An Oakland bank was hit twice within 6 days. Police say it was the same armed robber 29%

By Aldo Toledo2%

7/21/2026, 12:24:58 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 28% saturation with 51 hits. Analysis detected 314 faulty-reasoning hits from 182 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.9% and a BS Rank of 29% (13,583 of 19,034 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 71.40% of the article peer group.

A 67-year-old man accused of robbing an Oakland bank twice in less than a week has been charged with numerous felonies, Alameda County prosecutors said Monday. 
Authorities said Michael Savage carried out armed robberies at the Wells Fargo branch at 901 Franklin St. in Chinatown on July 9 and July 15. 
Both robberies occurred shortly after 9 a.m. 
Prosecutors charged Savage with robbery, false imprisonment and other felony offenses. 
The criminal complaint also includes sentencing enhancements alleging he has multiple prior convictions for violent crimes that qualify as strikes under California law. 
Court records show Savage was convicted of second-degree robbery in 2014 and 2017. 
“These were brazen robberies that terrorized bank employees and customers, and left innocent people in fear for their lives,” District Attorney Ursula Jones Dickson said in a statement. 
Savage was scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday in Alameda County Superior Court at the Wiley W. 
Manuel Courthouse in Oakland. 
He remained in custody at Santa Rita Jail as of Monday afternoon. 
Confirmation Bias
20.3%
Anchoring Bias
4.9%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
3.8%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
12.6%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
28%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
11.5%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
25.3%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
15.4%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
15.4%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
4.4%
Quote-first Misdirection
15.4%
Biased Writer Voice
15.4%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

182 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.