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

[Satch]

Sorry... I've been caught up in other things lately and haven't had time to read/post here... I'm trying to get up to speed on the cases I follow.

I just emailed NamUs and asked what happened to the rest of the info.

I haven't heard anything about the PM from 1144 Market... I think it's been long enough now that we can follow up without 'pestering'... although I'm still mortified to call the LE contact... <cringe>

I wonder if it would be worth trying to reach the SF coroner to see if they have a different address - it's possible that LE had the right address of where the body was found, but it was just entered wrong on NamUs... or did we have some other source for the 1144 address? I think I emailed the SF coroner at the same time I first emailed John Day PD and they never replied...

I'm so lost, apparently I need to reread this thread from start to finish.:blushing:

I also haven't heard anything from the demo company whose owner found the body.

Welcome back, Odyssey!

For the record everyone, Odyssey has been an AWESOME help in reaching out to different agencies and LE about Farren! Thanks so much! Nice to have you back!

Satch

 

[Odyssey]

I got a response but it only addressed the photo - apparently it has to be jpeg and I most likely uploaded a jpg. I think I can fix that, but the reply didn't mention the rest of the information I asked about.

 

[Odyssey]

Photo has been added.

 

[alllads]

Photo has been added.

Phew, well at least that's a step! It's so frustrating how no one seems very bothered about either identifying the remains, or finding what happened to Farren. There's a good chance the remains could be his and LE and the Coroner's Office are really not spurred to move quickly...

 

[Odyssey]

Phew, well at least that's a step! It's so frustrating how no one seems very bothered about either identifying the remains, or finding what happened to Farren. There's a good chance the remains could be his and LE and the Coroner's Office are really not spurred to move quickly...

I think the LE contact is doing the best he can, but John Day is a really small town and I think he is having to rely on other larger agencies. He gave me a number for the state agency where Farren's DNA sample was submitted, but said he'd already spoken to them and they weren't sure whether his DNA had been entered into the national database, and were going to look into it.

I got the feeling from talking to the John Day PD contact that he really cares about finding Farren.

I'd really like to follow up with him but I'm blocked from emailing him (My email got hacked a couple weeks after I talked to him and spammed a bunch of people in my contacts, including him) and I'm too mortified to call him (what if he got a virus from that spam, etc)

I'd really like to get clarification on the address of the remains too, but the San Francisco ME never responded to my email that I sent back then. NamUs doesn't show that he's been ruled out.

Myself and someone else here (Satch or allads, I think) tried to contact the company whose owner found the remains with no luck...

It's frustrating feeling like there's nothing we can do.

 

[typically-a-reader]

Nothing on this in a while!

 

[galateasca]

In reading the article that everyone has mentioned, I, too, believe that UID #3 sounds like it could be Farren. If so, there are any number of reasons he could have been there. True, foul play is high on that list, but he could have been under the influence of alcohol or drugs and ended up there to crash. He may have been sick and fearing that he no longer had a place to stay or money to pay for a place, he snuck into the attic and died there.

I wish LE would check this out already.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/movies/we-were-here-film-about-aids-in-san-francisco.html?_r=0 This is an interesting article about SF in the early days of AIDS. Sets the tone for what was going on in the area.

My other thought was if this is not Farren, perhaps he died of AIDS later on but was unclaimed because he used a fake name or was found comatose. I tried to check that out on line, but haven't found anything yet. Any ideas?

 

[Satch]

In reading the article that everyone has mentioned, I, too, believe that UID #3 sounds like it could be Farren. If so, there are any number of reasons he could have been there. True, foul play is high on that list, but he could have been under the influence of alcohol or drugs and ended up there to crash. He may have been sick and fearing that he no longer had a place to stay or money to pay for a place, he snuck into the attic and died there.

I wish LE would check this out already.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/movies/we-were-here-film-about-aids-in-san-francisco.html?_r=0 This is an interesting article about SF in the early days of AIDS. Sets the tone for what was going on in the area.

My other thought was if this is not Farren, perhaps he died of AIDS later on but was unclaimed because he used a fake name or was found comatose. I tried to check that out on line, but haven't found anything yet. Any ideas?

