CA CA - Farren Stanberry, 18, San Francisco, 24 Apr 1980

[Ciriii57]

Apologies to fellow sleuthers that as a foreigner I can’t help out much with questions about banks, Greyhounds or rural camp grounds. But I might be able to help out with the idea of tracking people from this time in San Francisco.


I have done a bit of archival reading and I think the National Hotel was one of a number of hotels specifically catering to the LGBTIQ+ community in San Francisco. It was well-known - perhaps even iconic. I

This was a time when people were flocking to San Francisco as the gay rights movement gained momentum. This was also true in Australia, where I am from. (Sydney was the main place people went, including some of my family members.)

I found some issues online of a SF-based periodical magazine called The Gay Crusader from 1972 -1978. It is archived at U Berkeley. I don’t really know how to classify this magazine except to say I doubt it would be a Websleuths-approved mainstream media source if this case was current! But it has huge amounts of advertising so it must have had a large readership.I can’t work out if it is gossip rag with occasional useful social and political commentary, or a source of social and political commentary on the issues facing the San Francisco queer community with a lot of gossip and hookup content. Maybe it was a student publication idk.

Note: NSFW content abounds when you look this publication up.

Google Gay Crusader and 1139 Market or National Hotel they will all come up. This was very much the centre of things at least prior to 1980 (can’t find issues post-70s). It seems there was all kinds of crime, drama and carry on associated w the hotel and there is a manager who i won’t name who is repeatedly discuseed And referenced as though the writers know him personally (not the person mentioned here). I’ll post some screen grabs if I can get mod approval. This guy is important.

Amazing to think of Farren in this environment.

The urban gay subcultures of the 70s and 80s were a completely separate ecosystem. They had their own newspapers and magazines. You could purchase travel guides that told you where was safe and welcoming to go all over the USA and the world (you can see these advertised in the SF newspapers linked here by sleuthers). These media advertised bars and clubs, jobs, tradesman, sex work, seeking singles, social events like balls and sports clubs and also reported on political and social justice stuff to do with the gay rights movement. Basically people could just turn up in San Fran, get a copy of local gay press as they left the Amtrak or whatever and find out what they needed to know.

People went to these urban hubs and literally reinvented themselves. New names, new lives.
It would have been an incredibly brave thing to do, and potentially very lonely and yes, dangerous.

Not knowing anything much about Farren, it’s hard to say what being a part of the scene meant to him. It might not have been about his relationship with any family in particular but simply about being same-sex attracted and seeking a place to be himself around others like him.

There would possibly be gay elders remaining from this time who remember this hotel specifically and the characters who frequented it. I think keeping on working w the GLBT archive (once we’ve figured out what to ask for) and asking for contacts via any current existing gay press in California would be useful places to start. Is anyone here a SF local?

Amazing! I am definitely gonna be googling this when I get the chance (not til next week now ! I can't believe that The National was iconic, let alone a hub for crime! Sgt Rand described it as a flop house! And to have found another manager name is outstanding, but it would be interesting to find out if this person was still there in 1980- it's possible the hotel came under new ownership. I only wonder this as I notice that as from 1980 there is a change in their advert style. Less of the "wildest in the west" and more restrained "gay managed".
Still, what are we talking here in terms of this guy and crime? Are we talking drugs, prostitution, mafia style things?

I can't imagine Farren specifically chose this hotel, but he did have roommates so I wonder if they were already a part of this scene or he met them there. Could they have gotten him into something dodgy? I can't imagine Farren ever came across any if these publications in John Day, but if SF was well known at the time to be somewhere gay people could be relatively open then that could have drawn him there.
Of course, we still can't be certain if Farren was actually gay but with all the evidence I think it's an extremely strong possibility.

You mentioned how people went to these places and reinvented themselves, changed their names etc. I recently found that in 1980 California you could change your name without going to court, just fill in a form. What do you think the chances of Farren doing this are, as opposed to being killed?

 

[Ciriii57]

Malheur National Forest - Joaquin Miller Horse Camp

Malheur National Forest - Joaquin Miller Horse Camp

www.fs.usda.gov

Yes it appears to be a lightly used and unmanned campground. Generally only the busiest campgrounds are manned in the Forest Service system. I would assume it was even less developed in 1980 -- probably not a horse camp at that time but just a regular campground.


