The crime of terroristic threat occurs when a person threatens violence and places any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury. A terrorstic threat can also occur when the threat causes a reaction by emergency personnel, interrupts public communication, transportation or public services, disrupts public assemblies or places the public in fear of serious bodily injury. As one can image, the greater degree of fear by a bomb scare or similar threat, the more serious the penalty.
After 9/11 the offense of terroristic threat took on a whole new connotation. Although the penalty for threatening to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property is a often a Class B misdemeanor, a threat made on the playground is classified under same offense as a threat to blow up the school. The punishment range is difference if convicted, but the general public may not be aware of this subtle distinction when seeing “terroristic threat” on a criminal background check.
The criminalization of heated exchanges and fighting words has long been litigated to test the limits of the First Amendment. The statute on its face only criminalizes specific, articulated threats. First, the threat must be one that alludes to committing a criminal offense. Generally expressions like “I wish the Starbucks would blow up” are legally distinct from specific expressions like “I am going to blow up the Starbucks.” Second, the threat must be communicated or published. Nihilistic musings in an angst ridden teenage journal may be troubling, but they are not criminal. Third, there must be a reaction of either fear, disruption or emergency response. Finally, there must be an intent to cause that reaction or fear. While there is a constitutional right to free expression, these individual rights end when the irresponsible exercise of such encroaches upon the safety of others. One of the significant factual disputes is whether or not the threat was really intended to cause a reaction. The specific intent of the speaker is the essential element of the offense.
In the context of domestic violence allegations, harassment, or anytime the threat involves death or serious bodily injury one can understand why law enforcement takes these allegations with utmost severity. Many of our juvenile clients have learned this the hard way. After Columbine, Virginia Tech, and the dozens of replicated attempts across the country, public schools and private universities have zero tolerance for ill-attempts at humor. With a heightened sense of fear after these tragedies, the District Attorneys’ Office and the local school districts handle these matters very conservatively.