An angry remark is not automatically a criminal threat. When you are suspected of making a threat, what matters is the content of the statement, the circumstances in which it was made, the way in which the other person learned of it and the required intent. WhatsApp messages, spoken words, gestures and conduct can all play a role. Saying that it was only a joke does not in itself resolve the legal question.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: Verdacht van bedreiging: wanneer een uitlating strafbaar is
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Tehdit şüphesi: bir söz ne zaman suç oluşturur?
Have you been invited for questioning about a threat? Keep the complete communication and discuss the suspicion with a lawyer before you respond on the substance. Do not contact the complainant to agree on a statement or to have a police report withdrawn. That can cause new problems and influence the investigation. Even a well-meant explanation can be misunderstood if a contact ban is in place.
In this article, you can read how a threat is assessed, what significance digital evidence has and what you can do if you are accused of making a threat. For your specific case, you can turn to a criminal defence lawyer at Arslan Advocaten.
Which threats fall under criminal law?
Article 285 of the Dutch Criminal Code (Sr) makes certain threats a criminal offence. These include, among others, threatening to kill, to cause grievous bodily harm, to commit arson and other serious offences listed in the law. Not every unpleasant warning falls under that provision. Telling someone that you will instruct a lawyer, for example, is something different from threatening serious physical violence.
The assessment is not made using a fixed list of forbidden words. The same words can mean something different in different situations. A statement made during an escalating argument, combined with showing an object, may be assessed differently from a single sentence in a clearly fictional context. Earlier confrontations and the relationship between those involved may also be significant.
The statutory maximum for the basic form of threat is three years’ imprisonment or a fine of the fifth category. That maximum does not tell you what sentence to expect in your case. There are special and aggravated forms, while the evidence, seriousness, previous convictions and personal circumstances influence the actual outcome. The current definition of the offence is in Article 285 Sr.
Not just words, but the full context
A threat case often begins with a short passage from a police report. A careful assessment requires more. What happened just before the words were spoken? How far apart were the people involved? Were there gestures? Could the other person know that a remark was meant differently? Was a message sent directly or passed on later by someone else?
Your lawyer examines the statement together with the evidence about those circumstances. An important question is whether, by its nature and context, the threat could give rise to a reasonable fear of the serious violence announced. That is not the same as asking only whether the complainant states that they were afraid. Actual fear is not simply a separate requirement that replaces the full assessment.
Conversely, the absence of visible panic is not conclusive proof that no threat took place. People react differently to tension. A calm reaction can go hand in hand with a serious threat. The defence should therefore not rely on a single observation, but on a coherent explanation of words, conduct, circumstances and legal requirements.
Did you have to intend to carry out the threat?
For a criminal threat, it does not have to be established that you actually wanted to carry out the violence announced. Someone can deliberately frighten another person without having a worked-out plan for violence. Saying that you would never really do anything is therefore not automatically enough for an acquittal.
The required intent must, however, be examined. It concerns the relevant threatening meaning and the threat reaching the person threatened, with the precise charge and circumstances being important. Conditional intent may play a role: consciously accepting a considerable chance is legally something different from an unintended consequence of which you were entirely unaware.
An impulsive reaction, alcohol use or a joke can provide context, but is not a general exemption. Discuss with your lawyer what you actually meant, knew and perceived. Also share the information that seems unfavourable. Only with a complete picture can it be assessed whether a defence based on lack of intent is tenable and whether other evidence supports or contradicts that defence.
Threats via WhatsApp, social media or a voice message
With digital threats, more than one screenshot is often at stake. An image of a message may lack relevant information: earlier messages, replies, times, deleted parts, the identity of the user and whether the message was actually sent. So ask for attention to be paid to the full context and the reliability of the available material.
Keep lawfully available conversations in their original form. If necessary, make an export for your lawyer and note which phone or account you used. Also keep voice messages, attachments and the order of a conversation. Do not alter messages, manipulate accounts or ask others to delete communications. That can damage your defence and raise new questions.
If you dispute that you sent the message, specific information is important. Who had access to the account? Was the phone lost? Did you previously report misuse? A general statement that everyone knows your password is less useful than verifiable information. Your lawyer can assess which further investigation into origin or authenticity is relevant and feasible.
