When an anonymous threat is made, we have a need to access the level of the threat. Here is a translation from the German of a threat to a local mayor of a small town.
The threat is seven words only.
This small town was told that they were going to have to accept Islamic migrants into their tiny town. They protested repeatedly and the protests were so heated that meetings were canceled when bomb threats were called in. The residents feared for their lives, but also for their children. They know of media's concealment of migrant crimes, as well as the arrests of those who have posted migrant violence on Facebook and social media. Germans know how their politicians have told them that their daughters must change their dress, or that their women cannot go out unaccompanied at night, as well as the "anti-rape" remedies of wearing sneakers, tattoos, or holding a hand out and saying "arm's length." These things infuriate a scared public and each sexual attack or terrorist attack only increases the fear and frustration.
When one does not feel heard, anger can turn into rage. When rage becomes so powerful that it warrants to verbal explanation, it is often too late.
The anger boiled over and now the mayor, 62 year old male, has been beaten unconscious.
The threat was very short:
‘Who doesn’t want to hear must feel’
The brevity is very important. Lengthy sentences are often emotional and threats of length are often under the category of "need to persuade" as the author of the note is actually venting, which reduces the level of threat.
The short note tells us:
1. The author is resigned.
2. The author feels no need to vent--venting actually can mitigate the negative energy (anger), reducing rage to more manageable levels.
3. The author is likely not alone. The author feels no reason to share responsibility or guilt with anyone.
4. The author is resolved.
5. Note the passivity.
6. Note that there is no warning
7. Note there is no qualifying within it.
The two biggest points of assessing the level of the threat (for future analysis) is:
The brevity and the passivity.
This tells us the strength: there is no need to persuade, and the passivity indicates that there is more than one person involved. When an anonymous author wishes to deceive, he will add in a plurality of authors like a "small foreign faction" tells us that the writer is individual, local, English speaker, with good vocabulary).
The length of the note being long is emotional and has a need to persuade.
Under need to persuade, we must then gauge if the emotion increases or decreases over the pace of the statement. Some will exhaust themselves, while others will build, showing more danger.
In this very short threat, action is almost guaranteed. The reason I use "almost" is because the intent to harm is there, but circumstances could cause the change.
There is no equivocation in this short threat.
It was real, and it can be used for threat analysis going forward: short notes with passivity are threats that the authors show resolve. They should be given high priority.
From media's report: