
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Send us a text
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 a text
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.

90,932 Listeners

43,818 Listeners

228,694 Listeners

38,800 Listeners

26,224 Listeners

153,509 Listeners

1,066 Listeners

1,942 Listeners

112,200 Listeners

56,496 Listeners

15,863 Listeners

26,623 Listeners

45 Listeners

22 Listeners

619 Listeners