Can a Text or Social Media Post Lead to Terroristic Threats Charges in New Jersey?

You sent a text while you were angry. Maybe it was part of an argument that had been going back and forth for hours. Maybe you posted something on social media, sent a direct message, or wrote something in a group chat that someone else later showed to police.

Now, what you wrote is being described as a threat.

Can a text message or social media post really lead to a terroristic threats charge in New Jersey?

Yes. A threatening communication does not have to be made face-to-face or spoken aloud for police to investigate it as a possible criminal offense. Text messages, direct messages, social media posts, and other electronic communications can become evidence in a terroristic threats case.

But an angry or disturbing message does not automatically establish a terroristic threats offense. The words used, the circumstances surrounding the communication, how the message would reasonably be understood in context, and the sender’s state of mind can all matter.

What Does New Jersey Consider a Terroristic Threat?

New Jersey’s terroristic threats statute covers more than one type of threatening conduct.

Under one part of the law, a person can face a terroristic threats charge for threatening to commit a crime of violence with the purpose of terrorizing another person, causing an evacuation or serious public inconvenience, or consciously disregarding a substantial risk that the threat will cause that terror or inconvenience.

Another part of the statute addresses threats to kill made with the purpose of putting another person in imminent fear of death under circumstances that reasonably cause the person to believe the threat is immediate and likely to be carried out.

Both forms of terroristic threats described above are ordinarily third-degree crimes. Subsection (a) also provides that a violation committed during a declared national, State, or county emergency is a second-degree crime. In a 2025 decision, however, the New Jersey Appellate Division held that there must be a rational relationship between the threat and the underlying emergency when the State seeks to apply that enhancement.

The important point for a text or social media case is that the analysis goes beyond whether the words sounded angry or alarming when viewed by themselves.

Does It Matter If You Never Intended to Carry Out the Threat?

Yes, the sender’s state of mind matters. But saying, “I never planned to do it,” does not necessarily resolve the legal question.

In State v. Fair, the New Jersey Supreme Court considered a terroristic threats prosecution involving threatening statements and Facebook posts under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-3(a). The Court explained that a true-threat prosecution under subsection (a) requires consideration of both the person’s state of mind and how the communication would be understood when viewed objectively.

When subsection (a) is based on recklessness, the standard requires more than careless or poorly chosen words. In a true-threat prosecution, the State must establish that the person consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the threat would terrorize another person, and that disregarding the risk amounted to a gross deviation from what a reasonable person in the defendant’s situation would do.

The analysis also has an objective component. The State must establish that a reasonable person similarly situated to the recipient would have viewed the communication as threatening violence.

That makes context important.

A message sent during an escalating dispute does not exist in isolation. Prior interactions between the people involved, the language used, what was said immediately before and afterward, and other surrounding conduct can all affect how the communication is evaluated.

Can Something Said as a Joke Still Cause a Criminal Investigation?

Yes.

A sender’s claim that a message was a joke does not necessarily prevent police from investigating it. At the same time, describing something as a threat does not automatically make it a criminally punishable true threat.

New Jersey law distinguishes true threats of violence from statements made in jest, angry hyperbole, and other speech that does not amount to a true threat when considered in context. Whether something the sender describes as a joke falls on one side of that line or the other depends on the circumstances and the applicable legal standard.

That distinction can become particularly difficult with digital communication. A text message does not capture a person’s tone of voice. A screenshot may capture only one portion of a longer conversation. A social media post can also reach people who do not know what happened before it was written.

That is why the surrounding context can matter.

What Evidence Can Police Use in a Text or Social Media Threat Case?

The message itself may be only part of the evidence.

Depending on the circumstances, investigators and prosecutors can examine:

• The exact language used
• Messages sent before and after the alleged threat
• Prior communications between the people involved
• Screenshots, saved texts, direct messages, or social media posts
• Whether the communication referred to a particular person, location, weapon, or planned act
• What the recipient knew about the sender when the communication was received
• Statements made to police
• Witness accounts
• Conduct before or after the communication

A single screenshot can capture only part of a conversation. Reviewing the surrounding messages and circumstances can provide additional context for what was communicated and what the State can prove.

That does not mean context will necessarily defeat a charge. It means the surrounding evidence can matter when evaluating the accusation.

What If You Deleted the Message or Post?

Deleting a message does not necessarily make it disappear.

The recipient could already have screenshots or saved copies. Other people in a group conversation could also have copies, and records can remain on devices or accounts. Police can also seek electronic evidence from devices or accounts through lawful investigative methods.

Do not contact the other person to ask them to delete messages, change what they told police, or withdraw an accusation. Additional communications can themselves become part of the investigation.

If police are investigating a threatening communication, do not alter or delete potential evidence in an attempt to make the situation disappear. Preserve the messages and other information you still have so they can be reviewed with your lawyer.

Should You Explain to Police What You Really Meant?

When you know a message has been misunderstood, the instinct to explain can be strong.

You may want to tell police that you were angry, joking, exaggerating, quoting someone else, or never intended to hurt anybody. But that explanation becomes another statement investigators can evaluate alongside the original communication.

Police could already have screenshots, statements from the recipient, or other information you have not seen. Without knowing the full scope of the investigation, it can be difficult to know how your explanation will affect the case.

When Nancianne Aydelotte, Esq. reviews a case involving an alleged threat, she can examine the message itself, the surrounding conversation, what happened before and afterward, and the evidence police are relying on before advising a client about how to respond.

If police want to question you about a text, direct message, or social media post, speaking with a criminal defense lawyer before answering can help you understand the investigation and your rights.

Accused of Making a Threat in South or Central Jersey? Aydelotte Law Can Review What Happened

A text, direct message, or social media post can become part of a criminal investigation, but its meaning cannot be separated from the surrounding circumstances and the legal requirements of the charge.

At Aydelotte Law, LLC, we represent people facing criminal accusations in Camden County and throughout South and Central Jersey. We can review the communication, the surrounding evidence, what was said to police, and the circumstances that led to the investigation or charge.

An accusation does not determine what the State can ultimately prove.

If a text, direct message, social media post, or other communication has led to a police investigation or terroristic threats charge, contact Aydelotte Law, LLC to discuss what happened and understand the next steps.

Disclaimer: Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances. The articles on this blog are for informational purposes only and are no substitute for legal advice or an attorney-client relationship. If you are seeking legal advice, please contact our law firm directly.