Mind of a Serial Killer - MURDEROUS MINDS: The College Crush Murder Pt. 2

Episode Date: July 10, 2025

After months of stalking and obsession, Prosenjit Poddar finally snapped. In Part 2, we trace the tragic murder of Tanya Tarasoff—and the groundbreaking legal ruling that followed, forcing therapists to ask: when does doctor-patient confidentiality end, and protection begin? Killer Minds is a Crime House Original Podcast, powered by PAVE Studios. Listen wherever you get your podcasts. For ad-free listening and early access to episodes, subscribe to Crime House+ on Apple Podcasts. Don’t miss out on all things Killer Minds! Instagram: @killerminds | @Crimehouse TikTok: @Crimehouse Facebook: @crimehousestudios X: @crimehousemedia YouTube: @crimehousestudios To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is Crime House. When we're young, everybody tells us to never give up on our dreams. That no matter how unrealistic they might seem, they're always worth holding on to. Becoming an astronaut, a movie star, even President of the United States. And while most of us never achieve those goals, that's okay. Most of the time we find something else we'd love to do instead. But in Prashenjit Potter's case, he was on the verge of accomplishing his dreams. Growing up, it was almost unheard of for someone in his social class to travel

abroad and make a better life for themselves. Against all odds, Prashenjit transcended his circumstances and was accepted at one of the top schools in America. But after arriving in California, Prashenjit got a new dream to make Tanya Tarasov his wife. And just like before, he wasn't going to stop until it came true. No matter what. The human mind is powerful. It shapes how we think, feel, love, and hate. But sometimes it drives people to commit the unthinkable.

This is Killer Minds, a Crime House original. I'm Vanessa Richardson. And I'm Dr. Tristan Ingalls. Every Monday and Thursday, we uncover the darkest minds in history, analyzing what makes a killer. Crime House is made possible by you. Please rate, review, and follow Killer Minds. To enhance your listening experience with ad-free early access to each two-part series and bonus content, subscribe to Crime House Plus on Apple Podcasts.

Before we get started, be advised this episode contains descriptions of violence, murder, and stalking. Today we conclude our deep dive on Prashenjit Poddar. In 1967, he left his village in India for the University of California, Berkeley, hoping to rise above his humble circumstances and make a better life for himself. And when he met Tanya Tarasoff, Prashenjit thought he'd found his soulmate. However, Tanya didn't feel the same way, and eventually Prashenjit's obsession with her led to a violent and tragic murder.

As Vanessa goes through the story, I'll be talking about things like Prashenjit's ability to mask his true intentions from authorities, his inability to let go of his obsession, and how this case led to a landmark shift in how we approach doctor-patient confidentiality. And as always, we'll be asking the question, what makes a killer? What's better than a well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue? A well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue that was carefully selected by an Instacart shopper and delivered to your door. A well-marbled ribeye you ordered without even leaving the kiddie pool.

Whatever groceries your summer calls for, Instacart has you covered. Download the Instacart app and enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart, groceries that over deliver. After arriving in Berkeley, California in the fall of 1967, 22-year-old Prashenjit Poddar felt lost. He was a world away from his small village in India, with barely any friends and no real connections to speak of. For the next year, Prashenjit spent his waking moments

going between his engineering classes, his job as a naval architect, and his tiny dorm room at the university's international house. But that all changed when he met Tanya Tarasov. The moment he laid eyes on 19-year-old Tanya at an I-House dance in November 1968, Prosenjit's life seemed to suddenly have meaning. By the end of that year, he was already planning on marrying her. There was just one problem. Tanya didn't feel the same way. Sure, she liked Prosenjit, but she only saw him as a friend. And no matter how much she tried to tell him that, Prashenjit wouldn't listen. Things got so bad that after the school year ended in May 1969, Tanya went to stay with

her aunt in Brazil just so she could get away from Prashenjit. For his part, Prashenjit did try to move on. He went to therapy and promised to cut himself off from Tanya, but his efforts didn't last very long. By the end of the summer, Prashenjit was worse than ever. He'd gotten close to Tanya's younger brother, Alex, all in an effort to ingratiate himself with the Tarasov family. And that was just the beginning of it. Prashenjit had also hatched a plan to put Tanya into some kind of dangerous situation that he could then rescue her from. He wanted to prove he was worthy of her love.

