A tortured kitten, a rooftop chase, and a drone: The case SF’s DA can’t keep behind bars ⁠8%

By George Kelly⁠18%

7/17/2026, 9:01:56 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.9% saturation with 87 hits. Analysis detected 452 faulty-reasoning hits from 397 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 24.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠8% (19,537 of 21,166 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 92.30% of the article peer group.

A 33-year-old Reno, Nevada, man was charged with felonies Friday after allegedly torturing and killing a 6-week-old kitten in an ATM vestibule on Market Street. 
William Ohlson faces charges of killing, maiming, or abusing an animal, and overdrive, overwork or overload of an animal. 
Given the disturbing allegations, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins lamented that Ohlson was released from jail almost immediately after his arrest. 
Authorities may not keep him locked up before trial because of a recent state Supreme Court decision that limits pre-trial detention to cases involving violence against a human being. 
“Although we take this case extremely seriously, and this is very, very troubling conduct, we are bound and confined by the law,” Jenkins told reporters. 
She said her office would pursue every legal avenue to prevent Ohlson from possessing another animal while the case moves through the courts. 
He was also charged with a misdemeanor count of resisting a peace officer. 
That stems from his attempt to elude law enforcement Tuesday by fleeing his Fell Street hotel and clambering onto the roof of an adjacent building, Jenkins said. 
Officials said the San Francisco Police Department used a drone to track and apprehend Ohlson as he sought to escape. 
The fire department shared a ladder, helping cops gets on top of the building. 
Ohlson carried the kitten into the banking vestibule on Market Street between Laguna and Octavia at 2 a.m. on July 1, the SFPD said. 
Police found the kitten’s remains nearby the following day, after a witness came forward. 
Working with San Francisco Animal Care and Control, police identified Ohlson as the suspect and went to his hotel Tuesday to bring him in. 
A drone spotted him on the roof, the SFPD said. 
This may be the first case in which the department’s new surveillance equipment was used in an animal cruelty investigation, Chief Derrick Lew said. 
Jenkins acknowledged that because Ohlson listed a Nevada address and had no permanent residence in San Francisco, there is a risk he could fail to appear for his arraignment Monday. 
But flight risk and the nature of the offense are not factors that can be weighed in the current framework, she said. 
If he misses Monday’s hearing, she noted, the court will issue a bench warrant for his arrest. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%George Kelly: 3.6%The San Francisco Standard: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%George Kelly: 3.3%The San Francisco Standard: 3.4%Availability Heuristic6.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%George Kelly: 0.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias6.0%This article: 4.3%George Kelly: 5.6%The San Francisco Standard: 6.6%Framing Effect4.3%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 7.3%George Kelly: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 0.6%Status Quo Bias7.3%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 2.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 12.6%George Kelly: 1.7%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Pessimism Bias12.6%This article: 21.9%George Kelly: 8.1%The San Francisco Standard: 7.4%Negativity Bias21.9%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 1.7%The San Francisco Standard: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 1.3%The San Francisco Standard: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 3.8%The San Francisco Standard: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.4%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.3%George Kelly: 4.6%The San Francisco Standard: 3.4%Appeal to Authority7.3%This article: 5.5%George Kelly: 0.9%The San Francisco Standard: 1.2%False Dilemma5.5%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.0%George Kelly: 4.1%The San Francisco Standard: 5.3%Hasty Generalization6.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 10.6%George Kelly: 7.4%The San Francisco Standard: 4.5%Appeal to Emotion10.6%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 1.3%The San Francisco Standard: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.4%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.0%George Kelly: 2.8%The San Francisco Standard: 3.4%Anecdotal5.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.6%George Kelly: 1.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.6%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 1.9%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 4.3%George Kelly: 1.8%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection4.3%This article: 9.3%George Kelly: 2.8%The San Francisco Standard: 5.4%Biased Writer Voice9.3%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%George Kelly: 0.4%The San Francisco Standard: 2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

397 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers61%attributed speech155writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 25 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 27 words • 0.0% coverageSan Francisco Police Department • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageSan Francisco Police Department • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageSan Francisco Police Department • 10 words • 0.0% coverageDerrick Lew • 24 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 30 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 22 words • 0.0% coverageBrooke Jenkins • 17 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Derrick Lew

100%flagged-word coverage
24 attributed words9.9% of attributed speech46% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Quote-first Misdirection-11.0 ptsWriter: 11.0%Derrick Lew: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.0 ptsWriter: 11.0%Derrick Lew: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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