Specific Intent

Menacing requires specific intent to cause another person bodily harm or to cause the threat of bodily harm. It is therefore important to establish what is on the defendant=s mind at the time of the alleged crime. In many states, assault is divided between simple and aggravated assault. The difference being that aggravated assault requires intent from the offender at the moment of the crime. During a criminal trial, the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove that the defendant intended to either cause harm or cause the apprehension of physical harm.

Specific Intent to Frighten

If the offender threatens to cause bodily harm, the offender could be convicted of menacing provided that it is shown that his intent was to frighten the victim. Fright under the legal definition is considered harmful to the victim.

Specific Intent to do Bodily Harm

If the assailant attempts to cause the victim immediate bodily harm, the offender may be convicted of menacing if it is shown that he intended to cause general harm. It is not necessary that the defendant wanted to create specific harm, but only that he wanted to create some kind of bodily harm. It is often apparent from the nature of the act what the offender=s intentions were. If their actions at the time are proven to be harmful by nature, then it is difficult to later back out, and claim that they intended no harm. A threat that involves bodily harm unless a demand is complied with also constitutes specific intent to do bodily harm because the harm is intended, but merely conditional against an unlawful demand.