UCMJ Article 115: Communicating a Threat or Hoax to Cause Panic

A false bomb threat phoned in to dodge a duty shift, a fabricated warning of a chemical spill spread for amusement, a fake report of an attack designed to send a unit scrambling: each can fall under Article 115 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Even when no device exists and no one is hurt, knowingly broadcasting a false threat that mimics a real emergency drains resources, disrupts operations, and erodes the trust units depend on.

Article 115, codified at 10 U.S.C. 915 and titled “Communicating threats,” covers genuine threats and false ones. This page focuses on the false-threat or hoax conduct, which is set out in subsection (c). The conduct was previously charged under the general article, Article 134, before the 2016 Military Justice Act, effective 1 January 2019, gave Article 115 its current structure.

How Article 115 is structured

Article 115 contains three related prohibitions:

  • Subsection (a): wrongfully communicating a threat to injure the person, property, or reputation of another.
  • Subsection (b): wrongfully communicating a threat to injure a person or property by use of an explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, a biological or chemical agent or weapon, or a hazardous material.
  • Subsection (c): maliciously communicating a false threat concerning injury to a person or property by use of an explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, a biological or chemical agent or weapon, or a hazardous material.

A false threat under subsection (c) is one that, at the time it is communicated, the speaker knows to be false. This is the hoax provision: the danger is fabricated, but the disruption and fear are real.

Elements the government must prove

For a false-threat or hoax charge under Article 115(c), the prosecution must establish each element beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • That the accused communicated information concerning an attempt or supposed attempt being made or to be made to unlawfully kill, injure, or intimidate a person, or to unlawfully damage or destroy property, by means of an explosive, weapon of mass destruction, biological or chemical agent or weapon, or hazardous material.
  • That the information was false and the accused knew it was false.
  • That the communication was malicious.

“Malicious” generally means the communication was made with the intent to cause, or with reckless disregard of the risk of causing, the kind of fear, disruption, or wasted response a real threat would produce. The offense does not require that anyone actually panic; the wrongful communication of the known-false threat is enough.

Maximum punishment

For a false threat concerning a destructive device under Article 115(c), the maximum punishment listed in the Manual for Courts-Martial is a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for ten years. The elevated ceiling reflects the seriousness of fabricating a bomb, weapon-of-mass-destruction, or chemical-agent threat.

By comparison, a general threat or general false threat under Article 115(a) carries a dishonorable discharge, total forfeitures, and confinement for three years. For offenses committed on or after 27 December 2023, sentencing proceeds under the standardized sentencing parameters and criteria, with the destructive-device hoax placed in a substantially higher category than an ordinary threat.

Defenses

Recognized defenses to an Article 115(c) charge include:

  • Good-faith belief in the threat’s truth. If the accused genuinely believed the danger was real, the communication was not a knowing falsehood.
  • No knowledge of falsity. The government must prove the accused knew the information was false; an honest mistake defeats the charge.
  • Absence of malice. A communication made without malicious intent, such as a sincere report of a perceived hazard, falls outside the offense.
  • Insufficient proof. The prosecution must show a false communication concerning a covered destructive device or material, made knowingly and maliciously.

Distinctions from related offenses

Article 115(c) is distinct from a genuine threat under subsection (a) or (b), which involves a real intent to place a victim in fear of actual harm rather than a fabricated danger. It also differs from a false official statement under Article 107, which targets false statements made in an official capacity, and from malingering under Article 83, which targets feigning illness or injury to avoid duty. A single course of conduct, such as faking a bomb threat to escape a shift, can implicate more than one article.

Frequently asked questions

Does anyone have to actually panic for the offense to be complete?
No. The offense is complete when a known-false threat concerning a covered device or material is maliciously communicated. Actual panic is not required.

What makes a hoax threat a felony-level offense?
The fabricated danger involves an explosive, weapon of mass destruction, biological or chemical agent, or hazardous material. That subject matter places the conduct under Article 115(c), with a ten-year confinement ceiling.

What if the accused believed the threat was real?
A genuine good-faith belief that the danger was real defeats the knowledge-of-falsity element. The government must prove the accused knew the information was false.

Can a prank qualify?
Yes. A communication intended as a joke can still be malicious and known to be false. The label the speaker assigns does not control.

Does this apply off base and overseas?
Yes. UCMJ jurisdiction follows the service member, so a hoax communicated off the installation or abroad can be charged when the article’s terms are met.

Sources

10 U.S.C. 915 (Article 115, Communicating threats): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/915
Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition), Part IV: https://jsc.defense.gov/Portals/99/2024%20MCM%20files/MCM%20(2024%20ed)%20(20240102)%20(adjusted%20bookmarks).pdf
Military Attorney Joseph L. Jordan, Articles of the UCMJ

This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It describes military law and procedure of public record, does not address any individual case, and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Related:

  1. UCMJ Article 114: Carrying a Concealed Weapon A hidden knife in a waistband, a pistol tucked under civilian clothes off duty, brass knuckles slipped into a pocket on liberty overseas: each can place a service member under......
  2. UCMJ Article 114: Dueling Dueling belongs to an earlier age, yet it remains a punishable offense in the modern armed forces. The reason has little to do with the survival of the practice and......
  3. UCMJ Article 80: Attempts A crime that fails or is interrupted can still reflect a deliberate decision to break the law. Article 80 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice addresses that reality by......
  4. UCMJ Article 112a: Wrongful Use or Possession of Controlled Substances Few offenses are enforced more consistently across the armed forces than drug misconduct. A positive urinalysis can end a career, and the consequences reach service members on or off duty,......
  5. UCMJ Article 105: Forgery Military operations run on paper and its electronic equivalents: leave forms, pay vouchers, contracts, orders, identification cards. When someone falsifies a signature or alters a document so it appears to......
  6. UCMJ Article 125: Kidnapping Kidnapping is among the gravest offenses a service member can face under military law. Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice punishes the unlawful seizing and holding of......
  7. UCMJ Article 84: Breach of Medical Quarantine When a contagious illness threatens a warship, a barracks, or a forward-deployed unit, commanders and medical officers can place affected personnel under quarantine to keep an outbreak from spreading. A......
  8. UCMJ Article 108a: Captured or Abandoned Property Property seized from an enemy or left behind on the field of operations does not become a souvenir, a windfall, or a private commodity. It belongs to the United States......
  9. UCMJ Article 119b: Child Endangerment A young child depends entirely on the adults responsible for its care, and military law imposes criminal liability when a service member with that responsibility places a child at risk.......
  10. UCMJ Article 131e: Prevention of Authorized Seizure of Property When investigators move to seize property, the law expects it to remain available for that seizure. A service member who destroys, removes, or disposes of property to keep it out......
  11. UCMJ Article 131c: Misprision of a Serious Offense A service member who learns that someone has committed a serious crime, and then takes steps to hide it, can be prosecuted under Article 131c of the Uniform Code of......
  12. UCMJ Article 107a: Parole Violation A service member who earns parole from military confinement leaves the disciplinary barracks under a written promise to obey specific conditions. Breaking that promise is itself a criminal offense. Article......
  13. UCMJ Article 128a: Maiming A service member who deliberately leaves another person permanently scarred, blinded, or missing the use of a limb has done something the military treats as far graver than an ordinary......
  14. UCMJ Article 107: Making False Official Statements A military justice system runs on the reliability of what its members say and sign. A duty log, a sworn statement to an investigator, a travel voucher, a maintenance entry:......
  15. UCMJ Article 118: Murder Murder is the most serious offense in the military justice system, and it is one of the few that can expose a service member to the death penalty. Article 118......