And to make it feel real, he was going to buy a gun. The second Prashenjit told his friend Farooq Mystery about his idea, Farooq told Prashenjit's therapist Dr. Lawrence Moore. After spending the summer in sessions with Prashenjit, Dr. Moore knew this was a dangerous situation. Prashenjit hadn't been following his advice, and when Dr. Moore confronted him about his unhinged plan on August 18, 1969, Prashenjit stormed out of his office. It was the last appointment they'd ever have.

Working with someone who's resistant to treatment or mental health providers in general is a challenging situation for any clinician. It's something I've encountered in my own work as a forensic psychologist. And in fairness, most of the individuals I work with in a forensic setting are often court ordered, so they're even more likely to be treatment resistant because they're not there voluntarily. So when you have a patient like Prashenjit, you're not just dealing with standard denial or defensiveness. As I outlined in episode 1, Prashenjit exhibits rigid thinking, obsessive fixation, features of erotomania, paranoia, and emotional dysregulation. This leaves very little room for insight or compromise.

While it's true he's showing up for his sessions, it seems he's using these to justify his thinking, not to genuinely reflect or change, because when challenged, he reacted angrily and prematurely canceled the session. This is highly suggestive of delusional thinking. In cases like this, when you challenge the fantasy or delusion like Dr. Moore did, it's common to see anger and defensiveness as a reaction and it's even more common to see resistance to treatment moving forward. Providers have to be very strategic when working with individuals with delusions or obsessions to avoid that premature termination or avoid becoming part of their delusion, especially when there's paranoia. Generally, before we challenge any delusion, we need to establish a strong therapeutic rapport first. Not by colluding with the delusional beliefs, but

with providing coping skills for them because their beliefs are distressing, regardless of whether or not they're rooted in reality. But when we are dealing with individuals who are highly obsessive or delusional and endorsing violent threats, it's even more concerning, because it does require challenging, because of the imminent concern, and that will most certainly provoke or escalate the individual. Fortunately for me, the times in which I've encountered this exact scenario, the individual was already in custody and therefore the risk of harm to others was already managed by virtue of their environment and 24-hour surveillance.

Well, Dr. Moore was definitely concerned about Prashenjit's reaction. He seriously thought about calling the police, but that would be a major escalation because it would require violating doctor-patient confidentiality. However, in some circumstances, it is allowed. At that time, a doctor could only violate a patient's confidentiality if he is required to do so by law or unless it becomes necessary in order to protect the welfare of the individual or of the community. And Dr. Moore wasn't sure if Prashenjit's threat rose to that level. He didn't have a history of violence, which made it unlikely that he'd hurt anyone in the future. But something about this case just didn't feel right.

Dr. Moore was convinced that Prashenjit was capable of hurting Tanya. He knew he had to act before she came back from Brazil. So he called the Berkeley campus police. That afternoon, officers Johnny Teel and Everett Atkinson arrived at Dr. Moore's office. They understood his concerns, but they couldn't detain Prashenjit just yet. In order to take him in for observation, they needed a medical doctor to sign off on it. And although Dr. Moore did have a doctoral degree, he wasn't an M.D., which meant the responsibility fell to Prashenjit's original psychiatrist, Dr. Stuart Gold.