No horse breeding or horses provided for riding -- a horse camp is a campground for people with their own horses, who like to ride them on allowed forest trails. The campground would have room for horse trailers, corrals where the horses can be secured, etc. Only the infrastructure is provided -- the horse folks bring the horses.

If you want to try to get some history on the campground, call the Malheur National Forest and ask for the historian, if they have one, or else the Recreation Officer. The Forest Supervisor is an administrative position and probably not the person to talk to.

(source: I am a former Forest Service employee)

@Auntie Cipation thank you very much for this info. So you are our resident forestry expert then!
I'm interested that back in 1980 this would have been a very remote, quiet campground. Might you have any insight into why Farren went there alone? Why his family dropped him there? I just can't see then dropping him only part way to his destination, not does this look like a busy road to hitchhike along or where there would be a bus stop.
Possible there was an event? Is it remotely possible this was a gay hookup spot?

I am afraid I may have to defer to you on this one about contacting the historian/recreation officer unless there is an email address. I'm based in Malta and even though I would happily call everywhere my husband would go ballsitic! (I asked him if we could consider a vacation to SF, his response "I'm not spending my holiday handing out missing person fliers" ) haha

 

[Auntie Cipation]

@Auntie Cipation thank you very much for this info. So you are our resident forestry expert then!
I'm interested that back in 1980 this would have been a very remote, quiet campground. Might you have any insight into why Farren went there alone? Why his family dropped him there? I just can't see then dropping him only part way to his destination, not does this look like a busy road to hitchhike along or where there would be a bus stop.
Possible there was an event? Is it remotely possible this was a gay hookup spot?

I am afraid I may have to defer to you on this one about contacting the historian/recreation officer unless there is an email address. I'm based in Malta and even though I would happily call everywhere my husband would go ballsitic! (I asked him if we could consider a vacation to SF, his response "I'm not spending my holiday handing out missing person fliers" ) haha

I can't speculate why a person would go alone to a campground -- if he were going to simply camp by himself it seems his family would have known that, so I assume he was meeting others -- either for a "hookup" or as a meeting point to then travel together.

I'm not available to do the Forest research, but I assume there would be email addresses available on the website, as well as phone numbers. I know you are far away but I thought perhaps others on the thread might be available to delve into that.

I don't necessarily know much about forestry per se, but about Forest Service activities and services, I'm happy to share my experience if it may be helpful. I didn't start with them until 1990 so even my thoughts will be guesses about how things were done a decade prior to that.

 

[KathPlumber]

Amazing! I am definitely gonna be googling this when I get the chance (not til next week now ! I can't believe that The National was iconic, let alone a hub for crime! Sgt Rand described it as a flop house! And to have found another manager name is outstanding, but it would be interesting to find out if this person was still there in 1980- it's possible the hotel came under new ownership. I only wonder this as I notice that as from 1980 there is a change in their advert style. Less of the "wildest in the west" and more restrained "gay managed".
Still, what are we talking here in terms of this guy and crime? Are we talking drugs, prostitution, mafia style things?

I can't imagine Farren specifically chose this hotel, but he did have roommates so I wonder if they were already a part of this scene or he met them there. Could they have gotten him into something dodgy? I can't imagine Farren ever came across any if these publications in John Day, but if SF was well known at the time to be somewhere gay people could be relatively open then that could have drawn him there.
Of course, we still can't be certain if Farren was actually gay but with all the evidence I think it's an extremely strong possibility.

You mentioned how people went to these places and reinvented themselves, changed their names etc. I recently found that in 1980 California you could change your name without going to court, just fill in a form. What do you think the chances of Farren doing this are, as opposed to being killed?

I wouldn’t be surprised if when he went to college that’s when Farren got the idea of moving to SF, either from someone else or from something he was exposed to.

San Francisco was nationally prominent at the time for it’s LGBTIQ+ community. The first gay holder of public office in the USA, Harvey Milk, was shot dead in San Francisco in 1978. 1978 was also the year the rainbow flag flew for the first time at the San Francisco Pride parade.

