9 hurt after reckless driver crashes into car during SF police pursuit ⁠26%

By KTVU Staff⁠16%

7/20/2026, 12:43:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Framing Effect, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 47.8% saturation with 100 hits. Analysis detected 382 faulty-reasoning hits from 209 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 37.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠26% (15,835 of 21,175 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 74.80% of the article peer group.

Nine people were injured in San Francisco on Sunday night when a reckless driver trying to evade police crashed into another car. 
San Francisco Police Department officers were on patrol in the area of Guerrero and 19th streets just after 8 p.m. on Sunday when they "observed a vehicle driving erratically," according to a department statement. 
Police tried to stop the reckless driver, but the suspect failed to yield and almost struck another patrol car near 18th and Guerrero streets, the SFPD said. 
"The suspect vehicle eventually came to a stop in the area of 14th and South Van Ness Avenue when it crashed into another occupied vehicle which collided into a fire hydrant and a business," police said in a statement. 
"Officers quickly detained the driver and the other four occupants of the suspect vehicle for the investigation." 
Two people inside the suspect vehicle were taken to a hospital with life-threatening injuries, while six others were reported to have suffered minor injuries. 
The ninth refused transportation to a hospital. 
The driver and four passengers from the suspect vehicle were detained following the crash, but their identities and the possible charges they may face were not released. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 2.7%KTVU: 3.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 1.1%KTVU: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 7.1%KTVU: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.6%KTVU: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 37.3%KTVU Staff: 4.6%KTVU: 6.7%Framing Effect37.3%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.4%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 5.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.3%KTVU: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 11.5%KTVU Staff: 4.4%KTVU: 5.3%Negativity Bias11.5%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 3.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.4%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.4%KTVU: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 47.8%KTVU Staff: 7.8%KTVU: 4.0%Appeal to Authority47.8%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 12.9%KTVU Staff: 2.9%KTVU: 2.7%Hasty Generalization12.9%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 8.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 2.0%KTVU: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 4.8%KTVU: 3.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 22.0%KTVU Staff: 5.6%KTVU: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)22.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.4%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 43.1%KTVU Staff: 5.2%KTVU: 2.9%Unattributed Quote43.1%This article: 8.1%KTVU Staff: 0.7%KTVU: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection8.1%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 1.9%KTVU: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.9%KTVU: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

209 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker29%attributed speech148writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageSan Francisco Police Department • 34 words • 100.0% coverageSan Francisco Police Department • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
61 attributed words100% of attributed speech95% writer coverage
0%30.0%60.0%Unattributed Quote+17.9 ptsWriter: 37.8%San Francisco Police Department: 55.7%55.7%Quote-first Misdirection-11.5 ptsWriter: 11.5%San Francisco Police Department: 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.