He was happy to help, but by the time Dr. Moore had everything he needed, two days had passed and then it took another two days for officers Teel and Atkinson to respond. But when they visited Prashenjit at work on August 22, they didn't understand what all the fuss was about. He was kind and respectful, nothing like the manic psychopath Dr. Moore had described. Prashenjit said it was all a big misunderstanding. Of course he would never hurt Tanya. When he'd made those threats in Dr. Moore's office, he was just blowing off some steam.

If anything, Tanya was the problem. Prashenjit said she liked to play with his feelings and throw her other relationships in his face. By the end of the interview, the officers seemed to be on Prashenjit's side. They left him alone and even gave him a card in case he ever needed their help. So what we're seeing here is actually a really classic pattern in some individuals with obsessive fixations. And it's a big reason why these cases are so difficult for law enforcement,

clinicians, and even friends and family to navigate. By the time the police got to Prashenjit, he knew what they wanted to hear because he was already challenged by Dr. Moore. So he used impression management to convince the police he was not the problem. But how was he so convincing? So first, Prashenjit wasn't irrational across the board. Outside of his fixation with Tanya, he seemed to present as intelligent, polite, and articulate, and he was studying to become an engineer. These factors make it difficult for others, especially those who aren't clinically trained,

to believe that he could be dangerous. He's not ranting or disorganized, which is often what people mistakenly expect when they picture someone who might commit violence. Second, there's an element of manipulation. Though often not conscious in the way we think of sociopathic manipulation, in Prashenjit's mind, he may have genuinely believed that he was the victim and that Tanya's rejection or, quote, mixed signals justified his behavior. So when he spoke to police he wasn't necessarily lying in the traditional sense at least to him.

He was spinning the narrative that he'd built to protect that fantasy. And of course there is an element of law enforcement bias occurring here as well. It's very common for officers especially at that time to feel reassured by a cooperative non-threatening demeanor. They walked into the interview expecting a dangerous and unstable person, and instead they met a pleasant young man who, quote, just got a little carried away. That contrast can cause even experienced officers into minimizing risk. Well, the campus police officers weren't the only ones who bought Prashenjit's act. About a week after the officers interviewed him at work, Dr. Moore was summoned to his

boss's office. He'd been on vacation when Dr. Moore asked for Prashenjit to be forcibly committed, and he wasn't happy that Dr. Moore had acted without him. Dr. Moore argued that he was trying to act in Prashenjit's best interest, but his boss wasn't buying it. He put Dr. Moore on probation and told him to destroy all correspondence with the campus police so there wouldn't be a record of it. He didn't want it getting out that Dr. Moore had broken confidentiality with his patient.

Dr. Moore did as he was told. Mostly. He was still worried about the situation and decided to keep a copy of his original note asking for the police's help. He hoped the situation wouldn't escalate, but if Prosenjic did ever try to hurt Tanya, at least Dr. Moore would be able to prove he'd done the right thing. And Dr. Moore was right to be concerned. because Tanya was about to return to Berkeley, and Prochenjit was ready to put his plan into action. Tanya Tarasoff arrived in Berkeley in the early fall of 1969.

It was a bittersweet return. During her last week in Brazil, she'd met someone, an American guy named Patrick. He was everything Prashenjeet wasn't. Adventurous, confident, and a bit of a bad boy. The two of them had spent Tanya's final weekend in Brazil cozying up in a hotel. Tanya was sad to leave him, but Patrick promised to visit her over Christmas. Besides, there was something important waiting for her back home.

Before leaving for Brazil, she'd applied to transfer from her community college to UC Berkeley. It was against her father's wishes, but Tânanya had done it anyway. The decision letter was there when she arrived, and Tanya got in. But it wasn't all good news. Tanya also found out that her younger brother, Alex, had moved into an apartment with Prashenjit. She couldn't believe it. Alex knew all about Tanya's problems with him. She'd wanted to completely cut ties with Prashenjit, but that would be merely impossible if he was living with her brother. Alex told Prashenjit that Tanya wasn't interested in seeing him. He agreed to respect her wishes. There was just one problem though. The two of them were throwing a housewarming party

that weekend and Tanya was invited. Prochenjit was going to skip the party. He really was. But then he started to think maybe Tanya wouldn't even show, and if she did, he could still keep his distance from her. Or maybe, just maybe, this could be the night where everything changed. Meanwhile, Tanya was trying to decide if she would actually go to the party or not. She didn't want to be around Prashenjit.

