BREAKING: Twin Falls In-N-Out shooter identified as 24-year-old Chad Williams—motive unknown 10%

By Roberto Wakerell-Cruz67%

8/2/2026, 1:18:43 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Optimism Bias, and Confirmation Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 28% saturation with 47 hits. Analysis detected 289 faulty-reasoning hits from 168 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 21.6% and a BS Rank of 10% (24,152 of 26,790 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 90.20% of the article peer group.

Police have identified the suspect in Saturday’s deadly shooting at an In-N-Out Burger restaurant in Twin Falls, Idaho, as 24-year-old Chad Williams. 
Williams is deceased after suffering a self-inflicted gunshot wound, police said. 
At least three people were killed and seven others were injured in the shooting, which occurred Saturday afternoon at the southern Idaho restaurant. 
Two of those injured have since been released from the hospital, while three are listed in stable condition and two remain in critical condition. 
Twin Falls city spokesman Josh Palmer said officers responding to the scene found the suspected gunman’s body in an area near the restaurant. 
Officials were still determining whether Williams was included in the fatality count. 
Authorities have not yet released the names, ages, or additional details about the victims as they continue notifying family members. 
Some of those injured suffered serious injuries, Palmer said. 
The investigation into the shooting remains ongoing and the motive is currently unknown. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.1%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 3.9%The Post Millennial: 6.0%Confirmation Bias13.1%This article: 13.1%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.7%The Post Millennial: 0.8%Anchoring Bias13.1%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.6%The Post Millennial: 3.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.5%The Post Millennial: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.1%The Post Millennial: 0.5%Overconfidence Bias6.5%This article: 28.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 8.8%The Post Millennial: 9.7%Framing Effect28.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.8%The Post Millennial: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 11.9%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.5%The Post Millennial: 0.5%Status Quo Bias11.9%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.5%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 14.3%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 4.7%The Post Millennial: 1.2%Optimism Bias14.3%This article: 7.7%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.2%The Post Millennial: 1.6%Pessimism Bias7.7%This article: 25.6%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 8.5%The Post Millennial: 9.9%Negativity Bias25.6%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.2%The Post Millennial: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.2%The Post Millennial: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.3%The Post Millennial: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.4%The Post Millennial: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.1%The Post Millennial: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 3.7%The Post Millennial: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.3%The Post Millennial: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.3%The Post Millennial: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.7%The Post Millennial: 0.4%Primacy Effect6.5%This article: 7.1%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.1%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.1%The Post Millennial: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.2%The Post Millennial: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.0%The Post Millennial: 2.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.9%The Post Millennial: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.3%The Post Millennial: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.7%The Post Millennial: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 4.9%The Post Millennial: 5.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 11.9%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.4%The Post Millennial: 0.3%Red Herring11.9%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.3%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.5%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 3.5%The Post Millennial: 4.6%Appeal to Emotion6.5%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 4.7%The Post Millennial: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.6%The Post Millennial: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.3%The Post Millennial: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.2%The Post Millennial: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.0%The Post Millennial: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.5%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.3%The Post Millennial: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.5%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.1%The Post Millennial: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 2.5%The Post Millennial: 1.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 6.5%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.3%The Post Millennial: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection6.5%This article: 6.5%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 4.5%The Post Millennial: 4.8%Biased Writer Voice6.5%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 1.9%The Post Millennial: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.1%The Post Millennial: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 3.6%The Post Millennial: 5.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Roberto Wakerell-Cruz: 0.0%The Post Millennial: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

168 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker19%attributed speech136writer words
Selected voice

Josh Palmer

28%flagged-word coverage
32 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.1 ptsWriter: 8.1%Josh Palmer: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.1 ptsWriter: 8.1%Josh Palmer: 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.