This episode examines the national competency crisis, focusing on misdemeanor defendants, rising incompetence findings, statutory responses across states, and the ethical, clinical, and systemic consequences for courts, evaluators, and defendants with serious mental illness.
All content for Forensic Briefs is the property of Dr. Michelle Guyton and Dr. Alex Millkey and is served directly from their servers
with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
This episode examines the national competency crisis, focusing on misdemeanor defendants, rising incompetence findings, statutory responses across states, and the ethical, clinical, and systemic consequences for courts, evaluators, and defendants with serious mental illness.
This episode examines the national competency crisis, focusing on misdemeanor defendants, rising incompetence findings, statutory responses across states, and the ethical, clinical, and systemic consequences for courts, evaluators, and defendants with serious mental illness.
Andi Brierley joins Forensic Briefs to discuss his journey from incarceration to academia, exploring how lived experience informs desistance, peer mentorship, and rehabilitation. He highlights the power of credibility, connection, and rethinking “peer” roles in justice reform.
Professor Raquel Aldana joins Forensic Briefs to discuss the role of trauma, truth, and narrative in immigration law. She examines how forensic evaluations and storytelling shape asylum outcomes and why culturally sensitive, trauma-informed practices are essential.
Professor Raquel Aldana explores how trauma and law intersect in the immigration system, examining how legal processes can both harm and heal—and how forensic mental health evaluations are reshaping justice for displaced and marginalized communities.
Dr. Michael Chafetz is a board-certified clinical neuropsychologist in private practice in New Orleans. He specializes in the validity of Social Security disability exams, especially in low-functioning claimants, and frequently serves as a court-appointed expert in litigated matters. His experiences, including a Daubert challenge related to record reviews, led to his co-authorship of an international AACN best practices article on reviewing records. He also conducts FAA evaluations and licens...
Dr. Lisa Drago explores the growing role of social media in forensic mental health evaluations. She discusses ethical considerations, challenges in interpretation, and the impact of online behavior on credibility, diagnosis, and risk assessments, offering valuable insights for professionals navigating this evolving digital landscape.
Andrew M. Smith is an Associate Professor of Cognitive Psychology at Iowa State University, where he investigates memory, judgment, and decision-making, particularly within legal contexts such as eyewitness identification and deception detection. His research combines computational modeling with behavioral experiments and has been published in leading journals. He has received funding from organizations including the FBI, NSF, and Arnold Ventures. Smith is a fellow of the Psychonomic Society ...
Dr. Lizzy Foster and Dr. Sharon Kelley discuss the ethical and legal challenges of providing feedback in forensic mental health assessments, offering a practical framework to help evaluators balance transparency, respect, and professional responsibilities.
Dr. Julie Goldenson joins us to explore how trauma-informed principles can enhance forensic mental health assessments. Drawing from her 2022 article, she discusses the ethical tensions evaluators face, how complex trauma shapes behavior, and why therapeutic jurisprudence offers a framework for minimizing harm. Dr. Goldenson explains how empathy, cultural awareness, and transparency can improve assessments—without compromising objectivity or forensic integrity.
Dr. Dave DeMatteo joins Forensic Briefs to discuss the history, revisions, and unexpected legal power of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology. From their origins to future updates, he unpacks the ethical and legal stakes facing forensic psychologists—and why guidelines that were never meant to be enforceable, sometimes are.
Dr. Maaike Helmus discusses risk assessment in child sexual exploitation material (CSEM) cases, highlighting research challenges, tool validation issues, and recent debates around the CPORT. She explains how practitioners can responsibly navigate evolving science in high-stakes forensic contexts.
Dr. Shelby Hunter returns to discuss how common medical conditions like HIV, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease can impact cognitive functioning in forensic populations. She highlights practical strategies for clinicians and attorneys, drawing from her 2022 article to advocate for better assessment, care, and outcomes in criminal legal settings.
Professor Aliza Kaplan joins the podcast to explore how implicit bias in forensic science contributes to wrongful convictions. Drawing from decades of experience in criminal justice reform, Kaplan discusses the systemic challenges, forensic science flaws, and the urgent need for unbiased, independent analysis in our legal system.
In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Elizabeth Jeglic, a leading expert on sexual violence prevention, breaks down the complex process of sexual grooming. She discusses her research on identifying red flags, the five stages of grooming, and how we can take proactive steps to prevent child sexual abuse.
In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Dan Murrie discusses the growing competency crisis in the U.S. legal system. He explores the rising number of competency evaluations, delays in restoration services, and the systemic factors driving this issue, including mental health care gaps, homelessness, and evolving legal practices.
In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Gerald Young and Luciano Giromini discuss the complexities of assessing malingering and symptom validity in forensic settings. They examine current research on testing methods, challenges in diagnosis, and the role of psychological assessments in legal contexts, highlighting ongoing debates in the field.
Dr. Sebastien Rilen explores gender diversity in forensic evaluation, highlighting limited forensic-specific guidance. He offers advice on addressing gender identity in interviews and reports, discusses psychological testing with gender-diverse individuals, and provides considerations for test selection and interpretation.
Lee Vargen explores sovereign citizens' beliefs, helping forensic practitioners understand their unique views. He examines common legal issues, challenges in working with this population, and strategies for risk assessment specific to sovereign citizens.
In this discussion with Dr. Natalie Anumba, she discusses how forensic clinicians can address personal identities in interviews, including when and how to inquire, relevancy for reports, and key considerations for evaluators before approaching these topics.
Dr. Neal examines bias, its sources, and the impact of “fast” and “slow” thinking on cognition. She reviews bias in forensic experts, offers reduction strategies, and discusses psychological testing in court, providing guidance on distinguishing reliable methods from “junk” in forensic contexts.
This episode examines the national competency crisis, focusing on misdemeanor defendants, rising incompetence findings, statutory responses across states, and the ethical, clinical, and systemic consequences for courts, evaluators, and defendants with serious mental illness.