And yet something was drawing her to that party. She didn't want Prashenjit controlling her life. Tanya's thinking here is actually very understandable and very human. What we're seeing is someone who's trying to reclaim a sense of power and control Up until this point so much of her dynamic with prosciente had been defined by his feelings and his obsessions and his needs She was the target of his fixation and that can leave a person feeling trapped helpless and even objectified By choosing to go to the party part of Tanya was likely trying to say, I am not going to let you control me, especially if he is living with her brother, and she can't avoid him anyway. She is trying to make the best of an unfortunate situation.

And then there's the piece about him wanting to see her doing well, not because she wanted to reconnect, but because she may have hoped this would help him move on in some way. And this was effective at one point earlier on. So that's not manipulative, that's often part of the healing process for someone trying to move past unhealthy or controlling relationships. To be clear, this isn't a case of Tanya playing games or taunting Kroshenjit. Though sadly, victims are sometimes unfairly framed that way. What I believe she's trying to do here is assert her independence after feeling emotionally suffocated for so long.

She didn't want to hide or live in fear, and honestly, no one should have to. The tragedy, of course, is that in cases where someone is dealing with an obsessive individual like Prashenjit, even healthy acts of autonomy can be misinterpreted as provocative or rejection, which can further escalate risk. But Tanya's desire to reclaim control here makes perfect psychological sense. And she was not fully aware of the extent

of Prashenjit's mental state and fixation on her either. Well, at the party, Tanya didn't speak to Prashenjeet directly, but she made a point to speak extra loudly when she told some friends about her summer in Brazil, especially when she told them all about the guy she'd met, Patrick. But if Tanya thought it would make Prashenjeet back off, she was wrong. If anything, it only intensified his feelings for her. And now, there was no getting away from him. Because a couple weeks later, Tanya finally started classes at UC Berkeley. Everywhere Tanya went, Prashenjit seemed

to be there, lurking in a doorway or watching her in the distance. No matter how many times she or her friends told him to leave her alone, Prashenjit wouldn't listen. Prashenjit is engaging in different types of stalking behavior, and I think they're escalating because he's misinterpreting her enrollment in Berkeley as having some kind of special meaning with him. First, he's engaging in a stalking behavior known as life invasion,

because he's now living with her brother and engaging in repeated unwanted contact. And the second stalking behavior is surveillance. He's following and watching her from a distance. And the typology that he falls under is the incompetent stutter. That's the type of stalker. It stems from loneliness or lust and the motivation is to establish a friendship or relationship. They are not perceptive to disinterest and persist even when they know their advances are unwelcome. Though I don't think these behaviors and typologies were identified and classified as they are now back in this time. So Tanya took radical action at this point. On October 8th, she called Prashenjit at work.

Earlier that year, remember he'd gifted her a traditional Indian dress called a sari. In Prashenjit's culture, this type of sari was a betrothal gift. At the time, Tanya didn't know that. But since then, she'd learned what it meant. And now, she told Prashenjit she was going to burn it. After Tanya hung up, Prashenjit was devastated. The reality of his situation finally began to sink in. But that didn't mean he was giving up. Instead, he decided it was time to put his twisted plan into action.