Welcome to WS and Farren's case!

I agree with your assessments explained in the first paragraph. With financial resources gone, spare the meager $40 and change in Farren's unclaimed account, Mother refusing to send him money. Farren owing debts that he could not pay, I think it is heatbreakingly tragic that Farren could have been Under the Influence of Alcohol and/or drugs, crashed in that attic building, and may have been so despondent and distraught he could have died their either of suicide, drug/alcohol overdose, rather than foul play. He may have been ill for a long time due to chemical dependency or mental illness brought on by drugs and/or stress. If UID#3 IS Farren, the observations above could ascertain that he choose to take his own life. It's very possible that his body and mind broke down from the influence of stress and drugs causing his death.

Satch

 

[galateasca]

Thanks. Glad to be here. Been a lurker for a long time.

 

[Satch]

Bumping up for Farren

Satch

 

[Odyssey]

I just googled the San Francisco Medical Examiner's office because I wanted to try following up with them again, and found this. I guess Farren isn't a priority.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-s-embattled-chief-medical-examiner-to-step-5295424.php

A Chronicle investigation last fall found that the office had a backlog of hundreds of cases, almost half of which had languished for more than six months. That backlog violated national industry standards, which call for medical examiners to close 90 percent of cases within three months.

Heads up, if anyone is trying to submit anything to San Francisco, prepare for a long wait.

 

[Odyssey]

And yet another obstacle. It seems our LE contact in John Day resigned late last year.

And with the SF Medical Examiner being so backlogged, I'm guessing everything is at a standstill. I will try contacting the LE replacement sometime this coming week and see if I can get the ball rolling again.

I'm also going to go back through the city directories, I think I was just looking by address trying to find 1144 Market - but I think if I go back through and actually look in the N's for the National Hotel, it might show the owner's name. That could be useful to have, since the owner clearly remembered Farren's disappearance. He/she might also be able to shed some light on what was across the street. I wish I could find other residents at the National Hotel from that time.

That's all I can think of to do at the moment, Farren's NamUs page still says DNA sample available, not yet submitted.

I was told that the DNA sample is with the Oregon State Police, but that they did not know if it was submitted to any national database. They were supposed to be looking into it. I may try contacting them as well, but I'll try the new John Day contact first and see how that goes.

Farren, you haven't been forgotten.

 

[Odyssey]

Ok, one more update.

I did go back through the directories and found that the National Hotel was owned by a Vincent Kircher in 1980. Unfortunately, he died in 2005.

However, in trying to locate him, I came across this lawsuit that was filed against him regarding the National Hotel. The plaintiff in this case stated that he moved in there in 1981, and after reading this article, I strongly believe that Farren was in fact gay.

Respondent owned and operated the National Hotel in San Francisco, catering to both permanent and transient residents. The hotel advertised that it was "under gay management," was "clean, safe and comfortable" and had a "24 hour attendant." Appellant selected the National Hotel as a permanent residence on the basis of its advertisements that it was "gay managed," leading him to believe "there would be no contretemps toward sexual preferences." He moved into the hotel in February 1981.

http://law.justia.com/cases/california/calapp3d/193/1069.html

For the record, I don't think Kircher was the on-site manager of the National Hotel. It seems that he owned and operated several apartments and SRO's so he is probably not the person who knew about Farren. I also think Kircher wasn't the on-site manager because he wasn't gay (thus wouldn't coincide with 'gay management'). He had a wife and an ex-wife. There is a reference to the manager in the article but it doesn't give the name. The transcripts of the lawsuit should be public though, and would likely list the manager as a witness. Might be something to pursue down the road.

Vincent Kircher operated under the name Kircher Properties - there is currently a Gerda Kircher Properties in San Francisco, possibly related. I doubt that's useful, but you never know.

 

[Satch]

Ok, one more update.

I did go back through the directories and found that the National Hotel was owned by a Vincent Kircher in 1980. Unfortunately, he died in 2005.

