Crime alert for sexual assault report at Pearson Hall West

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.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 agree (1): The "Virginia Tech Police Department" authored this campus crime alert.

  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 "Virginia Tech Police Department" authored this campus crime alert.
  2. present: Because the notice is from the Virginia Tech Police Department.
  3. present: Checklist confirms the Virginia Tech Police Department is named as the issuing source.
  4. present: The notice clearly comes from the Virginia Tech Police Department.
  5. present: The disclosure is attributed to the Virginia Tech Police Department as the issuing authority.
  6. present: The Virginia Tech Police Department is the source of this sexual assault crime notice.
  7. present: VTPD source line, campus police as issuer.
  8. present: Virginia Tech Police Department is cited as the department that received the report and published this alert.
  9. present: "Virginia Tech Police Department" is named on the From line so the source is present.
  10. present: A second look still credits the Virginia Tech Police Department as the reporting source.
  11. present: The Virginia Tech Police Department is again the explicit source of the crime alert.
  12. present: The Virginia Tech Police Department is identified as the reporting and issuing source.
  13. present: The notice is issued by the Virginia Tech Police Department as the authoritative campus law enforcement source for the report.
  14. present: VTPD issues report based campus crime alert.
  15. present: The notice carefully attributes the report to the Virginia Tech Police Department as the originating agency.
  16. present: The Virginia Tech Police Department is the agency sending this notice.
  17. present: The text names the Virginia Tech Police Department as the origin of the alert, so a source is present.
  18. present: Present because the Virginia Tech Police Department issued this campus crime notice.
  19. present: Source is the Virginia Tech Police Department as named at the start of the alert.
  20. present: Virginia Tech Police Department is named as the reporting agency so the source is present whereas without that line the notice would be unattributed.
  21. present: Virginia Tech Police Department issues this alert and anchors official campus police authorship.
  22. present: The Virginia Tech Police Department is named as the agency that received the report.
  23. present: The alert identifies the Virginia Tech Police Department as the issuing authority for the report.
  24. present: Recipients can see the Virginia Tech Police Department is named as the source of this crime alert.
  25. present: The notice identifies the Virginia Tech Police Department as the source.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 agree (1): A reported "sexual assault" meeting elements of "Sexual Battery" and "Assault and battery" under Virginia Code.

  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: A reported "sexual assault" meeting elements of "Sexual Battery" and "Assault and battery" under Virginia Code.
  2. present: Since the incident meets elements of sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  3. present: Hazard is identified as sexual assault with cited elements of sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  4. present: It reports a sexual assault that meets sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia law.
  5. present: The report identifies sexual assault meeting the statutory elements of sexual battery and assault and battery.
  6. present: As reported, the conduct meets sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  7. present: sexual assault with sexual battery plus assault and battery codes.
  8. present: Virginia Tech Police Department reports a sexual assault meeting the elements of sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  9. present: "sexual assault" with sexual battery and assault and battery name the hazard.
  10. present: On recheck the hazard remains sexual battery plus assault and battery under the listed Virginia Code provisions.
  11. present: Sexual battery and assault and battery are identified with Virginia Code citations as the reported elements.
  12. present: The alert describes sexual assault involving sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia statutes.
  13. present: The hazard is a reported sexual assault that, as stated, meets the elements of sexual battery under Virginia Code 18.2-67.4 and assault and battery under Virginia Code 18.2-57.
  14. present: Sexual battery and assault and battery under VA code.
  15. present: The hazard is framed as sexual assault meeting elements of sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia statute.
  16. present: They are flagging a sexual assault that they break down as sexual battery and assault and battery.
  17. present: The text reports sexual assault and cites sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code, so a hazard is present.
  18. present: Present because the report describes sexual assault meeting sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia law.
  19. present: Hazard is sexual battery and assault and battery as the alert states those Virginia Code elements for a reported sexual assault.
  20. present: Sexual assault meeting sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code states the hazard whereas without those charges the threat type would be unclear.
  21. present: Alert reports sexual assault that meets sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  22. present: Sexual assault is reported, with sexual battery and assault and battery cited under Virginia Code.
  23. present: The alert describes a sexual assault meeting elements of sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  24. present: Recipients are informed of a reported sexual assault meeting elements of sexual battery and assault and battery under Virginia Code.
  25. present: The alert states a sexual assault meeting sexual battery and assault and battery elements.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 agree (1): The incident occurred at "Pearson Hall West (310 Alumni Mall)".