Prashenjit went to see one of his buddies from I-House, a guy named Goryan Nuaz. He wanted Goryan to pay Tanya for sex, but just before they did it, Prashenjit would burst into the room with a gun and save her. Goryan thought it sounded insane, but he didn't want to turn Prashenjit down then and there. Goryan told him he'd think about it and let him know in a couple days. there. Gorean told him he'd think about it and let him know in a couple days. Thinking the plan was on, Prashenji moved on to the next step, buying the gun. Since he wasn't a U.S. citizen, he could only buy a pellet gun. But that was just fine for his purposes. It just had to look the part. And in any case, pellet guns are still pretty dangerous if you're close enough. So I know we talked about his plans in episode one, but we're seeing a real shift here,

and it's a critical one in terms of risk escalation. Earlier in the case, Prashenjit's plan to, quote, rescue Tanya was still largely confined to fantasy. There was magical thinking, obsessive rehearsal, and imagining how those things would play out. That kind of thinking is dangerous on its own, but here's where things take a much more serious turn. He went from verbalizing it to putting his plan in motion. He's recruiting another person, he's strategizing, he's identifying obstacles like his inability to buy a real gun, and then problem solving around them.

So essentially, he's adapting his plan to the circumstances. That's not just obsessive fantasy anymore. That's pre-offense behavior. And so are the stalking behaviors I outlined. It's showcasing just how rigid and delusional his thinking has become. He not only thinks this plan will work, but he is not even giving thought to the trauma that this would cause Tanya, whom he claims to love. And let's not overlook his recruiting of Gorean.

It tells us something else. Prosenji no longer feels conflicted or guilty about manipulating others to pull this off. That shows increasing emotional detachment from the real world consequences, which is something we often see as obsession escalates toward violence. Is there a connection between love, desire, obsession, and violence? What is it that's fueling Prashenjit's mindset here? So yes, absolutely, especially when there's evidence of entitlement and there are stalking behaviors like this.

What's happening is it's entering the mindset of, if I can't have you, no one will. And that is highly dangerous. Obsession can feel like love on the surface to people, especially someone like Prashenjit, but it's fundamentally about control. Because when the fantasy breaks down, the person may lash out,

not because they hate the object of their obsession, but because they cannot tolerate losing the thing that they've built their entire identity around. they hate the object of their obsession, but because they cannot tolerate losing the thing that they've built their entire identity around. And that's what's fueling Prashenjit's mindset here. Eventually, Gauriand told Prashenjit he wasn't going to help him. But rumors about Prashenjit's plan had already started to spread around. At some point in mid-October, Tanya learned about it.

She realized she would never be able to deal with Prashenjit herself. So she called the I-House and told them about her problems with him. They connected Tanya with the International Student Advisor, but her soonest appointment wasn't until the following week, on October 28th. In the meantime, Prashenjit was spiraling. On October 26th, he asked Alex to invite Tanya over. When he said no, Prashenjit kept pushing. Eventually, Alex pushed back, physically. Then he stormed out of the apartment.

But at this point, nothing was going to stop Prashenjit. After Alex left, he decided if he couldn't get Tanya to come to him, he would go to her. Later that day, Prashenjit knocked on the Tarasov's front door. Tanya's mom, Lydia, answered. She told Prashenjit that her daughter wasn't home, and even if she was, Tanya didn't want to see him. As she shooed Prashenjit away, Lydia said that if her husband Vitaly ever saw him, he'd beat Prashenjit up. As he slunk away, Lydia probably thought that was enough to scare him off for good.

But she didn't know Prashenjit very well. And that encounter had only made him more dangerous. That evening, Prashenjit came back when he knew Tanya would be home. This time, he had his air gun and a knife. He likely told himself it was for protection, in case Vitaly spotted him. Prashenjit tiptoed up the front walk and rang the doorbell. Tanya cracked open the door and said she didn't want to talk to him. But when she went to close it, Prashenjit jammed his foot inside. He shoved his weight against the door and burst in. At that point, all Tanya could do was scream. Prashenjit

fired his air gun at her, emptying the clip. When she still didn't stop screaming, he chased Tanya onto the front lawn and stabbed her to death. What we see here is a tragic combination of both a slow, dangerous build-up over months and then a very specific trigger moment that tips everything over the edge. Prashenjit didn't just snap out of nowhere. And in his build-up, we can see the pathway to violence, the progressive series of steps where fantasy turns into planning, then preparation, and finally action. And these situations often end with a trigger moment.

