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

[Satch]

Guys,

Given what we now know <modsnip> These are my probabilities

40% Murdered

30% Accident

20% Suicide

5% Started New Life and Still Living

5% Started new life and died of AIDS later.

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

Guys,

Given what we now know <modsnip> These are my probabilities

40% Murdered

30% Accident

20% Suicide

5% Started New Life and Still Living

5% Started new life and died of AIDS later.

Satch

For me same order but slightly different numbers:

60% Murder
(For which 80% by someone he was acquainted with in some way and 20% random stranger)

20% accident or misadventure

10% suicide

5% stared a new life and survived

5% started a new life and died

 

[Ciriii57]

3.) The story of Farren "visiting a gay man?" when his Uncle contacted the hotel manager? The manager could have just said, "He was visiting a man." And how would the hotel manager have know he had died of AIDS unless the manager knew him personally? This is very possible. But only the manager CH, knows for sure.

Was this gay man a resident at the hotel? How long had be been there? Was the gay man connected to Farren's job or even jobs? Or even potentially Farren's murder? Had Farren been living somewhere else and he really went back to the National Hotel where he had befriended a gay man who still lived there?

Hey @Satch from your post last week...this is actually a really good point and got me thinking. So we don't know exactly what was said between DC and CH because it was just DC telling a newspaper but we get the gist of "Farren was visiting with a gay man when he disappeared and the gay man later died of AIDS".

OK so for CH to know this information then I figure that he must have known the gay man pretty well, right?
1) For him to know, and remember a decade later, that Farren was visiting this man tells me that he knew him and he was aware that Farren and this man were involved in some way.
2) For him to know that the man had died of AIDS also means he must have known him pretty well. It is possible that if this person was a resident at the hotel he may have known he had AIDS, but I'm certain at some point he would have had to be admitted to hospital and it doesn't seem likely that the manager would stay in touch with a former guest unless they were friends..so again knowing he died od AIDS suggests an acquaintance.

Is it possible that Farren was involved with a man who was acquainted with CH the hotel manager, perhaps that's even how they met. If so then how come neither the "gay man" nor CH ever bothered to report Farren missing? Did they actually know where he was or what had happened to him, is that why?

Was the gay man a resident at the National Hotel? Does it make sense that CH would say Farren was "visiting" someone at the same hotel we know he was also staying at? No, because you would just say "yeah I remember him, he was staying here and left all his stuff...". "Visiting" suggests elsewhere...unless:
1)Farren was staying at the National WITH this man. He came to SF to "visit" with this man specifically, which suggests that he already knew him in some capacity.
2)Since CH's version of events would seem to contradict the version where he went to work and never came back, then what if "visiting the gay man" was to do with his work in some way?

<modsnip: sleuthing random people>

 

[Bit of hope]

I found this. I think it's a picture of a hotelroom around 1930. Living Downtown

It must have been different in 1980, but I still can't imagine Farren was living with others in one hotel-room. It must have been others living on the same floor. Depending on how close Farren was with this most likely strangers, people from all walks of life and not at the greatest moment in their life, how would they have known he went to work anyway. They probably just assumed that. I wonder if the detective knows if there were specific people he associated with and there a notes of it.

Room sink, dilapidated chest of drawers, and case closet in a large
rooming house, the National Hotel, San Francisco. In rooming houses
for men, sinks were often mounted lower than usual
and informally doubled as urinals.



Floor plan of a large rooming house. The second floor of the National Hotel in San Francisco, built
ca. 1906. The location of the street entry is marked by a black triangle; the first room at the head
of the stairs is the office; toilets and baths are off the left rear hall. Shaded areas are light wells.


In a rooming house, one's room was never really isolated. Even for the very shy, life was indirectly social. After the third or fourth day, astute desk clerks would greet tenants by name. After two or three weeks, residents realized that they had begun to smell a bit like their hotel. At night, when the street noise died down, residents involuntarily monitored the activities and conversations in all the adjoining rooms. Coughing was a communal act; one always knew when one's neighbors had a cold. Carrying the sounds were light wells, floors, and walls built with minimal sound-deadening details; in hot weather or when the heating system overdid, hall doors and open transoms also carried sound. Personal affairs such as fights between couples could not necessarily be conducted privately behind closed doors. For a guarantee of behavior better matching middle and upper class norms, some residents looked to rooming houses with more overt management.

