• Summary
• Downloads
• Explanatory Notes
• Related Information
• Past Releases

THREATENED ASSAULT ^{Endnote 1}

WHAT IS THREATENED ASSAULT?

For this survey, threatened assault is defined as a verbal and/or physical threat to inflict physical harm, where the person being threatened believed the threat was able and likely to be carried out. Threatened assault may occur face-to-face or via non face-to-face methods (such as email).

Threatened assault includes:

• any threat or attempt to strike the person which could cause pain
• situations where a gun was left in an obvious place (including fake or toy guns where the victim thought it was real) or where the person knew the perpetrator had access to a gun
• incidents where the person was threatened in their line of work.

• any incident of name calling or swearing which did not involve a physical threat
• threats that resulted in an actual assault (the latter are counted under the offence category of physical assault).

Face-to-face threatened assault includes any verbal and/or physical threat, made in person, to inflict physical harm where the person being threatened believed the threat was able and likely to be carried out. It excludes any incident where the victim did not encounter the offender in person (e.g. via telephone, text message, e-mail, in writing or through social media).

WHO EXPERIENCED FACE-TO-FACE THREATENED ASSAULT IN THE 12 MONTHS PRIOR TO INTERVIEW IN 2013-14? (Table 12)

In the 12 months prior to interview, 494,200 Australians aged 15 years and over experienced face-to-face threatened assault (2.7% of the population).

Males were more likely to experience this crime type than females (3.0% of males compared to 2.4% of females).

The victimisation rate for face-to-face threatened assault was lower for married persons (1.9%) than for unmarried persons (3.8%).

People who were unemployed were more likely to have experienced face-to-face threatened assault than persons who were employed (7% compared with 3%).

People living outside capital cities were more likely to have experienced face-to-face threatened assault than those living in capital cities (3% compared with 2.5%).


REPORTING RATE (Table 15)

Just over a third (34%) of persons who experienced face-to-face threatened assault reported their most recent incident to police.


EXPERIENCE OF MULTIPLE VICTIMISATION (Table 8)

Two out of five (42%) persons who experienced face-to-face threatened assault (205,100 victims) experienced a single incident in the 12 months prior to interview, while 21% (105,800 victims) experienced two incidents.


CHARACTERISTICS OF FACE-TO-FACE THREATENED ASSAULT INCIDENTS (Table 15)

This section discusses characteristics of the most recent incident for persons who experienced face-to-face threatened assault in the 12 months prior to interview.

In the most recent incident of face-to-face threatened assault:

• The offender was more likely to be male (for 76% of victims) than female (14% of victims)
• The offender was more likely to be known to the victim (56%) than to be a stranger (43%)
  • When the offender was known, the victim was less likely to be living with the offender at the time of the incident (9%) than not living with the offender (48%)
  • For male victims, the offender was more likely to be a stranger (53%) than someone they knew (45%), while for female victims, offenders who were known to them were more common (70% compared with 31%)
• The location of the incident was more likely to be the victim's home (28%) or work (26%) than any other location
  • Male victims were more likely than female victims to have experienced face-to-face threatened assault in a licensed entertainment/recreation venue (11% compared with 3%)
  • Female victims were more likely than male victims to have experienced face-to-face threatened assault in their home (38% compared with 19%)
• A weapon was not used in the most recent incident for the majority of victims (89%)
• For nearly one in four persons who experienced face-to-face threatened assault (24%), the main reason they did not report the incident to police was they considered the incident to be too trivial/unimportant.