In Prashenjit's case, that moment happened at the door. Tanya firmly told him she didn't want to see him. She tried to physically shut him out. In that instant, it wasn't just about being rejected. He was being actively excluded, which likely felt like total humiliation and abandonment, at least to him. In this moment, all of the control he'd been trying to maintain over the situation unraveled, and when people with obsessive fixations lose that perceived control, it often triggers rage reactions like this.

The fact that Tanya screamed likely overwhelmed him further. Remember, Prashenjit is already emotionally dysregulated, and in that state, individuals can't tolerate heightened arousal like fear, noise, or panic, which is what led to this level of disorganized violence. How do people lie to themselves in situations like this? Do you think it's really possible that Prashenjit actually thought he'd only brought those weapons in case he had to defend himself? Yes and no. Prashenjit may have sincerely believed parts of his own justification, but that belief was built on a foundation of denial, entitlement,

and emotional distortion. And that's how obsessions escalate. By allowing the person to commit acts they would otherwise see as unthinkable, all while convincing themselves it's still somehow justified. Well, after it was over, Prashenjit didn't try to run. Once he realized what he'd done, he went back into the house and dialed 911. He told the dispatcher, I just stabbed my girlfriend. This episode is brought to you by Adidas. When the frustration grows and the doubts start to creep in, we all need someone who has our back.

To tell us we'll be okay, to remind us of our ability to believe because their belief in us transfers to self belief and reminds us of all that we're capable of. We all need someone to make us believe. Hashtag you got this. Are you ready to dive into the unknown? Join me, Peyton Moreland on Into the Dark, the true crime podcast from Ono Media with a hint of horror and mystery. Each week, I dive into a different case,

breaking down the facts, and pondering the age-old question, why do people do what they do? Now, sometimes the answer isn't so clear, and that's why I'll also explore conspiracy theories, hauntings, and all things spooky. From the Green River Killer to the Mothman Incident, we will unravel all of the questions that keep us up at night. So don't miss out. Subscribe now on your favorite podcast platform.

New episodes drop every Wednesday. Into the dark, where true crime meets the eerie unknown. On October 26th, 1969, 24-year-old Prashenjit Potter stabbed 20-year-old Tanya Tarasov to death. After killing her, Prashenjit calmly called the police and told them what happened. When they arrived a few moments later, he put his hands over his head and asked them to arrest him. So let's talk about this reaction. For someone like Prashenjit, this moment likely represented both the fulfillment and the destruction of the fantasy he had been clinging to. Tanya was never going to love him, and now she never could. The emotional struggle that had consumed him for so long, the longing that this relationship

would eventually be possible, all of that was suddenly over in the most tragic and permanent way possible. That's why his behavior after the murder feels so oddly calm, even relieved. Once the obsessive tension has been discharged through violence, some individuals experience a kind of emotional flattening or resignation. In some cases, it may even feel like a kind of twisted relief. Not joy, of course, but the relief of no longer having to carry the unbearable weight of their obsession. Which I think is especially true here for Prashenjit, because remember, he agreed to go to a therapist because the weight of this became too much. He could no longer cope with the feelings and the emotions

that his obsession was creating. Well, while the police dealt with Prashenjit, Tanya's body was transported to the hospital where she was officially pronounced dead upon arrival. Unsurprisingly, her cause of death was the stab wounds she'd suffered. But the coroner also discovered something else that made this crime even more tragic.

Tanya had been six weeks pregnant. Once Prashenjit was taken into custody, he was charged with first degree murder. But just because he'd been cooperative during his arrest, that didn't mean Prashenjit was going to make it easy on the prosecutors. During his arraignment, he pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. In the lead-up to the trial, Prashenjit was examined by at least three psychiatrists and a psychologist.

