Former Milwaukee gas station guard gets life for killing shoplifter 3%

By Chris Ramirez4%

8/6/2026, 1:53:59 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 5 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Halo Effect, with Fundamental Attribution Error as the most egregious example at 6.4% saturation with 18 hits. Analysis detected 66 faulty-reasoning hits from 282 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 8.2% and a BS Rank of 3% (29,830 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 97.50% of the article peer group.

A former security guard who fatally shot a man stealing a box of snack cakes from the Milwaukee gas station where he worked will spend the rest of his life behind bars. 
Circuit Court Judge Michelle A. 
Havas handed down a life sentence on Aug. 6 for William Pinkins in the Aug. 16, 2023, shooting death of Isaiah Allen. 
Pinkins was working as a security guard for Teutonia Gas & Food, at 4295 N. 
Teutonia Ave., despite being a convicted felon. 
That includes two homicides  one that was committed when he was 15. 
Prosecutors say Pinkins shot Allen, 29, in the back of the head after witnessing him take a box of Little Debbie's snack cakes and walk out without paying. 
A Milwaukee County jury convicted him in February of first-degree intentional homicide in Allen’s death. 
“He was a great and loving son, and a loving father,” Allen’s mother Natalie Easter said. 
“You robbed and stole the precious moments he could have had with his children.” 
According to a criminal complaint, Allen entered the store shortly before 6:20 a.m. 
A security guard was seated in the back of the business. 
Security video that was shown to the jury during Pinkins’ trial showed Allen grab a box of the pastries and leave with it. 
The security guard rose from his chair and approached Allen while producing a handgun. 
Within about arm’s distance, the guard shot Allen in the back of the head. 
Pinkins initially lied to investigators, telling them "some kids" had fired shots at the business, the complaint says. 
This is a developing story. 
Stay with jsonline.com for updates. 
Chris Ramirez. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.0%Journal Sentinel: 1.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.7%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.5%Journal Sentinel: 1.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 1.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 3.7%Journal Sentinel: 2.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%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: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.3%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Chris Ramirez: 3.9%Journal Sentinel: 3.6%Negativity Bias5.7%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.4%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 6.4%Chris Ramirez: 1.1%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error6.4%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.4%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.6%Chris Ramirez: 0.8%Journal Sentinel: 1.5%Halo Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%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: 0.1%Journal Sentinel: 0.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.2%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.9%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 1.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 1.8%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: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.0%Chris Ramirez: 4.2%Journal Sentinel: 4.1%Appeal to Emotion5.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.6%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.9%Journal Sentinel: 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.4%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.7%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.4%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%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: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.1%Journal Sentinel: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 1.3%Journal Sentinel: 0.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chris Ramirez: 0.0%Journal Sentinel: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.8%Chris Ramirez: 0.5%Journal Sentinel: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.8%

282 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers18%attributed speech230writer words
Selected voice

Natalie Easter

100%flagged-word coverage
30 attributed words58% of attributed speech16% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.2 ptsWriter: 2.2%Natalie Easter: 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.