Brooklyn cab driver shot in face following fender bender, second violent road rage attack in NYC in two days 30%

By Emma Seiwell50%

7/24/2026, 1:11:26 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, In-Group Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 19.1% saturation with 114 hits. Analysis detected 310 faulty-reasoning hits from 598 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.9% and a BS Rank of 30% (15,386 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 70.30% of the article peer group.

A livery cab driver was shot in the face after getting into a fender-bender in Brooklyn early Friday, according to cops and reports. 
Following the minor collision on North Portland Ave. near Auburn Pl. in Fort Greene, a man, who was not involved in the accident, pulled a gun and shot the 50-year-old Taxi and Limousine Commission driver in the right cheek at about 4:05 a.m., police said. 
Medics rushed the man to New York-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, where he was awake, alert and in stable condition, cops said. 
No arrests have been made. 
A motive for the shooting was not immediately clear. 
Cops are hunting for the suspect, who was last seen wearing a black shirt and gray shorts. 
“No taxi driver should fear being executed simply for picking up a passenger and earning an honest living,” said Fernando Mateo, a spokesman for the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers. 
The man wounded in Friday’s shooting was the second cabbie shot in the city in less than two weeks, Mateo said. 
Cab driver Danish Sarwar, who immigrated to the U.S. to support his family back in Pakistan, was left partially paralyzed after being shot in the neck by a fare during an attempted carjacking of his brand-new SUV on July 11. 
Sarwar, 21, was shot by a passenger he picked up in front of a daycare on Parkside Ave. near Bedford Ave. in Prospect Lefferts Gardens about 4:15 a.m., cops said. 
Sarwar was unconscious and in critical condition at Kings County Hospital for over a week. 
He awoke on Wednesday, unable to move his left arm or fingers, his brother said. 
“Enough is enough. 
Our drivers deserve to work safely. 
Our families deserve peace of mind. 
And the people responsible for these shootings must be brought to justice,” Mateo said in a statement. 
The NYSFTD will announce a significant reward for information leading to an arrest in both cases at a press conference in the Bronx on Sunday, he added. 
Friday’s shooting comes a day after another motorist was attacked with a meat cleaver following a minor car accident in Queens, officials said. 
On Thursday morning, a 47-year-old motorist got into a crazed argument with another driver following a minor collision at 26th Ave. and 127 St. in College Point about 5:35 a.m., police said. 
As the quarrel escalated, the assailant hacked the father of two in the back of the head multiple times with the cleaver. 
Medics took the victim to New York-Presbyterian Hospital Queens where doctors stitched up some of the gashes, according to his nephew. 
The victim hours later was “conscious and awake, said the 22-year-old nephew, who declined to give his name. 
“There is some pain in his lower thigh area.” 
The irate driver also sliced the victim in the chest and left arm before driving off in a white vehicle. 
The victim, who lives on Staten Island, is a caretaker to his elderly father. 
The nephew was stunned by the violent attack, saying the victim is not one to pick fights. 
“He’s a very well-mannered person,” he said. 
“That’s just a very absurd string of events that someone was willing to keep a blade in their car and pull it out at just a random citizen,” he added. 
“What they did was highly dangerous and they’re someone who needs to be put up with the justice of law.” 
The motorist responsible for the meat cleaver attack remained at large Friday, cops said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 2.4%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 3.3%newyorkdailynews: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Emma Seiwell: 5.8%newyorkdailynews: 6.1%Framing Effect3.2%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.6%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.5%Emma Seiwell: 11.4%newyorkdailynews: 9.8%Negativity Bias8.5%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Emma Seiwell: 0.8%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%In-Group Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 4.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 2.4%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.4%Emma Seiwell: 3.1%newyorkdailynews: 4.1%Hasty Generalization5.4%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.1%Emma Seiwell: 10.0%newyorkdailynews: 7.4%Appeal to Emotion19.1%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 2.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.6%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 2.5%newyorkdailynews: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.5%Emma Seiwell: 1.9%newyorkdailynews: 2.1%Unattributed Quote2.5%This article: 2.5%Emma Seiwell: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection2.5%This article: 5.4%Emma Seiwell: 3.9%newyorkdailynews: 6.7%Biased Writer Voice5.4%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

598 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker19%attributed speech486writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 32 words • 0.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 3 words • 100.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 6 words • 100.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 6 words • 100.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 17 words • 0.0% coverageFernando Mateo • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Fernando Mateo

57%flagged-word coverage
112 attributed words100% of attributed speech21% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Unattributed Quote+13.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Fernando Mateo: 13.4%13.4%Quote-first Misdirection+13.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Fernando Mateo: 13.4%13.4%Biased Writer Voice-6.6 ptsWriter: 6.6%Fernando Mateo: 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.