  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 incident occurred at "Pearson Hall West (310 Alumni Mall)".
  2. present: Because the assault is placed at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  3. present: Location is specified as Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  4. present: The incident is placed at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  5. present: The incident is fixed at Pearson Hall West, 310 Alumni Mall.
  6. present: The location given is Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  7. present: Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  8. present: Virginia Tech Police Department places the incident at Pearson Hall West, 310 Alumni Mall.
  9. present: "Pearson Hall West (310 Alumni Mall)" states where the incident occurred.
  10. present: Looking again, the incident is still sited at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  11. present: Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall provides a precise residence hall location.
  12. present: The incident is sited at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  13. present: The incident is placed at Pearson Hall West, 310 Alumni Mall.
  14. present: Pearson Hall West 310 Alumni Mall.
  15. present: The incident is placed at Pearson Hall West, 310 Alumni Mall.
  16. present: You get Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall as the spot.
  17. present: The text places the incident at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall, so a location is present.
  18. present: Present because the incident is placed at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  19. present: Location is Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall where the alert says the incident occurred.
  20. present: Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall anchors the location whereas without that address the incident would have no site.
  21. present: Incident occurs at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  22. present: The incident is placed at Pearson Hall West, 310 Alumni Mall.
  23. present: The alert places the incident at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
  24. present: Recipients are given a clear site at Pearson Hall West, 310 Alumni Mall.
  25. present: The report notes the incident at Pearson Hall West at 310 Alumni Mall.
• Guidanceabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 agree (0): No recipient instructions are stated, only that information is "limited to protect" the survivor.

  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. absent: No recipient instructions are stated, only that information is "limited to protect" the survivor.
  2. absent: Since disclosure is limited for survivor privacy and no community guidance is provided.
  3. absent: No actionable guidance is provided to recipients on protective steps or reporting channels.
  4. absent: Readers are not told what actions to take or how to stay safe.
  5. absent: The text supplies no recipient-directed safety instructions or reporting actions.
  6. absent: The alert supplies no community guidance or protective directives for readers.
  7. absent: no recipient action steps, only privacy limit note.
  8. absent: Virginia Tech Police Department includes no guidance telling recipients what to do, only a note that disclosure is limited for the survivor.
  9. absent: "Information disclosed here is limited" protects privacy only and gives recipients no action steps so guidance is absent.
  10. absent: A skeptical second read still turns up no action steps for the campus audience.
  11. absent: No recipient-facing safety guidance or required actions are included in the release.
  12. absent: The message contains no safety instructions or action items for the campus community.
  13. absent: Disclosure is confined to protect survivor identity, privacy, and rights and does not furnish affirmative safety instructions to recipients.
  14. absent: No campus action steps only identity privacy limit.
  15. absent: No guidance instructing recipients how to protect themselves is supplied in the alert text.
  16. absent: There is no safety advice or call to action for the reader.
  17. absent: The text provides no recommended steps or directives for the audience, so guidance is absent.
  18. absent: Absent because the notice offers no protective steps or actions for recipients to take.
  19. absent: Guidance is absent because the alert only limits disclosure for survivor privacy and gives no protective steps for recipients.
  20. absent: No safety tips or reporting instructions address the recipient so guidance is absent whereas present guidance would list protective or contact steps.
  21. absent: Text omits recipient safety steps and only limits disclosure to protect survivor privacy.
  22. absent: No protective instructions for the audience are included, only a privacy-limited disclosure note.
  23. absent: The alert gives no instructions or recommended actions for recipients to take.
  24. absent: Recipients get no safety guidance or call to action, only a limit on disclosure to protect the survivor.
  25. absent: The message gives no actionable guidance or safety directions for recipients.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 agree (1): It occurred in the "evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025" and was reported on "Monday, Nov. 10, 2025".

