The Clinical Gavel -Criminal Law Cases
The Clinical Gavel is a podcast about criminal law hosted by a seasoned forensic psychology professor. It breaks down complex legal concepts and examines high-profile criminal cases. Episodes offer expert analysis of the justice system and the psychology behind criminal behavior. Listeners gain an insider's perspective on how laws govern society.
Episodes
ADHD on Trial: Can Impulsivity Influence Criminal Responsibility?
When a defendant has ADHD, how should courts distinguish neurological vulnerabilities from deliberate criminal conduct? This episode examines the intersection of clinical diagnosis, forensic evaluation, and legal accountability, focusing on executive dysfunction and impaired behavioral inhibition. We explore why an ADHD diagnosis does not automatically establish diminished criminal responsibility
When the Crime Didn’t Have a Name: The Prosecution of Cecil Jacobson
When investigators began uncovering what fertility doctor Cecil Jacobson had done to his patients, prosecutors faced an unusual problem: existing criminal laws did not neatly describe some of the most disturbing conduct. The government ultimately built its case around charges including fraud and perjury. The Jacobson case demonstrates how prosecutors sometimes have to use existing statutes to conf
Can You Refuse to Answer Police Questions? — Your Right to Remain Silent Explained
You have probably heard the phrase “You have the right to remain silent,” but when does that right actually apply? This episode of Clinical Gavel examines the Fifth Amendment, Miranda warnings, police questioning, and why remaining silent is not always as simple as saying nothing. We also explore the psychology of police encounters and why stress, authority, and the urge to explain yourself can ca
Can Police Lie to You During an Interrogation? Where the Law Draws the Line
Can a detective falsely tell a suspect that an accomplice confessed—or claim evidence exists when it doesn’t? American courts have historically permitted some forms of deception during interrogations, but that does not mean investigators can say anything they want. This episode of Clinical Gavel examines the Supreme Court case Frazier v. Cupp, the voluntariness rule, and the line between deception
Can Police Lie to You During an Interrogation? Where the Law Draws the Line
Can a detective falsely tell a suspect that an accomplice confessed—or claim evidence exists when it doesn’t? American courts have historically permitted some forms of deception during interrogations, but that does not mean investigators can say anything they want. This episode of Clinical Gavel examines the Supreme Court case Frazier v. Cupp, the voluntariness rule, and the line between deception
The North Korea Laptop Farm (US v. Christina Chapman, 2024–2025): Identity Laundering and the Erosion of Digital Borders
Investigate the case of Christina Marie Chapman, who operated a “laptop farm” from her homes in Minnesota and Arizona, enabling North Korean IT operatives to steal U.S. identities, secure remote jobs at over 300 American companies, and generate more than $17 million for the DPRK regime.
This episode details the mechanics of the scheme—stolen identities, hosted company laptops, and cross-border shi
The Duty of Candor in the Age of AI: The Greg Lake Suspension
In April 2026, the Nebraska Supreme Court issued a landmark indefinite suspension against attorney Greg Lake, marking a shift from mere financial sanctions to career-altering discipline for AI misuse. This episode deconstructs the "Failure of Candor" that led to his downfall. We move past the 57 hallucinated citations to the courtroom confrontation where Lake initially blamed a broken computer and
The Right to Refuse Treatment – Riggins v. Nevada (1992)
In this episode, we examine Riggins v. Nevada (1992), a landmark Supreme Court case addressing whether the state can forcibly administer antipsychotic medication to a criminal defendant awaiting trial. The Court ruled that while forced medication is not categorically prohibited, the state must demonstrate it is medically appropriate and the least restrictive means of achieving competency for trial
Chemical Intent: The Limits of “Roid Rage” in Criminal Law
A forensic psychology and criminal law podcast analyzing “roid rage,” anabolic steroid effects on the brain, and how courts evaluate mens rea (criminal intent), voluntary intoxication, and legal responsibility in violent crime cases. This episode breaks down the intersection of neuroscience, behavioral evidence, and legal standards, featuring high-profile cases like Oscar Pistorius and legal prec
The matrix defense: State v. Ansley
When the Courtroom Can’t Wait — Drope v. Missouri and the Duty to Pause
STATE V. HIOTT- CAN CONSENT CLEAR YOU OF AN ASSAULT CHARGE
