Utter Threat
Uttering Threats - S.264.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada
Summary of the Offence
What is a charge of uttering threats pursuant to the Criminal Code?
Uttering threats is covered under s.264.1 of the Criminal Code, which states:
264.1 (1) Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys, or causes any person to receive a threat:
- (a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;
- (b) to burn, destroy, or damage real or personal property; or
- (c) to kill, poison, or injure an animal or bird that is the property of any person.
Generally, "uttering threats" refers to making statements that express an intention to cause physical harm or death to someone, to damage their property, or to injure an individual's animal.
Severity of the Offence
Uttering threats is considered a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown can choose to proceed either by indictment or summarily, depending on the circumstances of the case.
A summary offence is generally less serious in terms of both the nature of the crime and the severity of the sentence. In contrast, an indictable offence typically involves more serious crimes and more severe sentences.
Examples of the Offence
- Threatening to kill or injure another individual.
- Threatening to harm someone's animal or pet.
- Making threatening gestures or acts toward another person.
- Sending intimidating messages to another individual.
Elements of the Offence
To secure a conviction for uttering threats, the Crown must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, both the actus reus (guilty act) and the mens rea (guilty mind).
The Guilty Act (Actus Reus)
The Crown must prove that the accused knowingly uttered or conveyed a threat. According to the Supreme Court of Canada:
- The words must be examined in the context in which they were spoken or written, considering the person they were addressed to and the circumstances in which they were uttered. The meaning attributed to the words should be that which a reasonable person would give them (R v. McCraw, 1991 CanLII 49 (SCC)).
- The actus reus is established when a reasonable person aware of the circumstances would perceive the words as a threat of death or bodily harm (R. v. ML, 2021 NBCA 27).
The Guilty Mind (Mens Rea)
The Crown must prove that the accused:
- Intended the words to intimidate, or
- Intended for the words to be taken seriously.
For the mens rea element, the words must have been intended to have a threatening effect. Recklessness is not sufficient; specific intent is required. The court may infer the intention from how a reasonable person would interpret the words.
It is not necessary for the recipient to actually feel intimidated or to take the threat seriously. What matters is that the accused intended for the words to have that effect. It is also irrelevant whether the accused actually intended to carry out the threat.
Possible Defences
- A Reasonable Person Would Not Perceive the Utterance as a Threat: If the accused can show that a reasonable person, aware of the circumstances, would not perceive the words as a threat, the actus reus will not be made out
- Lack of Intent: If the accused can prove that they did not intend for the threat to be taken seriously or did not intend to alarm the recipient, the mens rea will not be established. For example, if the words were said as a joke, or under the influence of intoxication or mental disability
- Alternative Meaning: If the words used can be plausibly interpreted in multiple ways or have an alternative meaning, this may not amount to a criminal threat
- Applicable Charter Arguments: The Charter outlines your rights and freedoms. If the police did not respect these rights during your arrest, it could support your defense. Any violations of your Charter rights could result in evidence being excluded
Possible Punishment If Convicted
Uttering Threats to Cause Death or Bodily Harm
- If proceeded summarily: The maximum punishment is up to 2 years less a day imprisonment and/or a $5,000 fine.
- If proceeded by indictment: The maximum punishment is up to 5 years imprisonment.
Uttering Threats to Damage Property or Harm an Animal
- If proceeded summarily: The maximum punishment is up to 2 years less a day imprisonment and/or a $5,000 fine.
- If proceeded by indictment: The maximum punishment is up to 2 years imprisonment.
Uttering Threats - S.264.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada
Summary of the Offence
What is a charge of uttering threats pursuant to the Criminal Code?
Uttering threats is covered under s.264.1 of the Criminal Code, which states:
264.1 (1) Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys, or causes any person to receive a threat:
- (a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;
- (b) to burn, destroy, or damage real or personal property; or
- (c) to kill, poison, or injure an animal or bird that is the property of any person.
Generally, "uttering threats" refers to making statements that express an intention to cause physical harm or death to someone, to damage their property, or to injure an individual's animal.
Severity of the Offence
Uttering threats is considered a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown can choose to proceed either by indictment or summarily, depending on the circumstances of the case.
A summary offence is generally less serious in terms of both the nature of the crime and the severity of the sentence. In contrast, an indictable offence typically involves more serious crimes and more severe sentences.
Examples of the Offence
- Threatening to kill or injure another individual.
- Threatening to harm someone's animal or pet.
- Making threatening gestures or acts toward another person.
- Sending intimidating messages to another individual.
Elements of the Offence
To secure a conviction for uttering threats, the Crown must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, both the actus reus (guilty act) and the mens rea (guilty mind).
The Guilty Act (Actus Reus)
The Crown must prove that the accused knowingly uttered or conveyed a threat. According to the Supreme Court of Canada:
- The words must be examined in the context in which they were spoken or written, considering the person they were addressed to and the circumstances in which they were uttered. The meaning attributed to the words should be that which a reasonable person would give them (R v. McCraw, 1991 CanLII 49 (SCC)).
- The actus reus is established when a reasonable person aware of the circumstances would perceive the words as a threat of death or bodily harm (R. v. ML, 2021 NBCA 27).
The Guilty Mind (Mens Rea)
The Crown must prove that the accused:
- Intended the words to intimidate, or
- Intended for the words to be taken seriously.
For the mens rea element, the words must have been intended to have a threatening effect. Recklessness is not sufficient; specific intent is required. The court may infer the intention from how a reasonable person would interpret the words.
It is not necessary for the recipient to actually feel intimidated or to take the threat seriously. What matters is that the accused intended for the words to have that effect. It is also irrelevant whether the accused actually intended to carry out the threat.
Possible Defences
- A Reasonable Person Would Not Perceive the Utterance as a Threat: If the accused can show that a reasonable person, aware of the circumstances, would not perceive the words as a threat, the actus reus will not be made out
- Lack of Intent: If the accused can prove that they did not intend for the threat to be taken seriously or did not intend to alarm the recipient, the mens rea will not be established. For example, if the words were said as a joke, or under the influence of intoxication or mental disability
- Alternative Meaning: If the words used can be plausibly interpreted in multiple ways or have an alternative meaning, this may not amount to a criminal threat
- Applicable Charter Arguments: The Charter outlines your rights and freedoms. If the police did not respect these rights during your arrest, it could support your defense. Any violations of your Charter rights could result in evidence being excluded
Possible Punishment If Convicted
Uttering Threats to Cause Death or Bodily Harm
- If proceeded summarily: The maximum punishment is up to 2 years less a day imprisonment and/or a $5,000 fine.
- If proceeded by indictment: The maximum punishment is up to 5 years imprisonment.
Uttering Threats to Damage Property or Harm an Animal
- If proceeded summarily: The maximum punishment is up to 2 years less a day imprisonment and/or a $5,000 fine.
- If proceeded by indictment: The maximum punishment is up to 2 years imprisonment.
