Explore every episode of the podcast The Clinical Gavel -Criminal Law Cases

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 shipments—while examining modern identity laundering and the challenges of enforcing digital sovereignty in a remote-work era.
Essential listening for cybersecurity professionals, national security analysts, corporate risk officers, legal experts, and anyone concerned with the intersection of economic espionage, sanctions evasion, and the vulnerabilities created by distributed workforces.

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 a wedding anniversary for the errors. We discuss why the court found his explanation "lacked credibility" and what this means for the Model Rules of Professional Conduct in a world where AI-generated fabrications are becoming a weekly occurrence in the docket

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. The decision protects the defendant’s due process rights and the integrity of the adversarial process by ensuring a defendant can present a defense as themselves, not as a pharmacologically altered version shaped by the state.

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 precedents such as People v. Hood and R v. Kingston to examine why steroid defenses often fail in court. Designed for audiences interested in true crime, white collar crime, legal analysis, and clinical psychology, this content targets people who like topics such as criminal defense strategy, expert witness testimony, mental state defenses, and the psychology of violent offenders.