  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: It occurred in the "evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025" and was reported on "Monday, Nov. 10, 2025".
  2. present: Because the report was received Monday Nov. 10, 2025 for an incident in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025.
  3. present: Report date of Nov. 10, 2025 and incident timing in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025 are both stated.
  4. present: The assault happened in the evening of Nov. 9, 2025, and police got the report on Nov. 10, 2025.
  5. present: The incident is placed in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025, with the report received on Nov. 10, 2025.
  6. present: Police received the report on Monday, Nov. 10, 2025, about an evening incident on Nov. 9, 2025.
  7. present: incident evening 9 Nov 2025, report logged 10 Nov 2025.
  8. present: Virginia Tech Police Department received the report on Monday, Nov. 10, 2025, for an incident in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025.
  9. present: "evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025" with the Nov. 10 report date supply when it happened and was reported.
  10. present: Checking the dates again, the report is Nov. 10, 2025 and the incident was in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025.
  11. present: Evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025 cover the incident, with report receipt on Nov. 10, 2025.
  12. present: The assault occurred during the evening of Nov. 9, 2025, and was reported on Nov. 10, 2025.
  13. present: The department received the report on Monday, November 10, 2025, concerning an incident in the evening hours of November 9, 2025.
  14. present: Report Nov 10 2025 incident evening hours Nov 9 2025.
  15. present: A report was received Monday, Nov. 10, 2025, regarding an occurrence in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025.
  16. present: The report came in on November 10, 2025 for something in the evening hours of November 9, 2025.
  17. present: The text dates the report to Nov. 10, 2025 and the incident to the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025, so time is present.
  18. present: Present because the assault is timed to the evening of Nov. 9, 2025 and the report to Monday, Nov. 10, 2025.
  19. present: Time is the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025 for the incident with the report received on Monday, Nov. 10, 2025.
  20. present: Report on Monday Nov. 10, 2025 and incident in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025 fix when events occurred whereas without those dates the timeline would be blank.
  21. present: Assault happens in the evening hours of Nov. 9 2025 while police receive the report on Nov. 10 2025.
  22. present: The report is dated Monday, Nov. 10, 2025, and the incident is set in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025.
  23. present: The alert states the incident occurred in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025, and was reported on Monday, Nov. 10, 2025.
  24. present: Recipients learn the incident was in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025, and reported on Monday, Nov. 10, 2025.
  25. present: The notice shows the incident occurred in the evening hours of Nov. 9, 2025, with a report on Nov. 10, 2025.
• Impactpresent15/25

  Final assessment

  Majority 15/25 codes 1: They were "acquaintances" and the "offender is a Virginia Tech student."

  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: They were "acquaintances" and the "offender is a Virginia Tech student."
  2. present: Since the parties were known acquaintances and the offender is a Virginia Tech student.
  3. absent: Beyond naming the offenses, the alert does not describe broader community impact or operational effects.
  4. present: The survivor and offender were acquaintances, and the offender is a Virginia Tech student.
  5. absent: Beyond naming the offenses, the notice states no separate consequence, severity, or harm language.
  6. present: The survivor and a Virginia Tech student offender were acquaintances known to each other.
  7. present: parties known as acquaintances, offender is VT student.
  8. present: Virginia Tech Police Department states the survivor and offender were acquaintances, the offender is a Virginia Tech student, and details are limited to protect the survivor.
  9. absent: "acquaintances" and student offender status add context but no injuries, disruption, or other effects beyond the hazard name so impact is absent.
  10. absent: A second pass still finds no impact narrative beyond naming the offenses and noting acquaintance status of those involved.
  11. absent: The alert does not expand into impacts such as harm severity, ongoing risk, or campus operational effects.
  12. absent: No impact details beyond the named criminal offenses are included in the notice.
  13. present: The survivor and offender were known to each other as acquaintances, and the offender is identified as a Virginia Tech student.
  14. present: Acquaintance VT student offender survivor details withheld.
  15. present: The survivor and offender were known acquaintances, and the offender is identified as a Virginia Tech student.
  16. absent: Calling them acquaintances and naming a student offender does not give you severity beyond the offense labels themselves.
  17. absent: The text describes no consequences or damage beyond the named offenses, so impact is absent.
  18. absent: Absent because no community wide effects, injuries, or other consequences beyond the named offenses are described.
  19. present: Impact is that the survivor and offender were known acquaintances and the offender is a Virginia Tech student.
  20. present: Acquaintance relationship and that the offender is a Virginia Tech student supply impact beyond the hazard name whereas without those facts only the offense title would appear.
  21. present: Survivor and offender know each other as acquaintances and the offender attends Virginia Tech.
  22. absent: Acquaintance and student details are given, but no severity or broader impact beyond the hazard names is stated.
  23. present: The alert notes the survivor and offender were acquaintances and that the offender is a Virginia Tech student.
  24. present: Recipients are told the parties were acquaintances and the offender is a Virginia Tech student, beyond the hazard name alone.
  25. present: The alert notes the parties were acquaintances and the offender is a Virginia Tech student.