However, in trying to locate him, I came across this lawsuit that was filed against him regarding the National Hotel. The plaintiff in this case stated that he moved in there in 1981, and after reading this article, I strongly believe that Farren was in fact gay.



http://law.justia.com/cases/california/calapp3d/193/1069.html

For the record, I don't think Kircher was the on-site manager of the National Hotel. It seems that he owned and operated several apartments and SRO's so he is probably not the person who knew about Farren. I also think Kircher wasn't the on-site manager because he wasn't gay (thus wouldn't coincide with 'gay management'). He had a wife and an ex-wife. There is a reference to the manager in the article but it doesn't give the name. The transcripts of the lawsuit should be public though, and would likely list the manager as a witness. Might be something to pursue down the road.

Vincent Kircher operated under the name Kircher Properties - there is currently a Gerda Kircher Properties in San Francisco, possibly related. I doubt that's useful, but you never know.

Welcome back, Odyssey!

Thanks for this new information! Farren, you are not forgotten!

Satch

 

[Odyssey]

Tomorrow I am going to try to contact the new LE person and see if they ever heard back on the dentals, or about the DNA sample. I'll also try again to get a better timeline if he seems open to discussing the case.

I sent another email to the SF ME yesterday but not holding my breath on getting an answer. This time, instead of suggesting the PM, I simply asked if it would be possible to double check the date/address.

Another thought I had - and I'm not sure what the procedure was/is, but if someone discovered human remains, I think they would call the police first, so there might be some kind of report on file with them also - and possibly a death certificate with the county clerk? The SFPD has a public record request form so I think I will try that also. It can't hurt.

Allads, do you recall where you called that you got that helpful librarian? Was it the main SF library? Perhaps there was also a newspaper article when the remains were found?

I wish we knew where the discrepancy is. It could be that the ME has it wrong (in which case the PD might have it right), or maybe it just got entered into NamUs wrong.

I was thinking that maybe it was, as someone had suggested awhile back, a derelict building that just didn't make it into the directories - but looking at those historic aerial views, it looks like there were 2 buildings there in the 50's, only 1 in 1968, and nothing by 1980. That is, if I was looking in the right place, it was kind of hard to tell what was what on those aerial views. (It makes sense since the directories changed from Jim's Barber Shop to Vacant in either 1967 or 1968.)

I am really hoping they had the address wrong, and not the year. If it is the right address, then it can't possibly be Farren. I think it would be hard to mix up 1984 and 1968, so I think there's a better chance that they have the wrong address.

I hope to have another update tomorrow!:crossfingers:

 

[Satch]

Tomorrow I am going to try to contact the new LE person and see if they ever heard back on the dentals, or about the DNA sample. I'll also try again to get a better timeline if he seems open to discussing the case.

I sent another email to the SF ME yesterday but not holding my breath on getting an answer. This time, instead of suggesting the PM, I simply asked if it would be possible to double check the date/address.

Another thought I had - and I'm not sure what the procedure was/is, but if someone discovered human remains, I think they would call the police first, so there might be some kind of report on file with them also - and possibly a death certificate with the county clerk? The SFPD has a public record request form so I think I will try that also. It can't hurt.

Allads, do you recall where you called that you got that helpful librarian? Was it the main SF library? Perhaps there was also a newspaper article when the remains were found?

I wish we knew where the discrepancy is. It could be that the ME has it wrong (in which case the PD might have it right), or maybe it just got entered into NamUs wrong.

I was thinking that maybe it was, as someone had suggested awhile back, a derelict building that just didn't make it into the directories - but looking at those historic aerial views, it looks like there were 2 buildings there in the 50's, only 1 in 1968, and nothing by 1980. That is, if I was looking in the right place, it was kind of hard to tell what was what on those aerial views. (It makes sense since the directories changed from Jim's Barber Shop to Vacant in either 1967 or 1968.)

I am really hoping they had the address wrong, and not the year. If it is the right address, then it can't possibly be Farren. I think it would be hard to mix up 1984 and 1968, so I think there's a better chance that they have the wrong address.

