Minor Threat Offences Defence Lawyers (Art. 171 CP)

The petty offence of threats (Art. 171.7 CP) and the aggravated minor threat of gender violence (Art. 171.4 CP) configure the least serious extreme of the threats criminal type but entail relevant legal consequences. The protected legal interest is the freedom and psychic tranquility of the victim against the promise of a future evil that, without reaching the gravity of the basic type of Art. 169 CP, disturbs their personal security. Consolidated Supreme Court case-law has established the differentiating criteria: the classification of the threat as minor or serious depends on the entity of the announced evil (injuries, death, minor patrimonial damages), the seriousness and credibility of the promise according to context, and the effective capacity of the author to execute it. The frontier between minor threat and verbal challenge without criminal entity is one of the most casuistic points of Criminal Law.

Methods of Commission

The commissive modalities are extraordinarily varied and have evolved with social context. Verbal in-person threats in neighborhood disputes, family conflicts, traffic incidents or labour disagreements are the most frequent. Written and telematic threats through WhatsApp, Telegram, SMS, social networks, emails or online forums configure a growing modality with immediate documentary evidence but challenges in digital authorship attribution. Gestural threats (throat-cutting gestures, threatening signs, exhibition of weapons not apt to produce serious injury) can integrate the type when context endows them with effective intimidating capacity. Threats of personal information dissemination without concrete patrimonial demand (which with patrimonial demand would integrate blackmail of Art. 171.2 CP) configure minor threat. The threat conditioned to compliance with non-patrimonial demands (ceasing to report, withdrawing complaint, abandoning work) when lacking patrimonial relevance integrates specific modality.

Penalties and Consequences

The penalties and consequences are graduated according to context and victim's condition. The generic petty threats offence (Art. 171.7 CP) is punished with 1 to 3 months' fine with daily quotas of €2 to €400 (Art. 50.4 CP). The minor threat of gender violence (Art. 171.4 CP), when committed by man against woman who is or has been his spouse or person linked by similar affective relationship, raises the penalty to 6 months to 1 year of prison or community service of 31 to 80 days, plus deprivation of weapon-possession and -carrying rights and, where applicable, disqualification from exercising parental authority. A minor threat against an especially vulnerable person living with the offender carries the same penalty (Art. 171.4 CP, second paragraph), imposed in its upper half where the act takes place in front of minors, in the shared home or the victim's home, or in breach of a penalty or measure (Art. 171.5 CP, last paragraph). Accessory consequences include prohibition of approach to the victim (Art. 48 CP), criminal records cancelled 6 months after the penalty is extinguished if it is a minor penalty, or 2 years if it is a prison term of up to 12 months (Art. 136 CP), civil liability for moral damages and, in gender violence, registration in the Central Convicts Registry with effects for protection orders.

Defence Strategy

Technical defence is built on four axes. First, the challenge of the typical entity of the threat: the criminal type requires credible and serious promise of future evil; generic anger expressions, colloquial outlets without specification of announced evil, verbal challenges typical of heated disputes but without effective intimidating capacity do not integrate the type. Second, the absence of credibility of the threat: when context excludes the real possibility of execution (physical incapacity, geographic distance, absence of means), the threat may be degraded to non-criminal infraction or configure another figure (insults, administrative infractions). Third, the challenge of authorship attribution: especially in telematic threats, proof of who effectively sent messages requires computer forensic analysis ruling out hacked accounts, identity impersonation or shared devices. Fourth, in gender violence, the distinction of relational context: couple discussions without dominance element, frustration manifestations without intimidating purpose, isolated conflict episodes not integrating violence pattern, can exclude the specific aggravation of Art. 171.4 CP.

Current Forensic Practice

In current forensic practice, minor-threats proceedings are mostly processed through petty offence trial (Arts. 962-973 Criminal Procedure Act) before the Investigation Sections, with trial held within short deadlines. In gender violence scenarios, jurisdiction is attributed to the Violence against Women Sections of the Tribunal de Instancia with accelerated procedures under LO 1/2004 of Comprehensive Protection Measures against Gender Violence. Organic Law 8/2021 on integral protection of childhood, Organic Law 10/2022 on sexual freedom, and Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency have expanded guarantees to victims, although none of them has amended Art. 171 CP. At Alonso Sala, our criminal lawyers specialized in minor threats intervene both in defence of the accused and in private prosecution of victims. As defenders, we articulate defences based on challenge of typical entity, absence of credibility, digital attribution or negotiation of intra-procedural mediations avoiding conviction. As private prosecution, we request precautionary measures when appropriate, articulate psychological expert reports on emotional damage, and build civil-reparation strategies. The intervention must be proportionate to the real entity of the conflict, avoiding both excessive criminalization of minor disputes and undervaluation of threats with escalating capacity.