Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California

| | Comments (2)
Tomorrow's Daily Bulletin newspaper (and Web site) will include two articles detailing Eric Brockway's latest legal troubles.

Brockway is accused of threatening to kill the victim and a witness in his trial for attempted murder, a charge on which he was acquitted Sept. 19.

Brockway apparently visited a Yucaipa mental-health clinic seeking help for his bipolar disorder, and in order to demonstrate his dire mental state, he told a worker there he wished to kill the two men, then kill himself.

Because of the landmark 1970s state Supreme Court decision in Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, the mental-health worker was obligated to report the threats to authorities.

The case involves the 1969 killing of UC Berkeley student Tatiana Tarasoff. An Indian exchange student she met in 1967, Prosenjit Poddar, pursued her romantically but she rejected his advances.

tarasoff[1].gifpoddar.gif

Poddar, apparently despondent over the rejection, sought counseling for his grief and during therapy sessions said he wanted to kill the woman.

After he carried out the killing, Tarasoff's family took action against the university and others for failing to notify Tarasoff of the threat and for failing to properly notify police.

Lower courts initially ruled in favor of the university, but the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of the family, stating that mental-health professionals must report threats they deem credible.

Click here to view a 31-page pdf file of the court's decision.

2 Comments

Ann Adams said:

I am a middle school teacher and one of my students wrote a death list that consisted of myself, a co-worker, six 8th grade students, and one seventh grade student. I felt uneasy about the situation and because my school district refused to discipline the student who wrote the list, I informed two of the parents. I did not identify the student's name (age 14) and the two parents were threatened by my administer to tell who informed them. The parents felt intimidated and told them that I had informed them. The superintendent has given me a letter that my contract will not be renewed as punishment for telling the parents. None of the parents were notified, and the student that wrote the list was allowed back to the classes with the children on the list. I gave a copy of the list to the local sheriff. Why am I being punished?????????

Thank you,

Ann Adams

n8b5yg

Cheryl Walls said:

Ann,
Let me share a thought with you...
if you feel as if you are being punished, think about this. if this person carries through with their list, you will not be there when the event takes place. You have done what you should to protect others, now protect yourself.
Something similar to this happened locally, a high school boy wrote a letter about killing a teacher. He was expelled. The next year he was allowed to return to the school! Schools have become more concerned with not upsetting a student than protecting their employees. Find a job where you will be protected and supported!
Don't feel punished, feel protected. you will not be in the same building with this obviously troubled student. I just hope someone allows this child to get the treatment he so desperately needs!
Good Luck!

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

About this blog

Covering Inland Empire Courts.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Will Bigham published on October 4, 2008 5:27 AM.

Amaya and Luque sentenced in 2006 carjacking case was the previous entry in this blog.

Deliberations continue Monday in San Bernardino shovel beating is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

Breaking News

Advertisement