What Are the Different Types of Blackmail?

Blackmail, a manipulative crime that preys on the vulnerability of its victims, manifests in various forms. According to the World Bank, extortion-related offenses have seen a fluctuation with hundreds of cases reported annually. Extortion, a common example of blackmail, often involves financial demands to keep sensitive information under wraps. Coercion, another facet, forces individuals into unwanted actions to prevent damaging revelations, while commercial pressure leverages business secrets for monetary gain. The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) reported losses exceeding $4.2 billion in 2020, with many cases involving blackmail tactics. Navigating these treacherous waters requires awareness and understanding of the legal implications and protective measures available.

The term “blackmail” is usually used for situations where one person or group of people discovers information that someone else doesn’t want exposed, then uses the threat of exposing that information to profit in some way. Depending on how incendiary or important the information is, people are often willing to go to great lengths to keep it quiet. Extramarital affairs are one common example; in some places, allegations of homosexuality can also be valuable material. Almost anything can qualify, though, as long as the person or people involved are motivated to keep whatever it is from being known.

Extortion happens when the person with the secret information contacts the target and demands money in exchange for silence. In most cases this comes in the form of a direct threat, and the privileged person usually produces evidence — like photos, hotel receipts, or email exchanges — as well as some idea of how it will be used if the demands aren’t met. He or she could threaten to send the information to a spouse or boss, for instance, or could say that it will be published online. People who are famous or otherwise well known might also be threatened with media exposure. It’s not uncommon for this sort of extortion to go on for years at great cost, though a lot of this depends on how inflammatory the information is and how badly the target wants to keep it quiet.

Blackmailing by coercion doesn’t usually involve money, at least not directly. In these instances, the target is usually told to commit some sort of action or behave in some specific way to avoid being exposed. Extreme examples involve the commission of crimes; targets are sometimes coerced to do things like rob stores, murder people, or launder money through their companies to avoid having their secrets told. It could also involve something simpler, like performing favors or tasks for the person with the information for no compensation other than the promise of silence. The key in these cases is usually that the target feels forced to do something he wouldn’t otherwise do or doesn’t want to do.

In the business realm, initiators usually have information that could be really damaging to a company or brand’s public image. A company that does something like illegally dump toxic waste might be a good target; so might a business that has engaged in questionable investing practices or that has lied on financial reports. Most corporate pressure cases involve extortion, where the instigator threatens to reveal the information unless he or she is paid. Threats in these situations usually involve media leaks or talks with major competitors. Coercion can come in too, however, particularly if the initiator could benefit. If he or she is an employee, for instance, he or she could demand a promotion, a pay raise, or other improved benefits in exchange for keeping the secret; if he or she is a competitor, the demands might involve reducing productivity for certain items or allowing the competitor to take the lead in certain arenas.

Corporate cases are usually considered their own separate class because, in most cases, information that is bad enough to tempt a company to conceal it is usually bad enough that it could harm investors, the public, or both. From this perspective, both the initiator and the company could be in the wrong by trying to keep the information quiet, which only serves to compound the problem.

The legal interpretation of each type may vary slightly by jurisdiction, but in most cases courts judge them by two standards. First is the intent to use embarrassing information or threats of physical harm as leverage to gain favors. The second standard is that the initiator would not receive compensation or an agreement to commit an unlawful act from the victim in the absence of the threats.

Proving extortion, coercion, or commercial pressure might be difficult, depending on the evidence that exists. Physical evidence, such as an audio or video recording, often leads to a stronger case. Courts may also consider whether the accused has a criminal history, as well as the value of compensation sought and how long the arrangement lasted. In most cases, though, bringing a blackmailer to trial necessarily requires that all of the facts are made public — including the basis of the relationship, which is to say, the secret that’s being kept. Someone who is paying to keep a spouse from knowing of an affair, for example, would defeat the entire point by exposing everything in court. As such, people are often hesitant to report these sorts of threats and problems unless there is some other overarching issue that makes a formal judgment worth it.

Blackmail is the coercion of money from a person through threats of accusation, exposure, or opposition in the public eye, the collection of value from a person as a condition for refraining from accusing him, or the disclosure of a secret to his detriment. It is comparable to extortion in that money is demanded to complete a task, prevent a loss, or exercise influence. It is frequently carried out using threats, preying on the victim's anxieties or gullibility, or threatening to expose the victim's defects, follies, or crimes.

Private extortion or blackmail is viewed differently under existing American law. Some laws require threats to be effective. An unsuccessful threat is normally tried as a criminal attempt under such legislation. The majority of modern extortion laws just require a threat to be made. Demands for illegal behavior varied according to statute.

The most common threats are (1) personal injury, (2) property damage, (3) criminal allegation, and (4) exposing any matter that would harm the victim's personal or commercial reputation or expose the victim to hatred, disdain, or ridicule.

There are several sorts of blackmail that are prohibited under both state and federal law. The Hobbs Act, a federal law against blackmail, requires proof that the offenders received property from the victim. This means that defendants are not liable for extortion under the federal Hobbs Act if they threatened the victim and the victim submitted under duress, but the defendant received nothing in return.

Being cautious about the information you disclose to others, particularly on the internet, is the most effective approach to protecting yourself from being subject to blackmail. Never reveal critical information, such as personal or financial particulars, to individuals in whom you lack faith or confidence. If you believe that you are the target of blackmail, you should contact the authorities and see an attorney as soon as possible. Always keep in mind that reporting suspected criminal activity as soon as possible is the most efficient strategy to deal with extortion or blackmail. If the criminal understands that you are prepared to pay, they will simply make additional demands in an effort to deplete your financial resources and victimize you further. If you agree to pay, the situation will only become more difficult.

No, if a person mistakenly reveals embarrassing material, they cannot be charged with blackmail. Blackmail necessitates intent, which implies that the individual making the threat must have done so knowingly and intentionally in order to obtain something of value.

When a blackmailer threatens to divulge a secret that will cause hatred, scorn, or ridicule, there must be genuine evidence that revealing the information will cause harm; the victim's opinion, feeling, or sensitivity to the revelation of the information is insufficient.