 

[Ciriii57]

Great find! Love the floor plan, I wish the rooms were numbered so we could locate 218, but I think it would have been in the second floor. I'm guessing the rooms weren't that different in 1980, I posted earlier a room from the early 2000s and it looks basically the same size and facilities, just some different paint!

I know it's hard to believe that more than one person shared this room but they did (and still do in places) it was extremely common to share a room with people you didn't know too well to save on rent, there was just absolutely no way they could have afforded a room by themselves. Even today in hostels you might end up sharing with strangers. I think particularly among young males teens who were hoping to start a new life it was common to sort of band together and share bills, food etc

I don't think LE ever knew who the roomates were tbh otherwise I feel like DC would have tracked them down for more info. I'm only assuming that LE even contacted the hotel after the missing person report was filed, I know SFPD told them they had no knowledge of him being missing But Sgt Rand was pretty clear that it was his roomates who said he'd left for work and left his few meagre belongings, rather than just people in the hotel in general.

Again great find..I particularly like the part about the sink doubling as a urinal!!!!

 

[Bit of hope]

Great find! Love the floor plan, I wish the rooms were numbered so we could locate 218, but I think it would have been in the second floor. I'm guessing the rooms weren't that different in 1980, I posted earlier a room from the early 2000s and it looks basically the same size and facilities, just some different paint!

I know it's hard to believe that more than one person shared this room but they did (and still do in places) it was extremely common to share a room with people you didn't know too well to save on rent, there was just absolutely no way they could have afforded a room by themselves. Even today in hostels you might end up sharing with strangers. I think particularly among young males teens who were hoping to start a new life it was common to sort of band together and share bills, food etc

I don't think LE ever knew who the roomates were tbh otherwise I feel like DC would have tracked them down for more info. I'm only assuming that LE even contacted the hotel after the missing person report was filed, I know SFPD told them they had no knowledge of him being missing But Sgt Rand was pretty clear that it was his roomates who said he'd left for work and left his few meagre belongings, rather than just people in the hotel in general.

Again great find..I particularly like the part about the sink doubling as a urinal!!!!

Ok, I stick with that then, more persons in one room. Hahaha, I read a lot of reviews of the Budget Hotel when it was still in operation. Everybody is talking about the smell of urine in the hallways.

 

[Satch]

I found this. I think it's a picture of a hotelroom around 1930. Living Downtown

It must have been different in 1980, but I still can't imagine Farren was living with others in one hotel-room. It must have been others living on the same floor. Depending on how close Farren was with this most likely strangers, people from all walks of life and not at the greatest moment in their life, how would they have known he went to work anyway. They probably just assumed that. I wonder if the detective knows if there were specific people he associated with and there a notes of it.

Room sink, dilapidated chest of drawers, and case closet in a large
rooming house, the National Hotel, San Francisco. In rooming houses
for men, sinks were often mounted lower than usual
and informally doubled as urinals.

View attachment 427475

Floor plan of a large rooming house. The second floor of the National Hotel in San Francisco, built
ca. 1906. The location of the street entry is marked by a black triangle; the first room at the head
of the stairs is the office; toilets and baths are off the left rear hall. Shaded areas are light wells.

View attachment 427476
In a rooming house, one's room was never really isolated. Even for the very shy, life was indirectly social. After the third or fourth day, astute desk clerks would greet tenants by name. After two or three weeks, residents realized that they had begun to smell a bit like their hotel. At night, when the street noise died down, residents involuntarily monitored the activities and conversations in all the adjoining rooms. Coughing was a communal act; one always knew when one's neighbors had a cold. Carrying the sounds were light wells, floors, and walls built with minimal sound-deadening details; in hot weather or when the heating system overdid, hall doors and open transoms also carried sound. Personal affairs such as fights between couples could not necessarily be conducted privately behind closed doors. For a guarantee of behavior better matching middle and upper class norms, some residents looked to rooming houses with more overt management.

Love this information!

I was wondering as well. How could Farren have roommates in a SRO hotel, unless the rules were stretched to allow for a several people to a room? But they would be packed in there like sardines!!! I can't imagine an SRO hotel with a single bathroom and toilet not in the room. But remember, this was one step above living on the streets, and "roommates" could have been several people by looking at that floor-plan. This would make Motel 6 look like a luxury suit!