There was also a lot of public and vocal homophobia across the USA in this era due to the “anti-gay crusade” of Anita Bryant. It wouldn’t have necessarily have been safe all the time for LGBTIQ+ people even in San Francisco. There were still police raids on gay venues and regular harrassment and so on.

Years of operating in the shadows due to the criminalisation of their sexuality meant that LGBTIQ+ people have evolved a way of interacting that involved a lot of secrecy and subterfuge. To read the San Francisco Chronicle and see: Cruising, bath houses, saunas, pseudonyms and sex work might seem seamy and unpleasant, but in reality these had been the only ways (for men in particular) to actually connect with anyone else who might be like you. It also meant that there was danger and you weren’t protected, maybe friends didn’t know where you were at all times, maybe no one knew your real name. Sex work was very common and quite dangerous, not just because you could be harmed by customers but you could get picked up by the cops who intentionally patrolled known beats looking for people to arrest for soliciting etc.

So, honestly I think it’s more likely Farren came to harm than just changed his name and disappeared.

I found a blog written by a woman whose sister died in San Francisco in this period. The sister was living at the National Hotel, having changed her name and undergone some gender affirming treatment. It’s rather a sad little story. It’s an example of what people went through at that time I guess.

 

[Satch]

I wouldn’t be surprised if when he went to college that’s when Farren got the idea of moving to SF, either from someone else or from something he was exposed to.

San Francisco was nationally prominent at the time for it’s LGBTIQ+ community. The first gay holder of public office in the USA, Harvey Milk, was shot dead in San Francisco in 1978. 1978 was also the year the rainbow flag flew for the first time at the San Francisco Pride parade.

There was also a lot of public and vocal homophobia across the USA in this era due to the “anti-gay crusade” of Anita Bryant. It wouldn’t have necessarily have been safe all the time for LGBTIQ+ people even in San Francisco. There were still police raids on gay venues and regular harrassment and so on.

Years of operating in the shadows due to the criminalisation of their sexuality meant that LGBTIQ+ people have evolved a way of interacting that involved a lot of secrecy and subterfuge. To read the San Francisco Chronicle and see: Cruising, bath houses, saunas, pseudonyms and sex work might seem seamy and unpleasant, but in reality these had been the only ways (for men in particular) to actually connect with anyone else who might be like you. It also meant that there was danger and you weren’t protected, maybe friends didn’t know where you were at all times, maybe no one knew your real name. Sex work was very common and quite dangerous, not just because you could be harmed by customers but you could get picked up by the cops who intentionally patrolled known beats looking for people to arrest for soliciting etc.

So, honestly I think it’s more likely Farren came to harm than just changed his name and disappeared.

I found a blog written by a woman whose sister died in San Francisco in this period. The sister was living at the National Hotel, having changed her name and undergone some gender affirming treatment. It’s rather a sad little story. It’s an example of what people went through at that time I guess.

Powerful insight,

We have no record of Farren graduating from high school.

Satch

 

[KathPlumber]

Powerful insight,

We have no record of Farren graduating from high school.

Satch

Oh yeah sorry, I saw the name of Farren’s final high school (Medford?) and Mis-took it for his college.

 

[Satch]

Oh yeah sorry, I saw the name of Farren’s final high school (Medford?) and Mis-took it for his college.

In relation to Farren's education,

He spent his first two years of High School in John Day Oregon, than attended another high school in his third year at Medford Oregon, six hours away. We don't know why Farren moved to Medford, or who he was living with at that time. At some point, he returned to John Day. His father traveled a lot, but lived a mountain man lifestyle. Mother had mental issues so his grandmother and Aunt raised him.

It is possible that Farren's father lived in Medford at the time of Farren's third year of high school, and perhaps Farren was living with him. But we don't know why or when he moved to Medord on a temporary basis. Another family mystery within a family mystery. Same as whether or not he graduated, and if he did, from what school?