THE LATEST SUPREME COURT RULING ON PRISON INMATE RIGHTS
WE LOOK AT THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS OF THE WEEK OF JUNE 23 2025
DO POLICE ALWAYS NEED A SEARCH WARRANT
TARASOFF V. REGENTS
ZINERMON V. BURCH
LEGAL DEFENSES THAT CAN BE USED FOR AN ATTEMPTED MURDER CASE1
CRIME SCENE STAGING
LAW FIRM PAID MILLIONS TO DEFEND INMATE FACES SANCTIONS FOR USING FAKE CASE LAWS THAT WERE PRODUCED BY AI
CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
PEOPLE V. HUMPHREY
SELF DEFENSE AND USE OF DEADLY FORCE IN CALIFORNIA A LEGAL ANALYSIS
CASE STUDY OF WHETHER CONSENT WAS VOLUNTARY OR COERCED
COURTS THOUGHTS ON PRAYER AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHAT IS THE RATIONAL BASIS LAW
WE CHAT WITH TRIAL LAWYER BRIAN WILLIAMS 4
BERRY V. SUPERIOR COURT - THE ISSUE OF SECOND DEGREE MURDER REQUIRES CONDUCT WITH HIGH PROBABILITY1
THE DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY
ANDRESEN V. MARYLAND- A PERSON'S BUSINESS RECORDS AS EVIDENCE VIOLATE THE 5TH AMENDMENT
LEGAL DEFENSES THAT CAN BE USED FOR AN ATTEMPTED MURDER CASE1
FBI PROFILERS DISCUSSES THE NUANCES OF UNDERSTANDING THE LAW
MAPP V. OHIO AND FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE
RUSSELL HEBETS DISCUSSES HIS LIFE AS A DEFENSE ATTORNEY
NYPD DETECTIVE DISCUSSES CRIME IN NEW YORK AND MORE
DEA AGENT DISCUSSES DRUG CARTELS AND MORE6
THE CASE OF ROSS V. STATE - THE ABANDONMENT DEFENSE
STATE V GARTLAND- CASTLE DOCTRINE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
WE CHAT WITH HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR
WE DISCUSS HOMICIDE INVESTIGATIONS WITH BC
STATE V. HIOTT- CAN CONSENT CLEAR YOU OF AN ASSAULT CHARGE1
STATE V. WILDER- PARENTAL CONTROL JUSTIFICATION
LAW V. STATE
CRIMINAL CASE BISHOP V. STATE
WARNING SENSITIVE CONTENT ON HUMAN TRAFFICKING WITH MATT RICHARDSON
DOES ZERO BAIL WORK, NEW STUDY SHOWS RESULTS2
WE DISCUSS THE LATEST ON THE UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO MURDERS AND WE DISCUSS SERIAL KILLERS
miller_vs_state_undercover_police_decoy_and_entrapment
THE ADOLESCENT BRAIN AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR
BECHTEL V. STATE- BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME AND ITS USE IN SELF DEFENSE CASES
THE FIRST CRIMINAL LAW CASE MOST LAW STUDENTS WILL LEARN-REGINA V. DUDLEY & STEPHENS
EWING VS. CALIFORNIA- IS THE THREE STRIKES LAW A VIOLATION OF THE EIGHT AMENDMENT
HOMICIDE DETECTIVE FRED REYNOLDS SHARES HIS CAREER AND MORE
CAN YOU CONVICT ONLY ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE-OWENS V. STATE
GIROUARD V. STATE- CAN WORDS CONSTITUTE PROVOCATION- TRYING TO MITIGATE A 2ND DEGREE MURDER TO MANSL
STATE V. FAR WEST WATER & SEWER INC.- CAN A CORPORATION BE CHARGED WITH NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE
BARKER V. WINGO- DOES A 5YR DELAY BETWEEN ARREST AND TRIAL VIOLATE A PERSON'S RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIA
CARTER V. COMMONWEALTH- CAN POINTING YOUR FINGERS LIKE A GUN BE CONSIDERED ASSAULT
SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE HELD LIABLE FOR A KILLING COMMITTED BY A VICTIM OF HIS FELONY- PEOPLE V. LOWERY
WHAT IS DEPRAVED HEART MURDER-STATE V. DAVIDSON
PEOPLE V. AARON- THE EVOLUTION OF INTENT AND FELONY MURDER
WE DISCUSS PLEA BARGAINING WITH PROFESSOR FISHER
MIDGETT VS. STATE- IS IT FIRST OR SECOND DEGREE MURDER AND DOES THE TYPE OF CRIME MATTER
STATE V. FORREST- SHOULD A SON BE CHARGED WITH 1ST DEGREE HOMICIDE FOR KILLNG HIS AILING FATHER
SOME UNCOMMON BIOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DEFENSES IN COURT
THE FIRST CRIMINAL LAW CASE MOST LAW STUDENTS WILL LEARN-REGINA V. DUDLEY & STEPHENS
MILLER VS STATE- UNDERCOVER POLICE DECOY AND ENTRAPMENT
THE CASE OF US vs CONTENTO-PACHON; THE DURESS DEFENSE
STATE V. RAMER- CAN 11YR OLD POSSESS THE CAPACITY TO KNOW THAT RAPE WAS WRONG
BRANCACCIO V STATE- INVOLUNTARY MEDICATION CAN IT BE USED AS A DEFENSE
GALLOWAY V. STATE - A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY
ANDRESEN V. MARYLAND- A PERSON'S BUSINESS RECORDS AS EVIDENCE VIOLATE THE 5TH AMENDMENT
MOLER V. STATE- CAN A JURY DISREGARD PSYCHIATRIC TESTIMONY WHEN A INSANITY DEFENSE IS RAISED
ALABAMA V. WHITE- IS AN INFORMANTS TIP ENOUGH TO PROVIDE A POLICE OFFICER WITH REASONABLE SUSPICION
THE DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY
ARIZONA V. GANT - AFTER AN ARREST CAN AN OFFICER SEARCH YOUR CAR FOR EVIDENCE UNRELATED TO THE ARRES
TERRY V. OHIO- CAN YOU SEARCH SOMEONE ABSENT PROBABLE CAUSE
NEW YORK V. QUARLES- IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A PUBLIC SAFETY EXCEPTION IN REQUIRING A MIRANDA WARNING
CAN AN ANONYMOUS TIP OF RECKLESS DRIVING SUPPORT A TRAFFIC STOP-NAVARETTE V. CALIFORNIA
MINNESOTA V. DICKERSON- IS AN OFFICER ALLOWED TO SEIZE CONTRABAND IF PATDOWN WAS FOR WEAPONS
