Forensic Briefs

In this episode, Terry Kukor explores aspirational forensic practice and the role of consultation in strengthening forensic mental health work. He discusses what it means to “strive” under the Specialty Guidelines, emphasizing humility, curiosity, tolerance for uncertainty, empathy, and critical thinking. The conversation examines common impediments to high-level practice, the value of consultation in reducing bias and improving reasoning, and how thoughtful collaboration can help forensic clinicians continually grow while maintaining ethical and professional integrity.

In Part Two of this discussion, Rick Frederick and James Mikesell continue their examination of test security and due process in forensic psychology. They explore how recent court decisions, APA resolutions, and professional guidelines affect psychologists working in legal settings. The conversation discusses practical recommendations for forensic clinicians to  “show their work,” understand the role of protective orders, and how to proceed with requests for test data.

In the first of a two-part conversation, Drs. Rick Frederick and James Mikesell explore foundational issues surrounding psychologists as expert witnesses. The discussion addresses ethics, the specialty guidelines, discovery obligations, impeachment, and the tension between test security and due process rights. Drawing on case law, professional standards, and real-world practice, our guests outline why transparency, protective orders, and legal literacy are essential for ethical and effective forensic work in civil and criminal contexts.

Dr. David DeMatteo returns to Forensic Briefs to examine the Sequential Intercept Model and the evolution of problem-solving courts. Our conversation explores diversion points across the justice system, the rise and impact of drug and mental health courts, and the balance between public safety and public health approaches. Dr. DeMatteo highlights research, policy implications, and practical ways forensic clinicians can apply these frameworks in evaluations, testimony, and system-level reform.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Reid Meloy returns to examine threat assessment and management through the development and application of the TRAP-18. He discusses proximal warning behaviors, distal risk factors, time-sequencing of violent pathways, and emerging research using artificial intelligence in forensic risk assessment. The conversation also analyzes the Capital Gazette mass murder, highlighting failures in threat management and the critical warning sign of attackers “going dark” before violence.Dr. J. Reid Meloy is a board-certified forensic psychologist (ABPP) with a national and international consulting practice in criminal, civil, and counterterrorism cases. A past president of the American Academy of Forensic Psychology, he is the developer of the TRAP-18 and co-creator of the WAVR-21 threat assessment instruments. Dr. Meloy has authored more than 270 scholarly publications and 14 books, and has served as a consultant to the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit and major public agencies worldwide.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Reid Meloy examines the psychology of extreme violence through the lens of affective and predatory aggression. Drawing from decades of clinical, forensic, and psychoanalytic work, he discusses pathways to violence, planning and emotional states, psychosis and rationality, stochastic terrorism, and the role of social media and ideology. The conversation highlights practical implications for threat assessment, expert testimony, and understanding violent behavior in contemporary contexts.Dr. J. Reid Meloy is a board-certified forensic psychologist (ABPP) with a national and international consulting practice in criminal, civil, and counterterrorism cases. A past president of the American Academy of Forensic Psychology, he is the developer of the TRAP-18 and co-creator of the WAVR-21 threat assessment instruments. Dr. Meloy has authored more than 270 scholarly publications and 14 books, and has served as a consultant to the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit and major public agencies worldwide.

In this episode of Forensic Briefs, Dr. Emily Salisbury explores gender-responsive strategies within the criminal legal system. She discusses how trauma, relationships, economic marginalization, and gender norms shape women’s pathways into justice involvement. The conversation examines the risk-needs-responsivity model, gender-specific assessment tools, reproductive justice, and probation practices, highlighting how policy and practice changes can improve outcomes for justice-involved women and their families.Dr. Emily Salisbury is an Associate Professor of Social Work and Director of the Utah Criminal Justice Center at the University of Utah. A nationally recognized applied criminologist, she is a founding scholar of gender-responsive correctional treatment and co-creator of the Women’s Risk Needs Assessment (WRNA). Her research and policy work focus on rehabilitation, decarceration, and reintegration of justice-involved women, with broad impact across correctional systems in the U.S. and internationally.

Dr. Terry Kukor explains how relevancy-focused reports shift forensic writing from procedure-based sections to findings-based answers. Learn practical filters for what belongs in a report, how to reduce cognitive strain, and why addressing disconfirming data strengthens credibility.

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 licensing board assessments for professionals in high-stakes roles. 

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 and was named a Rising Star by the Association for Psychological Science. 

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.

Discover a convenient, engaging, and cost-effective way to stay current in forensic psychology. Listen to Drs. Michelle Guyton and Alexander Millkey interview top researchers, clinicians, and thinkers in this field. These podcasts are 60 to 90 minutes in length and offer the opportunity to earn continuing education credit. Our organization is approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) to sponsor continuing education for psychologists.