Satch

 

[Tricia]

Dear Websleuths Members and Guests,
My apologies for interrupting your discussion.
Because of the downturn in advertising, we are short on the server payment.
We need to raise $1,700 this upcoming week or the server will be shut off.
Please know I hate asking but I am left with no choice.
Below are the ways you can donate
PayPal Pay Websleuths.com, LLC using PayPal.Me
Venmo name Tricia-Griffith-14
OR
Cash App $tgrif14
THANK YOU
Zelle use triciastruecrimeradio@gmail.com
Be sure and put "server" in the memo.
The ad revenue is growing but it is growing slowly. I am hoping I don't need to ask you again.
Please, only donate if you can afford to do so. DO NOT DONATE ONE PENNY UNLESS YOU ARE SURE YOU CAN.
Thank you, everyone. I appreciate your help.
If you have questions please do not post them on this thread. CLICK HERE and that will take you to the thread where you can ask questions.
Take Care,
Tricia Griffith
Owner/Websleuths.com

 

[Ciriii57]

I wouldn’t be surprised if when he went to college that’s when Farren got the idea of moving to SF, either from someone else or from something he was exposed to.

San Francisco was nationally prominent at the time for it’s LGBTIQ+ community. The first gay holder of public office in the USA, Harvey Milk, was shot dead in San Francisco in 1978. 1978 was also the year the rainbow flag flew for the first time at the San Francisco Pride parade.

There was also a lot of public and vocal homophobia across the USA in this era due to the “anti-gay crusade” of Anita Bryant. It wouldn’t have necessarily have been safe all the time for LGBTIQ+ people even in San Francisco. There were still police raids on gay venues and regular harrassment and so on.

Years of operating in the shadows due to the criminalisation of their sexuality meant that LGBTIQ+ people have evolved a way of interacting that involved a lot of secrecy and subterfuge. To read the San Francisco Chronicle and see: Cruising, bath houses, saunas, pseudonyms and sex work might seem seamy and unpleasant, but in reality these had been the only ways (for men in particular) to actually connect with anyone else who might be like you. It also meant that there was danger and you weren’t protected, maybe friends didn’t know where you were at all times, maybe no one knew your real name. Sex work was very common and quite dangerous, not just because you could be harmed by customers but you could get picked up by the cops who intentionally patrolled known beats looking for people to arrest for soliciting etc.

So, honestly I think it’s more likely Farren came to harm than just changed his name and disappeared.

I found a blog written by a woman whose sister died in San Francisco in this period. The sister was living at the National Hotel, having changed her name and undergone some gender affirming treatment. It’s rather a sad little story. It’s an example of what people went through at that time I guess.

Thanks for the blog, very interesting to see the kinds of people that were attracted to the same place as Farren. I wonder if Farren ever wrote home too. It does seem most likely that some harm befell him rather than a change of ID yes.

As @Satch said, we don't even think Farren completed High School let alone college. We know he liked to read Reader's Digest so it's possible he also read other publications which is where he was drawn to SF. Because I feel almost certain there was no gay literature or influence back in John Day then. But it is if course a possibility that Farren had already had a gay experience there with someone (friend, teacher, older man) Something like this could be the reason he chose to leave originally.
That is of course if SF was the intended destination and he didn't just end up there randomly.

Regarding the year 1978, the odd 1 year he spent at Medford. <modsnip>
We don't know what was happening with the family then or perhaps they sent Farren away for some reason (he'd been in trouble for example). But it does seem he dropped out and moved back to John Day by 1979.

 

[Ciriii57]

I found the below article really interesting. It is about the history of male prostitution in San Francisco. I wasn't aware but it seems like in SF hustling was not only common but perfectly acceptable-the bars and cafés relied on the business these men brought in. The ads we have seen for "modelling and photography" apparently were just fronts for rent boys. So many young men who came to SF fell into hustling.
Farren was there at a dangerous time however, although the AIDS epidemic hadn't really begun, SFs male hustlers we're seeing an increase in violence and a series of murders of male prostitutes.

We don't know that Farren did do this kind of work at all. But with him having possible money worries and perhaps being in this environment, it does become more of a possibility to consider.
If he did "go to work" and something bad befell him I would think it is much more likely the work would be of this nature, rather than at a respectable business. It also would make sense if he "visiting a gay man"...we ought to consider the possibility that this gay man was not a lover or friend, but a customer.
Possibly disturbing thoughts but also a distinct possibility.