If the above is what this like in 1980, picture almost a large room, run like a military barracks, but without a drill sergeant. This sounds like a roof over someone's head and nothing more. WOW! Farren must have been "easy to please" if he was happy there! Or did he just say that so as not to worry his Aunt and Grandmother?

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

I tried to find an article about people sharing rooms in SROs but couldn't, the below link is quite interesting though:

History of S.R.O. residential hotels in San Francisco – Central City SRO Collaborative

ccsroc.net

<modsnip: no source link>
I think he did love SF, so wasn't lying to his family, and probably he intended to move somewhere better once he'd earned some money and settled in.

 

[Satch]

I tried to find an article about people sharing rooms in SROs but couldn't, the below link is quite interesting though:

History of S.R.O. residential hotels in San Francisco – Central City SRO Collaborative

ccsroc.net

<modsnip: no source links>
I think he did love SF, so wasn't lying to his family, and probably he intended to move somewhere better once he'd earned some money and settled in.

Yes I agree!

Farren would be happy just being on his own and meeting and bonding with cool people! He didn't care about the hotel. He loved the people, culture, and freedom that he never had before.

Satch

 

[chart75]

Wow, great work everyone. A couple things come to mind:

1) Perhaps Farren spoke to the hotel manager frequently about needing work and asked if the National had anything available on a daily basis? Could that be why the manager remembered him ten years later? Maybe Farren pestered him for a job each and every day? Hotels and restaurants are always looking for workers, so it seems odd he wouldn't have been able to find another job. Maybe Farren and the manager struck up a friendship. <modsnip>
2) What if Farren became disillusioned with his lifestyle, or maybe not making ends meet in the big city and decided to disappear and start life over again somewhere else. Do we know how much he owed the National Hotel? Telling his roommates he was going to work effectively eliminates him committing suicide, but what if it was a guise to leave town and actually see more of the world? Could he have found a wallet loaded with cash and an ID and hatched a plan? He leaves his few belongings, a little bit of money behind, takes someone else's wallet and identity and maybe starts life over in a different town and no one ever finds him. Was he ashamed of something and therefore never reached out to his grandmother or sister again?
3) Did his family ever hire a private investigator to look for him?

Just thinking outside the box.

 

[Ciriii57]

Wow, great work everyone. A couple things come to mind:

1) Perhaps Farren spoke to the hotel manager frequently about needing work and asked if the National had anything available on a daily basis? Could that be why the manager remembered him ten years later? Maybe Farren pestered him for a job each and every day? Hotels and restaurants are always looking for workers, so it seems odd he wouldn't have been able to find another job. Maybe Farren and the manager struck up a friendship. <modsnip>
2) What if Farren became disillusioned with his lifestyle, or maybe not making ends meet in the big city and decided to disappear and start life over again somewhere else. Do we know how much he owed the National Hotel? Telling his roommates he was going to work effectively eliminates him committing suicide, but what if it was a guise to leave town and actually see more of the world? Could he have found a wallet loaded with cash and an ID and hatched a plan? He leaves his few belongings, a little bit of money behind, takes someone else's wallet and identity and maybe starts life over in a different town and no one ever finds him. Was he ashamed of something and therefore never reached out to his grandmother or sister again?
3) Did his family ever hire a private investigator to look for him?

Just thinking outside the box.

Hey @chart75 glad to see you here!

Great thoughts, I'd never considered Farren might have worked at the hotel...but then I guess the roomates wouldn't have said he left for work, that to me more implies he went off somewhere. I agree that I'm pretty sure he'd be able to quickly find a job if he wasn't fussy about what he did. And yes, there is some reason that the hotel manager remembered him that we haven't yet figured out isn't there. The gay connection seems to stand out to me.
We haven't been able to find any info on him yet so not sure where he was from.

