
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Send us Fan Mail
In this episode we discuss the recent case of United States v. Rocha, where the CAAF reversed the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, which found that the enumerated Article 134 offense of Indecent Conduct, did not put Airman Rocha on notice that masturbating with a sex doll with childlike characteristics was a crime. CAAF says it did. We then hear from Lt Col Allen Abrams who provides a six step analysis on how defenders can analyze and attack the specification drafted by the government.
By Sam Castanien & Trevor Ward5
1919 ratings
Send us Fan Mail
In this episode we discuss the recent case of United States v. Rocha, where the CAAF reversed the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, which found that the enumerated Article 134 offense of Indecent Conduct, did not put Airman Rocha on notice that masturbating with a sex doll with childlike characteristics was a crime. CAAF says it did. We then hear from Lt Col Allen Abrams who provides a six step analysis on how defenders can analyze and attack the specification drafted by the government.

111,948 Listeners

56,508 Listeners

14,250 Listeners

15,592 Listeners

29,207 Listeners

15,950 Listeners