What Are Terroristic Threat Charges in Georgia (OCGA 16-11-37)?

Legal Elements and Actions That Constitute a Terroristic Threat in Georgia

OCGA 16-11-37 defines the specific requirements the State must prove in court to secure a conviction for a terroristic threat. Georgia prosecutors must present evidence for each element, rather than relying on assumptions. Understanding these elements can help identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s case and inform your defense strategy.

Georgia law requires three core elements for a terroristic threat:

1. A communication that contains a qualifying threat: The State must demonstrate that a statement was made threatening injury, property damage, or the release of a harmful or hazardous substance. This can include spoken words, texts, emails, direct messages, social media posts, voicemails, or any other digital communication. The law does not require the threat to be detailed; brief comments can lead to prosecution if they imply harm.
2. Intent connected to the communication: Prosecutors must prove the person intended to terrorize, force an evacuation, or create serious public inconvenience. Intent can be demonstrated through the words used, the history between the parties, or the surrounding circumstances. If clear intent cannot be proven, prosecutors might argue reckless disregard, meaning the person acted without regard for how the threat would be perceived or its potential impact.
3. A threat that appears credible to a reasonable person: Georgia courts determine whether an average person would perceive the statement as serious. This standard prevents convictions based on jokes, impulsive outbursts, or statements without a genuine indication of danger. Courts consider factors such as tone, context, delivery method, and the listener’s reaction. A threat must involve more than mere alarm; it must genuinely provoke fear or disruption.

What Does Not Qualify as a Terroristic Threat

Georgia law does not criminalize every upsetting or emotional statement. Courts often dismiss charges based on:

• Harsh language or profanity is used during an argument.
• Jokes that are poorly received but do not imply genuine harm.
• Sarcasm or exaggerated statements made out of frustration.
• Comments lacking any intent to frighten or disrupt.
• Words that appear threatening only when taken out of context.

Georgia courts apply a “true threat” standard. A statement must be severe enough to instill fear or cause public disturbance genuinely. If the words merely reflect anger rather than an intent to harm, or if the listener understood them as part of a heated exchange, they typically do not meet the legal threshold for a terroristic threat.

Situations That Commonly Lead to Charges

Charges for terroristic threats often stem from misunderstandings or emotionally charged situations. Common scenarios include:

• Domestic disputes where one party alleges a threat of harm.
• Others interpret social media posts as violent or credible.
• Statements directed at schools, workplaces, or government offices.
• Messages suggesting bombs, chemicals, or other dangerous substances.
• Comments made under the influence of alcohol that recipients take seriously.
• Group chats or online arguments where tone and intent are ambiguous.
• Threats are made during road rage incidents or heated confrontations.

These situations can escalate rapidly because the listener’s reaction often initiates an investigation. If the recipient reports fear or if a disruption occurs, such as a school lockdown or workplace evacuation, law enforcement may classify the statement as a terroristic threat, even if the speaker had no actual intent to cause harm.