Woman, 36, found dead with slashed neck inside her Brooklyn home ⁠25%

By Theodore Parisienne⁠0% Nicholas Williams⁠57%

6/20/2026, 8:41:53 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Biased Writer Voice, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 41.5% saturation with 76 hits. Analysis detected 372 faulty-reasoning hits from 183 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 37.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠25% (15,416 of 20,515 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 75.10% of the article peer group.

A 36-year-old woman was found dead with a slash wound to her neck Saturday inside her Brooklyn home. 
Officers rushed to the scene around 9:12 a.m. of the two-story building near 85th St. and Fourth Ave. in Bay Ridge where they discovered the lifeless body of Maria Santos Flores, cops said. 
EMS declared her dead at the scene. 
Santos’ husband was alerted of her gruesome death while he was at work by the victim’s sister, who called him after she visited the home and found the woman’s body near the bottom of the staircase. 
“I don’t know if it’s a robbery or she fell down, I’m not sure,” the victim’s husband, Santos Hernandez, 35, a warehouse worker, told the Daily News. 
“Police said they tell me later, they said they are getting information.” 
Santos, who was married to Hernandez for three years, lived on the second floor of the building. 
She had two children, an 18-year-old son and a 14-year-old daughter. 
No arrests were made as cops are still investigating the incident. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.6%Theodore Parisienne: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Confirmation Bias6.6%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.8%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 4.2%newyorkdailynews: 3.3%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.0%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Theodore Parisienne: 5.9%newyorkdailynews: 6.1%Framing Effect6.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Status Quo Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.3%newyorkdailynews: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 41.5%Theodore Parisienne: 12.2%newyorkdailynews: 9.7%Negativity Bias41.5%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.0%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 2.8%newyorkdailynews: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 9.8%Theodore Parisienne: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Primacy Effect9.8%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.4%Theodore Parisienne: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Appeal to Authority10.4%This article: 14.8%Theodore Parisienne: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%False Dilemma14.8%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.0%newyorkdailynews: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.0%Theodore Parisienne: 4.7%newyorkdailynews: 7.4%Appeal to Emotion6.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 3.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 4.5%newyorkdailynews: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 22.4%Theodore Parisienne: 1.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)22.4%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 39.3%Theodore Parisienne: 1.4%newyorkdailynews: 2.1%Unattributed Quote39.3%This article: 14.8%Theodore Parisienne: 1.9%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection14.8%This article: 25.7%Theodore Parisienne: 5.3%newyorkdailynews: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice25.7%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Theodore Parisienne: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

183 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker21%attributed speech144writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageSantos Hernandez • 27 words • 100.0% coverageSantos Hernandez • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Santos Hernandez

100%flagged-word coverage
39 attributed words100% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+77.1 ptsWriter: 22.9%Santos Hernandez: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+69.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Santos Hernandez: 69.2%69.2%Biased Writer Voice-32.6 ptsWriter: 32.6%Santos Hernandez: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.