Lds Student Resists Professor' "Stomp On Jesus" Object Lesson

[Buzzard]

The law seems to imply 'maybe'.

"There is no legal definition in English law as to what constitutes criminal threatening behaviour, so it is up to the courts to decide on a case by case basis. However, if somebody threatens violence against somebody, then this may be a criminal offense. In most countries it is only an offence if it can be proven the person had the intention and equipment to carry out the threat."

I CA, where I arrested people for a living for a while, the definition of "assault" was when the victim had a reasonable reason to fear that the perpetrator was going to commit battery or other bodily harm, even if no battery or other harm took place. If the person did not have the means to carry out the threat, it was still considered a "terroristic threat", and was a crime, albeit a less serious one.

[urroner]

I CA, where I arrested people for a living for a while, the definition of "assault" was when the victim had a reasonable reason to fear that the perpetrator was going to commit battery or other bodily harm, even if no battery or other harm took place. If the person did not have the means to carry out the threat, it was still considered a "terroristic threat", and was a crime, albeit a less serious one.

Reasonable fear is one thing, realistic fear could be another thing.