I hope to have another update tomorrow!:crossfingers:

The above evidence I think is very strong that Farren was gay, and likely when he said he wanted to "see the world" when he turned eighteen, I think that may have been true. But I also think that Farren really wanted to go out and find peace and happiness in his life, which he may not have had as a child. We know that Farren was raised by his grandmother. This may have been said before, but I forgot, what is known about Farren's father? I seem to recall that either his parents were divorced or at the very least separated, but not sure. It does sound like Farren's Mother was cold, or at the very least indifferent to him.

Until that tragic time when Farren disappeared in 1980, he did call his family and inform them of his whereabouts. But when Farren talked about "seeing the world." Was he looking even at that time to associate with the gay community and needed to say something general like that, because he just could not "come out of the closet?" Was he fearful of his Mothers, if not other family's reactions, likley rejections, and had to leave?

Just to review, did Farren have any siblings? I wonder if and where they looked for him? Farren's Uncle has searched for him intently for years.

With the hope of Odyessy getting some help from the new LE investigators, I have linked the articles for us to review, so that they could be found more easily:

This is an essay about Farren: http://whereaboutsstillunknown.wordpress.com/2013/03/31/farren-stanberry/

Here is Farren's case at Charlie Project: http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/s/stanberry_farren.html

Notice the difference in Farren's appearance, especially with his hair. They almost look like different people! It is possible if Farren was gay, he may have been good at camouflaging his appearance, so those who looked for him may not have recognized him, even if they had seen him. However, we don't know the time spam between those pictures. Are they really all circa 1980?

To review again, this is Farren's case at Doe Network: http://doenetwork.org/cases/931dmca.html

It says Farren's pictures are from 1979, and differs from Charlie Project's account that Farren also told his Aunt about his plans to "see the world."

Satch

 

[alllads]

Hi Odyssey, just seen this. The librarian was indeed at the main SF library, they have a central e-chat service for assistance. I didn't ask about an article to be honest, didn't want to ask for too much all at once! But the librarian definitely checked directories, and the overall consensus was that 1144 is unlikely to have still existed in 1980, or 1984. I think also because he buildings around it also had been demolished in the 1970s.

 

[Odyssey]

I have not seen any mention of Farren's father, or of any siblings. I don't think there was anyone with the last name Stanberry in his grandmother's obituary either - but he could have possibly had an older sister who had married/changed her name.

I so agree about the photos! I was thinking one must be more recent, but I couldn't really see that he looked older or younger in any of them, just different. I'm horrible at trying to guess ages though.

 

[Odyssey]

Hi Odyssey, just seen this. The librarian was indeed at the main SF library, they have a central e-chat service for assistance. I didn't ask about an article to be honest, didn't want to ask for too much all at once! But the librarian definitely checked directories, and the overall consensus was that 1144 is unlikely to have still existed in 1980, or 1984. I think also because he buildings around it also had been demolished in the 1970s.

Thanks, I may try contacting them too. I'm just thinking that if a typo was made on the address, that maybe an old record from another source (police report, newspaper, death certificate) might have the correct one.

It also just occurred to me that somewhere upthread it said that the UN Plaza has an address range - I forget the exact numbers but something like 1132-1150 Market St.

Anyone here familiar with the UN Plaza? Could it possibly have been a building in UN Plaza where the UID was found? I'm guessing not because there would be security and someone couldn't just walk in there, but I think at least now there's a big hotel there so that would always be open. Not sure if there was then. It could be that the plaza buildings don't have their own addresses and someone just guessed 1144?

I keep picturing a dilapidated or abandoned building because of the wrecking crew - but it said the wreckers were doing an inspection, not a demolition... so maybe that wasn't what it was at all.

 

[Odyssey]

The new LE contact in JD is on vacation, I was able to leave a message on his voicemail. The person who answered did not say when he'd return, hopefully Monday.

I have also prepared a letter to send to the SFPD to see if they have any record of the body being found in 1984. I will mail that tomorrow.

I decided against contacting the library for now. I don't want to creep out some poor librarian by asking about a UID unless I can't get anything from the PD or ME.

If I don't hear back from my email to the ME in the next couple weeks, I will send them a formal request also, it seems they are required to respond to those within 14 days.

So... waiting game again. <sigh>