BARchive: The Golden Age of Hustlers

Male prostitution is probably as old as the city itself. Edward Prime-Stevenson wrote in 1908 that soldiers in the Presidio were for rent during the Spanish-American War. It is certainly as old as the homophile organizations.

www.ebar.com

 

[Ciriii57]

One further thought on this subject:
Is it possible that when RC contacted the hotel he was told that Farren was working in the male escort/prostitution business and was working/visiting a customer.
To save the feelings of his wife and mother in law (Farren's aunt and grandma), and Farren's reputation, he just said the neutral but odd phrase "he was visiting a gay man".
This would also explain why he began placing ads in gay oriented magazines which were mostly advertising for male escorts.

What this doesn't explain is how the hotel manager knew the gay man had died of AIDS subsequently.

 

[BelMarduk]

You mentioned how people went to these places and reinvented themselves, changed their names etc. I recently found that in 1980 California you could change your name without going to court, just fill in a form. What do you think the chances of Farren doing this are, as opposed to being killed?

Transgender people do this all the time. If this were the case, it would have been even more likely he would not have contacted family in the belief they would not accept him than if he were just gay. I prefer to think of this theory and hopefully he is still out there someone.

 

[Ciriii57]

Transgender people do this all the time. If this were the case, it would have been even more likely he would not have contacted family in the belief they would not accept him than if he were just gay. I prefer to think of this theory and hopefully he is still out there someone.

That idea had honestly never crossed my mind. But it's very intriguing. It may also explain why no one remembers him as he was in his photos.
I would love to think he or she is still out there living a full life. But I still have a lot of trouble believing he never contacted his grandma again. Not even just a letter to say he's fine.
If it were his mum and dad maybe,but something about it being his grandma who raised him...i don't know,maybe that's my own sentimentality....

 

[Satch]

One further thought on this subject:
Is it possible that when RC contacted the hotel he was told that Farren was working in the male escort/prostitution business and was working/visiting a customer.
To save the feelings of his wife and mother in law (Farren's aunt and grandma), and Farren's reputation, he just said the neutral but odd phrase "he was visiting a gay man".
This would also explain why he began placing ads in gay oriented magazines which were mostly advertising for male escorts.

What this doesn't explain is how the hotel manager knew the gay man had died of AIDS subsequently.

This is very possible,

I understand that Farren's family said, "We don't care if Farren was gay or not. We just want to know whether he is alive or dead so we can have closure."

But, I don't think they said this until AFTER Farren went missing and outsiders got involved. I think Farren had no idea how they would react, and wasn't ready to come out to his Aunt and Grandmother. This was too hard for him to do back home.

He had to come up with a reason for leaving that put an emphasis on his love of travel and adventure, so he's gonna say, "When I turn 18, I am going to go out and see the world." However, if San Francisco was his intended destination all along, the truth might be a little too strong for them to take. I can't see Farren saying, "Aunt Sandra, Grandma, I have something to tell you. I'm gay, and I want more than anything else to go out to San Francisco and be a part of that community." I can't see him doing that. It is just like when Uncle Richard contacted the hotel. Given the "underground sex and crime" reputation that it had, and if Farren got involved in work that involved hustling money for sex and gay prostitution, with Richard introducing himself as "family."

Curt Harvey has to come up with a story, because it's family, from a little country town in Oregon. They don't know the ropes of the big city and the powerful type of people and influences that the gay community has in San Francisco, at the National Hotel, and probably tons more hotels in the city. Farren could have been working for a place or customer of ill repute. Yet, he can't let family know that. Obviously, if CH knew what was going on with Farren, was close to Farren, and might even hold clues to Farren's disappearance, he is going to remember that. But to save face, he says, "I remember Farren, when he was here, he was visiting a gay man." RC "Where, where do I contact this person? I would like to find out more about him because he knew Farren." CH, "Oh, I'm sorry, but this person died of AIDS." Maybe CH felt very uncomfortable talking to Richard about what the hotel was like. This could have been a way to save his reputation, give Farren the respect of keeping his employment and sexuality a secret. If Farren's work was a "bad place, that could be camouflaged so deeply, that it would be very, very difficult to find out, almost impossible. Even for LE.