Indirect threats and messages in a group
A threat does not always have to be addressed directly to the intended person. A statement made to a third party may also be relevant in certain circumstances. Among other things, it is then examined whether the message reached the person threatened and what the suspect knew or consciously accepted about it being passed on.
In group chats, identity and the intended addressee can be unclear. Is the message about a specific, recognisable person, an undefined group or an invented scenario? Who could see the conversation and which shared history was known? Those questions help to reconstruct the meaning of a statement without taking the words out of their setting.
Do not approach participants yourself to align their recollections. Give names and relevant contact details to your lawyer, who can consider whether witnesses need to be examined. A witness must be able to give their own statement. The aim is to preserve existing information, not to organise a shared story put together after the event.
Invited for a police interview about a threat
An invitation to an interview is a moment to prepare your defence. Ask whether you will be questioned as a suspect, broadly what the suspicion concerns and when the interview will take place. Discuss in good time whether you want legal assistance during the interview. The police do not have to give you the full file in advance, but your lawyer can assess what information is available and what is missing.
As a suspect, you have the right to remain silent. You are not obliged to give an immediate explanation of the incident to show that you have done nothing wrong. At the same time, remaining silent is not a standard solution for every case. Sometimes verifiable exculpatory information is actually important. The choice of when and how to make a statement is best made after discussing the suspicion and the available evidence.
Read an official police report carefully before signing it. Ask for corrections if words, times or intentions have been recorded incorrectly. If there are language difficulties, communication must be understandable and an interpreter may be needed. You can find more about the first contact with the police in our explanation of the police summons letter and your rights.
Which documents help your defence?
Start with the documents you actually have: the invitation, the police report if available, procedural documents, messages and any decisions imposing conditions. Draw up a chronological summary for your lawyer. Keep facts and interpretations separate. For example, first write down which words you read and only then how you understood those words.
| Subject | Possibly relevant material |
|---|---|
| Exact wording | Complete message thread or saved voice message |
| Context | Earlier communication and timeline of the confrontation |
| Identity of the sender | Account details and specific indications of access or misuse |
| Conduct at the scene | Camera footage and independent witnesses |
| Restrictions imposed | Written contact ban or other decision |
| Personal circumstances | Employment details and relevant information about support or supervision |
Have any camera footage secured quickly through an appropriate, lawful route. Retention periods can be short. Do not ask an organisation to provide data to which you are not entitled, but discuss with your lawyer whether a request for preservation or further investigation is needed. That can be more important than arguing months later about footage that no longer exists.
Withdrawing a police report and contact with the complainant
A common misunderstanding is that a threat case stops as soon as the complainant no longer wants you to be prosecuted. In the ordinary threat offence under Article 285 Sr, the Public Prosecution Service (OM) decides on prosecution. A change in the complainant’s attitude may be relevant, but does not automatically undo the earlier police report or other evidence.
So do not ask the complainant to make an untrue statement or to leave out relevant information. Repeatedly pressing for a conversation may also be experienced as distressing and lead to new accusations. If a contact ban, behavioural order or condition of suspension applies, you must comply with its precise wording. That may also cover indirect contact through family or social media.
If you want to apologise, make good any damage or explore whether mediation is possible, discuss this with your lawyer first. A carefully guided route can help prevent misunderstandings and breaches of conditions. Mediation is voluntary and does not automatically end a criminal case. An agreement is therefore no guarantee that the OM will refrain from prosecution.
Which decisions and penalties are possible?
After the investigation, the OM may dismiss the case, choose an appropriate out-of-court disposal or summon you to court. Which route is available and appropriate depends on the case. If a punishment order is imposed, do not treat it as an ordinary administrative fine. The decision contains a criminal finding of guilt and calls for a deliberate choice.
If you disagree with a punishment order, have the time limit for lodging an objection (verzet) and the consequences of payment checked straight away. Paying while you still want to contest the accusation can limit your options. Our explanation of objecting to a punishment order discusses that decision in more detail.
