Milwaukee teen sentenced in strip mall shooting; parking lot was 'war zone' 25%

By Chris Ramirez0%

7/24/2026, 12:02:56 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 17.6% saturation with 97 hits. Analysis detected 482 faulty-reasoning hits from 552 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 37.1% and a BS Rank of 25% (16,551 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 75.60% of the article peer group.

Bre'nee Veasley, 19, was studying to help people like Earl Williams III. 
Williams had been shot in the face in May 2025 and suffered a broken jaw, missing teeth and facial dropping. 
His mouth had to be wired shut. 
Doctors and nurses worked for weeks on Williams, patching and cleaning his wounds, until he was well enough to go home. 
Days after he was discharged, prosecutors say Williams grabbed an illegal firearm and ignited a shootout outside a Milwaukee strip mall that would leave Veasley, a promising nursing student, dead. 
Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge David Borowski on July 23 sentenced Williams to 12 years in prison. 
He also ordered Williams to serve eight years of extended supervision after his time behind bars is over. 
Veasley was leaving a party near the old Northridge Mall on June 20, 2025, when police got a call, around 11 p.m., to go to the area for a shooting. 
By the time, officers arrived on the scene, a crowd of people had gathered around Veasley in the parking lot. 
She suffered several gunshot wounds and died at the scene. 
Three other teens, ranging in ages 14 to 16, also were struck. 
One of them, 16-year-old Kingston Liphford, died from his injuries on July 4, 2025. 
Investigators recovered 110 spent rounds from the scene and believe as many as 11 weapons were fired during the attack. 
"You turned this parking lot into a war zone," the judge said. 
Assistant District Attorney Daniel T. 
Flaherty said he didn't believe Williams fired the shots that killed Veasley, but that he shot first, setting in motion the chain of events that resulted in her death. 
Flaherty called Williams a danger to the community. 
Veasley was a sophomore at Milwaukee Area Technical College and was studying to be a nurse. 
She often talked to family and friends about her dreams to make a living wearing scrubs and caring for those who needed it. 
Hogans-Harris brought a poster to the courtroom for Williams' sentencing that showed Veasley in nursing scrubs. 
The grieving mother was surrounded by dozens of family members, some wearing buttons with images of Veasley, her birth and death dates scrawled on the border. 
"It's tragic that somebody's poor decision is causing us pain for the rest of our lives," said Marionna Allen, a close friend of Veasley's. 
“I wish we had more time with [her]. 
Nineteen years was definitely not long enough.” 
Williams apologized in court, saying he took full accountability for his actions. 
"I found myself at the wrong place at the wrong time, surrounded by a life-changing situation," Williams said. 
Williams was given 345 days of pre-trial custody credit that can be applied to his sentence. 
Two other teens, Jardan Anderson, 18, and Isaiah Daniels, 17, are charged with harboring and aiding a felon. 
Each is scheduled to be in court later for scheduling conferences next week. 
Milwaukee so far has had 57 homicides reported in the city, compared with 83 killings reported during the same period in 2025, the year Veasley and Liphford were killed, according to Milwaukee police statistics. 
Last year, 141 homicides were reported in the city. 
Chris Ramirez covers courts for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 
He can be reached at caramirez@gannett.com. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.4%Chris Ramirez: 0.7%Journal Sentinel: 2.5%Confirmation Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Chris Ramirez: 3.1%Journal Sentinel: 2.4%Availability Heuristic6.2%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.3%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 3.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%Chris Ramirez: 8.0%Journal Sentinel: 6.1%Framing Effect10.5%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%Chris Ramirez: 3.4%Journal Sentinel: 7.0%Negativity Bias6.9%This article: 3.3%Chris Ramirez: 1.6%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Self-Serving Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 2.9%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.6%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Chris Ramirez: 2.1%Journal Sentinel: 0.6%Halo Effect4.2%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 1.3%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 2.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 4.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 17.6%Chris Ramirez: 14.1%Journal Sentinel: 10.5%Appeal to Emotion17.6%This article: 5.3%Chris Ramirez: 2.6%Journal Sentinel: 1.7%Begging the Question5.3%This article: 10.7%Chris Ramirez: 8.0%Journal Sentinel: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.7%This article: 3.3%Chris Ramirez: 1.6%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Tu Quoque3.3%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 6.2%Chris Ramirez: 3.1%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Composition/Division6.2%This article: 4.2%Chris Ramirez: 2.1%Journal Sentinel: 1.3%Anecdotal4.2%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.6%Chris Ramirez: 1.8%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.6%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.9%Chris Ramirez: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Unattributed Quote0.9%This article: 2.2%Chris Ramirez: 2.2%Journal Sentinel: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection2.2%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 2.7%Journal Sentinel: 0.6%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 3.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Chris Ramirez: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.1%

552 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers19%attributed speech446writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageDavid Borowski • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageDaniel T. Flaherty • 29 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel T. Flaherty • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageMarionna Allen • 24 words • 0.0% coverageMarionna Allen • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMarionna Allen • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWilliams • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

David Borowski

100%flagged-word coverage
12 attributed words11% of attributed speech35% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%David Borowski: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -1.3 ptsWriter: 1.3%David Borowski: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-1.1 ptsWriter: 1.1%David Borowski: 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.