Blackmail

Template:EngCrimLaw

Blackmail is the act of threatening to reveal information about a person unless the threatened party fulfills certain demands. This information is usually of an embarrassing or socially damaging nature.

In a broader sense, blackmail is an offer to refrain from any action which would be legal or normally allowed, and is thus distinguished from extortion.

The word is derived from the word for tribute paid by English and Scottish border dwellers to Border Reivers in return for immunity from raids. This tribute was paid in goods or labour (reditus nigri, or "blackmail"): the opposite is blanche firmes or reditus albi, or "white rent" (denoting payment by silver).

English law

Under s21(1) of the Theft Act 1968 of English law, a person commits the offence:

if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief:

(a) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and

(b) that the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand.

The Act uses the word "menaces" which is considered wider in scope than "threat" and involves a warning of any consequences known to be considered unpleasant by the intended victim. This covers the spectrum from actual or threatened violence to the victim or others, through damage to property, to the disclosure of information. Homosexuals have frequently been subjected to blackmail, even though homosexuality is no longer illegal. ^{[citation needed]} In theory, this is becoming less of a threat as homosexuality, transsexualism and other non-standard sexualities are increasingly acceptable in society. But, in reality, the question is whether the individual is already "out". If their sexuality is already public knowledge, intended victims should not feel threatened by a menace to make another disclosure. The test is based on the victim's state of mind. If he or she is only known within a limited community, a menace to disclose to parents or, possibly, employers, could be considered threatening. Other pretexts for blackmail have included the threat to reveal adultery or criminal acts. But whatever the nature of the menace, it must be direct. Any vague threat to cause "something bad" to happen to some other person, except when certain demands are met, should not affect the mind of an ordinary person.

Commercial blackmail has become more common. This arises when a large commercial organisation receives credible information that it will suffer loss or damage in a particular way unless money is transferred. There are two major areas of threat:

denial of service attacks target corporations that have a major presence on the internet. Disrupting the portal through which on-line sales are made could seriously affect the corporation's revenue flow and demonstrating an ability to orchestrate consistent attacks may well represent a sufficient menace for these purposes; and
introducing poisons or other dangerous chemicals into the products offered for sale in a supermarket or other large store could significantly damage retail sales, or influence a manufacturer or national distributor. For example, a blackmailer threatened Masterfoods Corporation, the company that manufactures Mars Bars in Australia, claiming to have poisoned seven Mars and Snickers bars at random in New South Wales.

(See also protection racket.)

Lawful means

Many debt collectors have been accused of blackmail, but those pursuing legal debts are generally able to justify their threats of repossession because, even though unpleasant to the victim, this is a legitimate use of lawful civil law remedies. By contrast, those chasing illegal debts (a gambling debt, for example, which was not until recently enforceable under English law) who back up their demands with the threat of bodily injury cannot avail themselves of the same defence. There will also be liability even though the debts are legally owed if the menaces are of a criminal nature, e.g. of an assault or more serious violence or criminal damage. The offence criminalises the means adopted by the creditors as the social problem to be deterred, rather than the evasion by the debtors. The creditors are expected to use the standard judicial remedies to recover what is owing.

The maximum sentence under the terms of the Act is life imprisonment; this reflects the gravity of the offence, which can destroy a person's reputation, personal life and livelihood.

If the elements of blackmail are not made out and the defendant has acquired a vehicle, a charge under s12 Act 1968 may be preferred, see TWOC.

References

Allen, Michael. Textbook on Criminal Law. Oxford University Press: Oxford. (2005) ISBN 0-19-927918-7.
Criminal Law Revision Committee. 8th Report. Theft and Related Offences. Cmnd. 2977
Griew, Edward. Theft Acts 1968 & 1978, Sweet & Maxwell: London. ISBN 0-421-19960-1
Ormerod, David. Smith and Hogan Criminal Law, LexisNexis: London. (2005) ISBN 0-406-97730-5
Smith, J. C. Law of Theft, LexisNexis: London. (1997) ISBN 0-406-89545-7