
  17. present: Eighth College is identified as the place the assault happened.
  18. present: The where element is Eighth College at UC San Diego.
  19. present: Eighth College is the incident address given to readers.
  20. present: The crime scene is named as Eighth College.
  21. present: Eighth College is the stated location of the assault.
  22. present: Place is given as Eighth College rather than an unspecified neighborhood.
  23. present: Eighth College on the UC San Diego campus is the location of record.
  24. present: The where fact is Eighth College.
  25. present: Eighth College is identified as the site of the January 24 assault.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree recipients are told to use CARE, CSO escorts, police tips, and bystander intervention.

  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: Readers get police tip lines, CARE contact, CSO escort help, and bystander steps.
  2. present: Call the police, use CARE, request a CSO escort, or intervene on red flags.
  3. present: Protective guidance includes reporting, CARE advocacy, escorts, and stop-and-intervene cues.
  4. present: Recipients are told to tip police, contact CARE, get a CSO escort, and help someone at risk.
  5. present: Instructions cover 24 hour CARE support, police tips, escorts, and intervening on red flags.
  6. present: The body tells people to call police, use CARE at SARC, seek a CSO escort, and interrupt precursor behaviors.
  7. present: Protective actions include anonymous tips, CARE advocates, CSO escorts, and bystander intervention.
  8. present: Guidance tells the community to report tips, contact CARE, escort via CSO, and connect at-risk people with friends.
  9. present: Call (858) 534-4357, reach CARE, request a CSO escort, or step in on listed red flags.
  10. present: Recipients are directed to CARE, police reporting, CSO escorts, and bystander action.
  11. present: Protective instruction includes CARE at SARC, police tips, CSO escorts, and stop-and-intervene advice.
  12. present: The message tells people how to report, get CARE help, use escorts, and interrupt red-flag behavior.
  13. present: Readers are instructed to tip police, contact CARE, call a CSO escort, and intervene if they see listed behaviors.
  14. present: Readers are told to use CSO escorts, intervene on red flag behaviors, and contact CARE or police reporting lines.
  15. present: Protective steps include watching drinks, refusing to leave an intoxicated person isolated, and calling a CSO to walk someone home.
  16. present: The message directs people to get affirmative consent, flag coercive pursuit, and seek 24-hour CARE advocacy.
  17. present: Recipients get action guidance such as connecting at-risk people with friends and submitting tips at the police number or online form.
  18. present: Instructions tell the community to interrupt separation of intoxicated people, refuse threats as consent, and use CARE at SARC.
  19. present: People are coached to escort vulnerable peers, avoid isolating them, and report tips to (858) 534-4357.
  20. present: Guidance covers bystander interruption of red flags, CSO walks home, and confidential CARE support.
  21. present: Protective direction includes watching for drink-spiking tactics, insisting on voluntary consent, and calling CARE at (858) 534-5793.
  22. present: The text tells recipients how to protect others and themselves through escorts, intervention, and reporting options.
  23. present: Actionable advice tells people to withdraw from nonconsensual situations, flag coercive pursuit, and use Title IX and CARE resources.
  24. present: Recipients are instructed to seek CSO escorts, not treat alcohol as an excuse, and reach CARE or OPHD.
  25. present: Protective instructions tell readers to intervene on isolation and threats, request an escort, and call police or CARE.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree January 24, 2025 at 8:00 PM and the January 27 4:06 PM report supply time.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The report time of January 27 2025 at 4:06 PM and the assault at 8:00 PM on January 24 are stated.
  2. present: Dates and clock times for both the report and the January 24 incident are included.
  3. present: Recency is shown by the January 27 receipt time and the January 24 8:00 PM occurrence.
  4. present: When is given as 8:00 PM on January 24 2025, with a report at 4:06 PM on January 27.
  5. present: The assault and the police report each carry calendar dates and times of day.
  6. present: Timing is explicit for the January 24 assault and the January 27 4:06 PM report.
  7. present: The alert timestamps both the crime on January 24 at 8:00 PM and the later police report.
  8. present: January 24 2025 at 8:00 PM is the incident time and January 27 at 4:06 PM is the report time.
  9. present: Both the assault evening and the same-day report on January 27 include clock times.
  10. present: Recency is established with January 24 8:00 PM for the crime and January 27 4:06 PM for the report.
  11. present: The when element is filled by dated times for the assault and for receipt of the report.
  12. present: Times of day and calendar dates are given for both the crime and the police report.
  13. present: The assault at 8:00 PM on January 24 2025 and the 4:06 PM report on January 27 show when.
  14. present: The crime is timed to January 24, 2025 at 8:00 PM and the report to January 27, 2025 at 4:06 PM.
  15. present: Both the January 24 incident hour and the January 27 report hour fix when the event and the warning sit in time.
  16. present: Recency is clear from the 8:00 PM January 24 assault time and the 4:06 PM January 27 intake time.
  17. present: Dated clocks for the crime and for police receipt show how recent the warning is.
  18. present: January 24, 2025 at 8:00 PM is the incident time and January 27, 2025 at 4:06 PM is the report time.
  19. present: Timestamps on both the assault and the police report establish when this occurred relative to the warning.
  20. present: The notice pins the assault to the evening of January 24 and the police call to the afternoon of January 27, 2025.
  21. present: Exact dates and hours for occurrence and reporting supply the when element.
  22. present: January 24 at 8:00 PM and January 27 at 4:06 PM document recency of the crime and of police knowledge.
  23. present: Clocked dates for the assault and for the 4:06 PM report make timing and recency explicit.
  24. present: The assault time of 8:00 PM on January 24, 2025 and the report time on January 27, 2025 supply when.
  25. present: Recency is documented with the January 24, 2025, 8:00 PM occurrence and the January 27, 2025, 4:06 PM report.
• Impactpresent13/25