I think when Farren lost his job before his last phone call, that job was legit. This workplace could be something, such as a legitimate business that we could find out. When he lost that, and being short of money, I think he was lured by one of the ads in the gay newspapers, and somebody could have approached him sexually, and Farren was terrified, one thing led to another and he was killed tragially. His financial problems, his vulnerability, he was a cute guy, who could have been led down a path to horror.

But by this time, the family does not care at all about Farren's sexual orientation. They just want to find out what happened to him. In the 90's, Richard went all over to find Farren, decided that Farren was gay and at the very least, felt that the gay newspapers in San Francisco could help. It wasn't an issue of morals or ethics at this point for the family. All they want to do is know what happened to Farren.

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

I agree with everything you wrote @Satch
I think that's a probable scenario of how it could've played out.

Except the comments from CH about visiting the gay man who eventually died of AIDS. Something just doesn't sit right with me about this, I have misgivings but I don't really know why.
If he was either trying to protect Farren or the family then just say You don't remember him. If he was trying to protect himself then same thing, deny! He could have just said Farren went to work like the roomates did, but he comes up with this new fact. I'm feeling that more was said to RC and I don't know what. And I feel certain that CH knew more, much more. It's like he was sort of telling the truth, but not all of it.

Now regarding CH, I had a quick look through the thread to make certain and please correct me if I'm wrong, but although we know that CH worked at the National when Farren was there, and also when RC contacted them, I can't find anywhere that CH is the person who RC spoke to. I don't think it was ever known who he contacted was it? This information might not have come from CH at all.
I also found out that the National came under new management in 82 or 83. Whether this is relevant I don't know. (Can't post a link right now but can later if anyone wants)

 

[Satch]

I agree with everything you wrote @Satch
I think that's a probable scenario of how it could've played out.

Except the comments from CH about visiting the gay man who eventually died of AIDS. Something just doesn't sit right with me about this, I have misgivings but I don't really know why.
If he was either trying to protect Farren or the family then just say You don't remember him. If he was trying to protect himself then same thing, deny! He could have just said Farren went to work like the roomates did, but he comes up with this new fact. I'm feeling that more was said to RC and I don't know what. And I feel certain that CH knew more, much more. It's like he was sort of telling the truth, but not all of it.

Now regarding CH, I had a quick look through the thread to make certain and please correct me if I'm wrong, but although we know that CH worked at the National when Farren was there, and also when RC contacted them, I can't find anywhere that CH is the person who RC spoke to. I don't think it was ever known who he contacted was it? This information might not have come from CH at all.
I also found out that the National came under new management in 82 or 83. Whether this is relevant I don't know. (Can't post a link right now but can later if anyone wants)

Agree @Ciriii57

All we know is that Richard contact the hotel and was told that "Farren had been visiting a gay man who later died of AIDS." To my knowledge no mention of Richard having any conversation with CH ever came up, nor AW, an assistant manager, nor were any hotel employee names ever given, If they were, they were not released to the public.

CH only came about from our research a few years ago. It might have been @Odyssey or @Bit of hope, or myself who asked "What was the name of the hotel manager?" And somebody said that it was CH. I think it is only assumed that Richard communicated with CH. But in all published reports, it has never been said with whom did he communicate at the hotel.

You are right on the money @Ciriii57. I think whoever told Richard that he remembered Farren was visiting a gay man who later died of AIDS knows more than he is saying. This didn't have to be 1990. Just anytime within 1990-1999. Likely 1996 when the ad for Farren to call grandma in John Day appeared in the San Francisco gay paper. That's up to a nineteen year spread of time, between Farren going missing sometime after April 26, 1980 and 1999 with Richard's inquires in searching for Farren.

Satch

PS. I also can't get this out of my head:
Except the comments from CH about visiting the gay man who eventually died of AIDS. Something just doesn't sit right with me about this, I have misgivings but I don't really know why.
If he was either trying to protect Farren or the family then just say You don't remember him. If he was trying to protect himself then same thing, deny! He could have just said Farren went to work like the roomates did, but he comes up with this new fact. I'm feeling that more was said to RC and I don't know what. And I feel certain that CH knew more, much more. It's like he was sort of telling the truth, but not all of it.