When the proceedings began in August 1970, they testified that Prashenjit did suffer from paranoid schizophrenia, the same condition Dr. Gold had diagnosed him with in the months before Tanya's murder. However, there was a disagreement over whether Prashenjit was capable of the premeditated malice required for first-degree murder. After the 17-day trial concluded, 25-year-old Prashenjit was found guilty of second-degree murder, meaning the jury didn't think he came to Tanya's house with the intention of killing her.

In the end, Prashenjit was sentenced to five years to life in prison. But the story wasn't over yet. After his conviction, Prashenjit hired a new attorney and filed an appeal. Prashenjit's lawyer argued that the judge had failed to properly instruct the jury on the meaning of diminished capacity. The appeals court agreed. They felt that if the jury had gotten better instructions, there was a good chance that Prashenjit wouldn't have been convicted at all.

Prashenjit was released in 1974 and a new trial was ordered. But it seems like nobody had the appetite to go through another long drawn out proceeding. Instead, Prashenjit was deported back to India. It was like his crime had never happened. Upon his return, Prashenjit's father arranged for him to marry a lawyer. He continued his studies in naval architecture and went on to have a daughter. But even though Prashenjit managed to escape his crimes without facing much consequence, Tanya received justice in other ways. Following the initial trial, Tanya's parents,

Lydia and Vitaly, filed a wrongful death suit against the regents of the University of California in September 1970. The case worked its way through the legal system for a few years until it reached the California State Supreme Court in 1974, the same year Prashenjit was released. In a landmark ruling now known by the shorthand Tarasov, the court dramatically altered the rules around doctor-patient confidentiality. Their decision established that if a psychologist's

patient is making threats, they have a duty to warn the potential victim. If this had been in place, Tanya might have been able to protect herself from Prashenjit. There was some pushback from doctors who were worried about doctor-patient relationships, but the decision was upheld in 1976. It was even broadened to establish a psychologist's duty to protect, not just warn. Meaning, a therapist may need to do more than just warn a potential victim. They may need to civilly commit the patient or take other action in order to protect the greater good.

Before long, this decision became precedent throughout the country. The ruling states, quote, protective privilege ends where public peril begins. I recall learning about this case very thoroughly in graduate school as a result. In California, because I can only speak to their law and ethics, the duty to protect has been expanded even more since then and beyond just the patient's disclosure. If we receive serious threats of violence that are disclosed to us by a patient's family member and the threat is credible, we can breach confidentiality to ensure the protection

of the intended victim. When we find ourselves in a tear us off situation, we are required to notify law enforcement or the potential victim directly. However, we often need to rely on law enforcement to notify the victim because we don't have their number or address and the patient won't often disclose it to us. Law enforcement has the means to get that when we can't. I have had many occasions where I needed

to initiate Tarasoff, but the majority of them occurred when I worked in corrections. As you can imagine, incarcerated individuals threaten serious violence against one another quite often. And although most of the time it's for secondary gain, like for example, they threaten their celly to get single cell status, but sometimes it is very serious. Thankfully, they are already incarcerated and law enforcement is right there to inform and they

take measures to ensure safety and security immediately, but the same is not always true in the community. The unfortunate experience I have had when having to initiate Tarasoff in the community is the pushback I would get from law enforcement. It even happened when I worked in corrections. It pains me to say this, but I would say 80% of the time, the law enforcement official I report to expresses frustration. The common reaction is, well, aren't you the mental health doctor? Why don't you do something about it? And they seem to think that we are trying to pass the responsibility onto them entirely, but in reality, we need to be working together as a team. It's been my experience that many officers believe that if the patient is

a threat then we should simply hospitalize them to solve the problem, but it's not that simple. Firstly, although they are verbalizing homicidal ideation, they might not meet criteria for involuntary hospitalization because involuntary hospitalization. Because involuntary hospitalization is taking away someone's civil rights and the law is very clear about what qualifies someone for this. Like I said, there have been a lot of incidents where someone was verbalizing homicidal ideation to us, but it was for secondary gain. It wasn't an actual threat. Secondly, they can only be hospitalized temporarily. There are maximum commitment laws and it's not a long-term solution.