  Final assessment

  Majority 13 of 25 treat incapacitation, rape or fondling classification, and sexual-violence wording as stated severity. Twelve treat those lines as restating the hazard name.

  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: Incapacitation, amnesia, rape, and fondling language goes past naming the offense.
  2. present: Sexual violence, rape or fondling, and drug incapacitation describe severity.
  3. present: The text describes sexual violence and drugs that can incapacitate or cause amnesia.
  4. present: Severity is marked by rape or fondling classification and incapacitation wording.
  5. present: Incapacitation and sexual violence descriptions count as consequence language.
  6. present: Drugs that alter consciousness plus rape and fondling labels go beyond a bare crime name.
  7. present: Amnesia, incapacitation, and sexual violence wording convey harm beyond the label assault.
  8. present: The notice discusses incapacitation and classifies the harm as rape or fondling.
  9. present: Sexual violence descriptions and drug incapacitation language supply severity.
  10. present: Incapacitation, amnesia, and rape or fondling language mark consequences rather than a bare name.
  11. present: Severity appears in sexual violence wording and in drugs that can incapacitate a person.
  12. present: Rape, fondling, and incapacitation language go further than naming sexual assault.
  13. present: Incapacitation and sexual violence descriptions count as severity rather than a mere hazard label.
  14. absent: No injury, lasting harm, or other consequence is described beyond naming sexual assault.
  15. absent: Severity scoring fails because the text never states outcomes or gravity past the crime label.
  16. absent: Calling the event a sexual assault, without describing harm done, does not meet the consequence test.
  17. absent: Impact is absent because only the hazard name appears, not injuries or other fallout.
  18. absent: Naming sexual violence without stating what harm followed keeps severity at zero.
  19. absent: No consequence, medical result, or elevated seriousness is added beyond the offense title.
  20. absent: Hazard labeling alone is present, so the severity or consequence criterion is not met.
  21. absent: The writeup never describes injuries, trauma outcomes, or other impacts of this assault.
  22. absent: Consequences stay unscored because seriousness is not described apart from the crime name.
  23. absent: Only the offense is named, with no account of resulting harm or gravity.
  24. absent: Severity is not established beyond the words sexual assault, so impact is coded absent.
  25. absent: No consequence or elevated seriousness is stated, so naming the crime is not enough for this item.