Vallejo police investigation underway following incident ⁠47%

By KTVU Staff⁠12%

7/20/2026, 11:31:14 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Biased Writer Voice, and Anecdotal, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 48.9% saturation with 85 hits. Analysis detected 409 faulty-reasoning hits from 174 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠47% (11,657 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 53.30% of the article peer group.

A police investigation is underway in Vallejo following an incident Monday afternoon. 
Authorities have not said what they are investigating. 
Aerial and ground video from the scene showed a large police presence near Mahogany Drive and Broadway. 
The incident appeared to be centered near an alley behind an auto repair shop around 1:15 p.m. 
Video from the scene showed a body beneath a yellow tarp. 
However, police have not confirmed a fatality and have not released information about what transpired. 
Reports suggest that one person in a vehicle wanted in connection with a robbery was involved and that shots were fired. 
Police have not confirmed those reports. 
However, officers were seen placing multiple evidence markers around the scene and near a gray sedan. 
One witness told KTVU they heard what sounded like two different guns being discharged. 
The witness said they first heard six shots from what appeared to be a smaller-caliber weapon, followed by nine shots from what sounded like a larger-caliber firearm. 
The investigation remains ongoing. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.1%KTVU Staff: 2.1%KTVU: 2.9%Confirmation Bias12.1%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.8%KTVU: 1.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 48.9%KTVU Staff: 6.4%KTVU: 3.1%Availability Heuristic48.9%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.5%KTVU: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 12.1%KTVU Staff: 3.6%KTVU: 6.0%Framing Effect12.1%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: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.4%KTVU: 6.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.5%KTVU: 1.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 21.8%KTVU Staff: 3.5%KTVU: 5.1%Negativity Bias21.8%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 1.7%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: 0.9%KTVU: 3.8%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: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%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: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 6.8%KTVU: 4.0%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.9%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: 12.1%KTVU Staff: 2.2%KTVU: 2.7%Hasty Generalization12.1%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%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: 7.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.4%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: 12.1%KTVU Staff: 2.1%KTVU: 0.6%Burden of Proof12.1%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: 23.6%KTVU Staff: 3.7%KTVU: 3.4%Anecdotal23.6%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.0%KTVU: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 46.6%KTVU Staff: 4.4%KTVU: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)46.6%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: 8.0%KTVU Staff: 4.7%KTVU: 2.7%Unattributed Quote8.0%This article: 0.0%KTVU Staff: 0.5%KTVU: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 25.9%KTVU Staff: 2.0%KTVU: 3.4%Biased Writer Voice25.9%This article: 12.1%KTVU Staff: 0.7%KTVU: 0.8%Indoctrination12.1%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: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

174 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.0%attributed speech160writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageKTVU • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

KTVU

100%flagged-word coverage
14 attributed words100% of attributed speech81% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%KTVU: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+80.6 ptsWriter: 19.4%KTVU: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-13.1 ptsWriter: 13.1%KTVU: 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.