Real threats cases. Real results.
Threats charges in Victoria cover a range of distinct offences, from state-based charges under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) through to Commonwealth charges where the threat is made using a phone, email or social media. The six case studies on this page span that range and show how these matters are defended and what outcomes are achievable.
The Legal Framework
The two most common state threats offences are found in sections 20 and 21 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). Threats to kill under section 20 carries a maximum of 10 years imprisonment. Threats to inflict serious injury under section 21 carries a maximum of 5 years imprisonment. Both offences require proof that the accused made the threat without lawful excuse and either intended the other person to fear the threat would be carried out, or was reckless as to whether they would. The prosecution does not need to prove the accused intended to actually carry out the threat, only that they intended or were reckless as to causing fear.
Where a threat is made using a carriage service, including phone, email, text message or social media, a separate Commonwealth charge arises under section 474.17 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), which carries a maximum of 5 years imprisonment. This charge frequently appears alongside state-based threat offences in the same brief.
Threats charges commonly arise in the context of relationship breakdowns, family conflict, and situations of acute emotional distress. They are frequently accompanied by other charges including assault, stalking, criminal damage and intervention order breaches. The way the broader charge set is framed, and what can be negotiated or withdrawn before a plea, often shapes the outcome as much as the sentencing hearing itself.
What These Cases Turn On
A common issue across threats matters is whether the words or conduct alleged actually constituted a threat within the legal definition, and whether the accused had the requisite intent or recklessness. Words spoken in anger, in a domestic context, or under significant emotional pressure do not automatically satisfy the legal elements, and these distinctions can be significant. Where the prosecution cannot establish all elements beyond reasonable doubt, charges can be withdrawn or defended.
Where charges proceed, diversion under section 59 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) may be available for eligible first-time offenders, allowing a matter to be resolved without a finding of guilt. Several of the case studies below resulted in diversion, illustrating that a person charged with a threats offence is not inevitably facing a conviction.
The case studies below are drawn from real matters we have defended. The charges, courts and outcomes have not been altered. Client details have been changed to protect privacy. They are published to give an honest indication of how these matters proceed and what results are achievable, not to suggest that every case on similar charges will produce the same outcome.
—
If you have been charged with a threat offence and need advice or representation, call 03 9670 5111 or fill out the form to the right of this page to contact one of our experienced lawyers.