 

[Ciriii57]

Hi Everyone,

I finally got around to looking at the "Gay Crusader" newspaper. Did anyone else have a look?, because I am afraid I didn't find anything relevant at all as to when Farren would have been there, I checked for the whole of 1980 and all I could find was the below article called "Those gay Inns" which is telling people about the worst gay hotels in San Francisco..."The National Hotel. To those of us who live here, we "know" the place, and would only reccomend it to those in dire need". This edition was published in May 1980...right when Farren would have been there! Not a glowing recommendation.

https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/sfbagals/Gay_Pride_Crusader/1980_Gay_Crusader_No98_May_28.pdf

A previous manager was named in 1977 as "Grady" and "Grand Grady" but far from any criminal activity it was reported that he was giving a meal for old people. There is also mention in 1977 that the hotel was where alot of underage sex happened and was the hang out for the Leather fetish guys. However, this was 3 years before Farren would have arrived at the hotel and so we can't really say if was like that when he stayed there. "Grady" may have been there, or maybe not. I feel like the hotel had come under new management by this point.

I am not sure if I have missed something?

 

[summergirl1]

It's a good point that we can't be sure of who Farren's uncle talked to either in person or over the phone, at the National Hotel. I hope Sargeant Rand is heard from soon. I was reading about another cold case that was recently solved, nothing like Farren's case though from the same era and it got me thinking. This case was a female Doe from 1981 in Southern CA that got solved through genetic genealogy so they had her remains and had to solve her identity first, but I was reading about retired investigators who had time on their hands getting involved in the case ( her murder has not yet been solved though) and I thought if some people like that from SF/Northern CA who are more local than Oregon LE ( who have obviously tried their best) could get involved in Farren's case that would be great, although that is highly unlikely to happen.

 

[Satch]

Another thought,

When Farren made that final phone call on April 26, 1980, do you think he said he "liked living at the National Hotel" so as not to worry his family? I just read that article, and with it being from 1980, it sounds like a hell hole. I know it's a step up from homelessness. But with all the dangers around there, who could really be happy at a place like this? Unless Farren was not a complainer type and just made the best of bad situations. Remember, we still don't know his mental state.

I would also like to find any reports of someone else who went missing from the same Tenderloin area in San Francisco between April and June of 1980. (The same months that Farren was there.) This would not make Farren an exclusive target, and would open the doors to someone in that area who sought out vulnerable people. Do you think this is possible? Or do you think that it was Farren and only Farren who got caught up in the wrong place at the wrong time?

I now believe what is in the case file, said by Farren's roommates "Farren left for work one day and never came back." more than "Farren was visiting a gay man at the National Hotel who later died of AIDS." The later is still possible, but I am now attributing this to "uncertain and unclear information." I am going with the roommates response, until I see evidence of something different. The "Visiting a gay man" sounds like a cover up for something else if that is even true.

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

When Farren made that final phone call on April 26, 1980, do you think he said he "liked living at the National Hotel" so as not to worry his family?

Hey @Satch with this comment I had always assumed he meant he liked living in San Francisco, not the hotel per se. Even though the hotel was pretty crappy, I think it may have been bearable as he was living with friends.

Regarding other people missing from the Tenderloin, I havent come across specific Tenderloin missing persons but a number of young men disappeared from SF in the years before and after Farren:
Kevin Murray vanished June 1979
Robert Kuhlman vanished June 1979
David Schwarzchild vanished August 1979
Farren Stanberry vanished April-June 1980
Richard Kula vanished April 1981
Frederick Putzi vanished September 1985

This list is not definitive and in fact there were more before and after, but these seem to be to all have certain similarities in features, age range etc etc. It's possible that there are other UIDs that fot the bill and even unsolved murders who were identified and havent been linked in. I do think there is a strong possibility that there may have been a serial killer active for some years in San Francisco that may have gone under the radar. (JMO-and I have been doing some research work on this actually)

@summergirl1 nothing yet from Sgt Rand I am afraid, I am hoping he is just on holiday! I mean he did say to ask him any questions and he'd answer. I hope your questions about the social security and bank account didn't make him realise that this had never been checked out and that what he is doing...I'm glad if he's doing it but really...if it was never checked on! no..surely not LOL