Before the criminal court, possible outcomes include acquittal, discharge from further prosecution or a conviction. Any penalty depends on the proven facts, seriousness, repetition and personal circumstances. A first suspicion does not automatically mean a dismissal; nor does a statutory maximum mean that the maximum penalty is usual. Promises of a fixed outcome do not fit an individual criminal case.
Criminal record, VOG and consequences for your work
A threat case can have consequences in addition to any penalty. Think of judicial records, an application for a certificate of conduct (VOG), a security job or an employment relationship in which trust is central. Those consequences are not the same in every case. A punishment order may also be relevant, while a record does not automatically lead to a VOG being refused.
For a VOG, Justis (the screening authority of the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security) looks at the specific purpose of the screening and the applicable assessment rules. The passage of time, the nature of the offences and your circumstances may be relevant. So tell your lawyer in good time if a course, licence or job depends on a VOG. See also applying for a VOG with a criminal record.
Do not let concerns about work become a reason to withhold facts from your own lawyer. Instead, discuss what interests are at stake. This allows the defence to map out both the evidential position and any consequences carefully. Whether and what you must report to an employer may require separate employment law advice.
Threats at work and towards a public official
A suspicion can also arise after a conflict with a colleague, manager, care worker or public official. The workplace does not automatically give a statement a different legal meaning, but the context and the capacity of the person threatened may be relevant. Article 285 also contains special aggravating provisions for certain persons and circumstances. So have the specific charge checked.
In a workplace conflict, several accounts of the same event may exist. An internal report, a conversation with HR and a police statement are not always identical. Differences must be examined on their merits: is it a summary, a recollection added later or a material contradiction? Collect the existing documents for your lawyer and do not ask colleagues to adjust their account to your version.
The consequences for your employment also deserve a separate assessment. An employer may take measures while the criminal case is still ongoing. What information you must provide and how you respond to an internal investigation depend on your position and the specific requests. Where necessary, have your responses under criminal law and employment law coordinated, so that a quick email does not unexpectedly contain an incorrect admission.
If the statement concerned a lawyer, civil servant or journalist, not only the job title must be established, but also the statutory connection with the performance of that role. An aggravating circumstance may not be assumed solely because someone happens to have a particular profession. Your lawyer can check what facts the OM alleges in this regard and what evidence is available for them.
Frequently asked questions about being suspected of making a threat
Is an angry remark always a criminal offence?
No. The words must be assessed together with the circumstances against the statutory requirements. Insult, an unpleasant warning and a threat are different concepts. A crude remark may be assessed differently in law from a specific threat of serious violence.
Can a joke still count as a threat?
Yes, it can. Your own explanation is relevant but not decisive. What matters includes whether the joke was recognisable as such, the context and the required intent. A joking intention claimed after the event does not automatically remove the meaning of earlier conduct.
Is one WhatsApp message enough for a criminal case?
A single message can give rise to an investigation. For a conviction, the court must find all the requirements proven on the basis of lawful evidence. The content, origin, context and any additional evidence therefore remain important.
Must the complainant actually have been afraid?
Actual fear is not the only yardstick. The nature and circumstances of the statement and the possibility of reasonable fear play a central role. A statement by the complainant must therefore be assessed together with the other information.
Does the case stop if we make up?
Not automatically. The OM can continue with the case. Reparation or reconciliation may, however, be relevant to the assessment and the way the case is dealt with. Do not make contact if conditions prohibit it, and have any restorative steps carefully guided.
Can I get a lawyer through subsidised legal aid?
That depends on the applicable rules and your situation. Not every case or every interview is automatically free of charge. Discuss the costs and options for legal assistance in advance, so that you know which arrangements apply.
Having your threat case assessed
Have you received a summons to appear, a punishment order or a court summons? Contact Arslan Advocaten and keep the complete communication. We will discuss which statement you are accused of, what context is missing and which next step suits your case. Timely preparation helps you present your position carefully and with verifiable information.
Sources
Editorial team and responsible lawyer
Editorial team: Arslan Advocaten. Responsible lawyer for criminal law: Melanie Schulpen.
Last editorially updated: 22 September 2026. This general information is no substitute for an assessment of your own file.
