The crime of “death threats” is a special type of assault against the person, which the legislator considers a serious crime. It is special, first, because the person threatened is only endangered, but without actual harm or attempted harm, and second, because in practice it is extremely difficult to distinguish between a real threat of murder and the use of common vocabulary by the perpetrator.
In fact, this difficulty stems mainly from the fact that the phrase “I’ll kill you!” and its derivatives are used in everyday speech both to make a real threat of murder and to express anger, amazement, surprise, and even happiness.
It is precisely for this reason that both legislation and judicial practice establish clearly distinguishable criteria for assessing when an act constitutes a threat of murder and when it constitutes the use of ordinary vocabulary.
Cases from practice involving charges of threats to murder
The first case of death threats concerns a property dispute between two brothers.
Ivaylo and Daniel* are joint owners of equal shares in a villa, which they inherited after the death of their parents. Ivaylo claimed that he alone should use the property, so he changed the lock and consistently denied Daniel access to it.
During his latest unsuccessful attempt to gain access to the villa, an angry Daniel began kicking the front door and trying to break the lock with a crowbar. Ivaylo and his wife stood by, hurling insults and curses at him, which further enraged him. He threw down the crowbar, approached his brother, grabbed him by the collar, pushed him against the wall, shook him several times, and said, “I’ll kill you!” He then let go of him and resumed his attempts to break down the door.
For this act, Daniel was given a six-month suspended prison sentence. However, the higher court ultimately acquitted him, considering that his words did not constitute a threat of murder within the meaning of the Criminal Code, but were merely an expression of anger resulting from Ivaylo’s unlawful actions.
The second case of death threats concerns a road rage incident between two motor vehicle drivers.
While driving on a busy boulevard in the capital, Mikhail’s* car was “cut off” by a black SUV with tinted windows. Mikhail honked his horn continuously. Without taking any further action regarding the incident, he continued driving in the same direction as the SUV. Mikhail’s wife Diana was with him.
At about 500 m in the direction of their movement, the black jeep is stopped by a red light at the traffic light system. Mikhail stops parallel to it, his goal being only to wait for the green light at the traffic lights, so that he can continue his journey. Probably thinking that Mikhail has intention to him take into account the violation committed, the driver of the black jeep gets out of it, approaches the other car, opens the door and points a gun at Mikhail and Diana.
Svetoslav was given a suspended sentence of one year’s imprisonment.
* Names have been changed to protect client confidentiality.
Essence and elements of the crime of “threat of murder”
According to the provisions of the Criminal Code, three essential elements must be established for the crime in question to have been committed.
Firstly, there must be a demonstrated or stated intention to forcibly take the life of one or more persons.
Such intent may be manifested through specific factual actions, e.g., pointing a gun, knife, etc.
The declaration of intent to take a life by force is made verbally and may take many forms. These may include uttering words such as “I will kill you,” “I will bury you,” “I will bury you alive,” “I will wipe you out,” “You will cease to live/exist/breathe,” and many others.
Important! For a crime to have been committed, it is not necessary for the person who utters the words or performs the actions that can be interpreted as a threat of murder to actually have the intention to carry it out. Nor is it necessary for them to have begun to carry it out. Furthermore, if the threat has been carried out but not completed for one reason or another (i.e., the victim’s life has not been taken by force), it will be considered attempted murder rather than a threat of murder.
The second element that must be proven in order to establish that a threat of murder has been made concerns the nature, degree, and intensity of the threat, i.e., whether it is objectively capable of causing reasonable fear in the threatened person that it may be carried out.
The requirement for objective suitability of the threat means that in order for there to be grounds for seeking criminal liability from the perpetrator, it is not necessary for the victim to have actually been frightened. This requirement also means that even if the person against whom the threat is directed was actually frightened due to their personal mental and psychological characteristics, this does not necessarily mean that a crime has been committed. Therefore, the objective suitability of any threat is assessed in light of the circumstances of each specific case.
Thus, for example, in the case described above concerning the conflict between Ivaylo and Daniel, the court ruled that Daniel’s words “I’ll kill you!” were not sufficient to cause reasonable fear that the threat would be carried out, as it was established beyond doubt in the case that before turning on his brother, the defendant threw away the potential weapon (a crowbar) with which he could have carried out the threat, and after uttering the words, he let go of his brother and again attempted to break down the door of the villa. The court interprets Daniel’s actions as an expression of intense anger, but not as a threat of murder.
On the contrary, Svetoslav was found guilty of making threats to commit murder with a gun, since pointing a gun (unless it is obvious that this gun is, for example, a toy) always causes reasonable fear that the trigger will be pulled.
Finally, the third element requires that the perpetrator be aware of the content of the threat and aim to cause the victim to have a well-founded fear that it will be carried out. In other words, they must be aware that they are threatening to forcibly take the life of the person against whom the threat is directed and must intend to do so.
Thus, the absence of a threat to forcibly take the life of the victim or the objective likelihood of such a threat causing reasonable fear of its execution, as well as the perpetrator’s lack of awareness of its nature, lead to the absence of a crime, or to an acquittal.
Penalties and defense against charges of death threats and special rules
As mentioned above, making a death threat is a serious crime under the Criminal Code. It is punishable by imprisonment of up to six years.
This means that when committing such a crime, it is not possible to be exempted from criminal liability by imposing an administrative penalty. However, in the case of multiple or exceptional mitigating circumstances (e.g., serious unlawful conduct on the part of the victim), the sentence of imprisonment may be replaced by probation. It is also possible to obtain a suspended sentence if the conditions for this are met and a well-constructed line of defense is presented.
Of course, in all cases it is possible for an acquittal to be handed down.
Whether this is possible is assessed for each specific case after a detailed and thorough analysis of the circumstances surrounding it, as well as after applying the criteria established in judicial practice. These criteria include assessing whether it is a threat of murder, the use of common vocabulary by the perpetrator, or a “quarrel/scandal/argument.” In the latter case, the established opinion of the courts in the country is that the actions with which the threat is manifested are taken spontaneously, and the threatening words are the result of an impulse, i.e. they are a consequence of the perpetrator’s emotional state and not of his desire to cause fear of the threat being carried out.
IMPORTANT! In the case of a violated suspended sentence from a previous conviction for a crime, having a well-developed line of defense to get an acquittal or a punishment other than imprisonment is really important to avoid the activation of the suspended sentence and the imposition of its effective serving in prison or a prison dormitory.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
You can find more interesting topics related to defense against criminal charges in the section “Criminal Law”.
Sole proprietorship law firm company “Silvia Petkova” provides qualified legal assistance in criminal cases, including brought charges for threatening to kill.
Do you need a good criminal lawyer? Get in touch with us!
Contact:
Working hours: Monday to Friday from 10:00 to 18:00 .
Address: Sofia, 2 Tri Ushi St., floor 3
tel. 0885 47 77 57
email: office@petkovalegal.com
or
Phone consultations and in-office consultations are conducted by appointment only. In cases of police or prosecutor detention, as well as in cases of detention in custody, the law firm ensures priority consideration of the case with immediate response and without a pre-scheduled appointment.