Regarding your second point, I recently read in another thread that at this time in California you could change your name without going to court so it would have been much easier to start a new life I guess so definitely a possibility. I don't know how he would be able to continue to live though without all his official papers?? Is it only possible to do if you steal someones ID or can you successfully change your identity?
His uncle had said he'd have no idea how to do this but we shouldn't assume that.
I just don't know why he wouldn't have contacted his grandma, but there could be something in the family that we aren't aware of...and could be a personal shame that we don't know of.
I believe that the hotel was charging $38 a week at this time, but he was sharing the room so it could have been less that he owed. I don't think he would have been able to continue in the room after 1 week unpaid so I guess we can say he owes at least $38, but probably less. And he had that amount in his bank account at the time, which suggests more foul play I think.

Regarding hiring a PI, I'm not aware that they specifically hired anyone but his uncle did contact some nationally well known Pi's who did some cursory investigations pro bono but found nothing at all.
I think if the family and LE had started looking for him in SF immediately they'd have a better idea as the people who knew him would have still been around with fresh memories.
<modsnip: encouraging the sleuthing of family/friends>

Please do think more outside the box!

 

[Satch]

Wow, great work everyone. A couple things come to mind:

1) Perhaps Farren spoke to the hotel manager frequently about needing work and asked if the National had anything available on a daily basis? Could that be why the manager remembered him ten years later? Maybe Farren pestered him for a job each and every day? Hotels and restaurants are always looking for workers, so it seems odd he wouldn't have been able to find another job. Maybe Farren and the manager struck up a friendship. <modsnip>
2) What if Farren became disillusioned with his lifestyle, or maybe not making ends meet in the big city and decided to disappear and start life over again somewhere else. Do we know how much he owed the National Hotel? Telling his roommates he was going to work effectively eliminates him committing suicide, but what if it was a guise to leave town and actually see more of the world? Could he have found a wallet loaded with cash and an ID and hatched a plan? He leaves his few belongings, a little bit of money behind, takes someone else's wallet and identity and maybe starts life over in a different town and no one ever finds him. Was he ashamed of something and therefore never reached out to his grandmother or sister again?
3) Did his family ever hire a private investigator to look for him?

Just thinking outside the box.

Great thoughts @chart75 and I saw your great comments as well @Ciriii57!

Good thoughts on the hotel manager striking up a friendship with Farren as a possibility! That could be a reason why he remembered Farren after all these years, or there is some other element that we don't know about.

I put #2 very unlikely. That doesn't mean Farren could not have done it. But I don't see Farren as a deceiver. I see him as a fun/funny joker, with a quest for adventure, but one who would not want to hurt others by deceiving them or manipulating them.

I still put suicide only slightly below murder in this case, sometimes I have 50/50 splits in my mind. This is because I still see Farren as being frightened of not being able to pay his debts. And if we know that he called his Mother, who was mentally ill and not on good relations with Farren, (who doesn't report their own son missing?!) There had to be something. I agree with @Ciriii57. There's missing pieces that we don't have yet about Farren:

1.) Where he worked?
2.) Was it a second job that he left for after being fired from the first job? Or did he report to work on April 26, 1980, was fired, and than call his Mother and grandmother that same day?
3.) How long was Farren in San Francisco?
4.) I wish we could find someone who knew Farren while he was in San Francisco and lived with him at the hotel. This would help us find out more about Farren's time in San Francisco. Did Farren confide any secrets to people that would explain his travel plans, or actions, after he lost his job?

If Farren ended phone conversations with "I love you" with his grandmother and aunt on a regular basis, I might feel different about the suicide theory. But if Farren was depressed about the job loss, and told his grandmother "I love you." That is often the last words of a suicide victim. I was at 60/40 murder than suicide. But if it's one or the other, I think it's a 50/50 shot. You could make a case for 60/40 either way.

Satch

 

[Odyssey]

The main reason I have trouble with the suicide theory is that he hasn't been found. (Unless he has and the SF Medical Examiner made a mistake.) I also don't really see financial troubles as a strong enough reason to take his own life, especially since he was welcome to go home and declined. Also, I think the worst that could have happened to him is that he would have bad credit or maybe been sued if he had unpaid bills. Unless it was taxes, child support or traffic tickets he wouldn't have been arrested or anything. He probably didn't have any bills other than the hotel and food, etc and he had enough to get by for awhile, especially if he was sharing a room.

On the other hand, if he had fallen in love and been rejected or hurt, I think it would be more likely that he couldn't handle it, especially if it were his first real (male) love.