But let's say they do appear to meet criteria for an involuntary hold and we are in the community. In California, we typically still have to call emergency services to write the hold because most mental health providers aren't certified to write holds, which I know is surprising, but it's true, and all police officers are certified. We also need them to help safely transport them to a designated hospital, whether they use their cruiser or they call for medical transport. So their involvement is necessary in more ways than one.

The initial 5150 hold lasts up to 72 hours, but upon arrival to the designated hospital, the hospital staff does an evaluation of their own and ultimately makes a determination as to whether or not they need that full amount, or if they need to have it extended beyond the initial 72 hours. The point in all of this is that when it comes to initiating tariffs off or an involuntary hospitalization, we need law enforcement and we need to work together to ensure the safety for all. If this decision had been in place prior to Tanya's death, do you think things might have played out differently?

That's an excellent question. And the difficult part about this is that Dr. Moore did recognize that Prosenji was dangerous. He listened to the threats. He reported his concerns to campus authorities who then contacted campus police. And despite getting criticized and admonished professionally for that, at least that part of the system

worked to that point. But here's where it failed. Law enforcement didn't believe that he was a threat. There was not a clear legal obligation to warn Tanya herself. The threat information stayed within the university and the university erroneously believed that because Prashenjit presented his column to both police and the university that his true threat risk was low. If Tarasov versus Regents of the University

of California was law at this time, Tanya would have been notified. Individuals would be legally obligated to work with law enforcement to develop a more active protection plan, perhaps initiating a restraining order or monitoring him closely. Providers would be less apprehensive about reporting their patient because they have legal protections now for doing so,

and they won't fear being professionally admonished as a result. But if the law was in place then would that have stopped Prashenjit in the end and there's no way to tell. At the very least though, Tanya would have been notified and could have been prepared and could have created safety plans even when everything else failed her. Her family and her friends could have been a part of those plans. It's all so unfortunate, but Tarasov forced the legal and clinical world to finally acknowledge what so many stalking, obsession, and violence cases show us.

And that's the greatest danger is often when the victims never even know they're at risk, and now people have a chance to know when they're in danger. There's no doubt that this case had a far-reaching impact. And at the center of it were two young people trying to find their way in the world. Both Prashenjit and Tanya had dreams of a meaningful life in Berkeley, full of love and freedom. But that's where their similarities ended. Prashenjit tried to force that dream into reality at the expense of everything else.

His obsession with Tanya led him down a dark path of pain and misery. At the end of it, an innocent young woman paid the ultimate price, exposing the true dangers of what happens when our desires go unchecked and nobody is there to stop them. Thanks so much for listening. Come back next time for a deep dive into the mind of another murderer. Killer Minds is a CrimeHouse Original powered by PAVE Studios. Here at CrimeHouse, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on social media at Crime House.

And don't forget to rate, review, and follow Killer Minds wherever you get your podcasts. Your feedback truly makes a difference. And to enhance your listening experience, subscribe to Crime House Plus on Apple Podcasts. You'll get every episode of Killer Minds ad-free, along with early access to each thrilling two-part series and exciting bonus content. Killer Minds is hosted by me Vanessa Richardson and Dr. Tristan Engels and is a Crime House original powered by Pave Studios. This episode was brought to life by the Killer Minds team Max Cutler, Ron Shapiro, Alex Benedon, Laurie Maranelli, Natalie Pertsowski,

Sarah Camp, Sarah Corey, Sarah Tardiff, and Carrie Murphy. Thank you for listening.