At a minimum, a threat's significance would seem to depend on the conjunction of two factors: the threat's credibility (the likelihood that the threatener
can and will execute the threat) and the magnitude of the harm or disadvantage threatened.
were rated specious if there was no evidence to indicate that the threatener
went beyond the statement to action.
However, the offence does not require that the threatener
have any intention to carry out the threat, only that they intend the words to intimidate or be taken seriously.
Threat assessment has two parts: an evaluation of the threat itself; that is, the assessment of the credibility and overall viability of an expression of an intent to do harm, and an evaluation of the threatener
Still, given any probability [lambda] that a genuinely suicidal individual would apply for help, and given that nongenuine threateners
, who constitute a fraction 1-s of the 'market', would always apply for help (as they should not fear the constraint that might be imposed on their ability to execute their threat), (12) the probability that a patient who threatens to commit suicide is indeed suicidal is, by Bayes's Rule, z(s, [lambda]) = [lambda]s/([lambda]s + 1-s).
Guyer & Rapoport, 1970), and the threatener
often has to follow with messages demonstrating a willingness and ability to follow-up on the threat.
in effect says: "I will do something that hurts you more than it helps me unless you pay me not to.
Each player can threaten to choose its second strategy, associated with its opponent's two worst outcomes (1 and 2), if its opponent does not choose its first strategy when the threatener
Both of these cases involve giving something to a threatener
of one sort or another.
The only question in issue was whether an accused's behaviour could be found to be morally involuntary due to threats, even where the threat was not one of immediate harm and the threatener
was not present.
In an additional regression (see Table A2 in Appendix S1, Supporting information), we have tested, using a random-effects probit model, whether being an antisocial threatener
is an indicator of the probability of being an anti-social punisher (i.
1) Information gathering: What does the team know about the threatener
and the targets?