I still think anything is possible and yes, someone who knew him in San Francisco would be sooooo helpful!

 

[chart75]

Is there a way to find out how many nearby buildings were vacant when Farren disappeared? Mummified body found in wall of Oakland convention center identified as missing man

What about Farren being kidnapped? Maybe he was hired to do a job, drugged, taken out of the city and murdered, thus no body in SF. Not having a body makes it less likely to be suicide (IMO), and murder less likely as well.

 

[Ciriii57]

I too also struggle with the suicide idea on the basis that he had enough in his account to cover the room and I think it's likely he could find another job pretty quickly. I doubt he would have been worried about his debts, the hotel were unlikely to call the cops over this rather than just throw him out... imagine how many of the homeless and transients got to a point they couldn't pay...I feel like it was probably a regular occurrence to evict people from these hotels. Also as @Odyssey said, he could have just gone home! @Satch I always say "I love you" when I end a phone call, it doesn't make me suspicious at all that he said this to his gran, I don't see this as his "final words" but just normal. And as @Odyssey said it would be unusual for his body not to turn up...but not impossible.

I still think he was lured somewhere, possibly related to a job, and may have met foul play somewhere away from SF. Does anyone know how extensive the BART system was at this time? Is it feasible that Farren could've travelled to say Oakland or Berkeley easily for work?

Is there a way to find out how many nearby buildings were vacant when Farren disappeared

Yes there is. I had posted a link earlier to Polk's directory of 1980 which does list vacant buildings. Its freely available via SF libraries and searchable.
There were quite a lot in the area, but it has undergone massive redevelopment since. There was a UID found in a neighbouring building but this was ruled out as being Farren.

 

[chart75]

BART was completed to Oakland and Berkeley in the early 1970's. The closest BART station was .1 miles away from the National Hotel, so Farren easily could have taken it to work. It would help if we knew where work was.

 

[Ciriii57]

BART was completed to Oakland and Berkeley in the early 1970's. The closest BART station was .1 miles away from the National Hotel, so Farren easily could have taken it to work. It would help if we knew where work was.

Thanks! That's good to know, so was the whole Bay area easily accessible by this time then? Making travelling for work much more likely.
No, we never have figured out where he worked, the closest we got was the possibility that he worked for the Marriott Corporation (but it's not 100% it was him and we never figured out where the various Marriott holdings were in relation to The National). In reality he actually could have been working literally anywhere. God knows if there's even a way to find out?

 

[chart75]

Not sure, but that's why I asked about whether the family had ever hired a private detective. Maybe I've watched too many TV shows (Perry Mason, Rockford Files, etc.) because it seemed as if they could track down those details. Maybe they can't in real life, but maybe they can. Too much time has probably passed in this case to make a difference, unless they have access to databases or inside contacts that we don't.

 

[Satch]

Sup All?

Can we confirm, at least to the best of our knowledge how many F. Stanberry's resided in San Francisco around March-April 1980 in business and residential directories? We have an F. Stanberry connected with the Marriott. This could be the Marriott Hotel or other businesses owned by Marriott. We also have Farrren Stanberry's unpaid funds at Wells Fargo Bank.

How many Marriott Hotels were around Market Street? If "F. Stanberry "belongs to no other Stanberries beginning with F in San Francisco, than we have found where our Farren worked! The Marriott, or a company connected to that.

Satch

 

[Bit of hope]

Sup All?

Can we confirm, at least to the best of our knowledge how many F. Stanberry's resided in San Francisco around March-April 1980 in business and residential directories? We have an F. Stanberry connected with the Marriott. This could be the Marriott Hotel or other businesses owned by Marriott. We also have Farrren Stanberry's unpaid funds at Wells Fargo Bank.

How many Marriott Hotels were around Market Street? If "F. Stanberry "belongs to no other Stanberries beginning with F in San Francisco, than we have found where our Farren worked! The Marriott, or a company connected to that.

Satch

Maybe he was working for a Bob's Big Boy. Marriott Corperation bought Big Boy in 1967 and sold it in 1987. While searching on history stuff, someone remembers one on Upper Market Street between Church and Sanchez Streets.

Big Boy Restaurants - Wikipedia (sorry, there isn't a website that describes it, that I could find)

Bob's Big Boy - San Francisco - Western Neighborhoods Project​