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

[Satch]

Hey everyone, I just found the below article from 1996 that mentions Farren. I haven't seen it before. It mentions that Farren was last seen June 1982! It also suggests to me that he went by the name Wade, not Farren.

The coroner's tale: Death is a mystery

Bud Moorman is relaxing at home reading the personal classified ads in the Sunday edition...

www.sfgate.com

Any thoughts, especially about the year?

Edit- my original post just shared a photo as I couldn't access the link but thanks to a genius it's now accessible and above.

Great great find!

I wonder of that year should be June 1980 and not June of 1982? There is a lot of date confusion with Farren's case! Don't have enough evidence to suggest one way or the other that Farren went by "Wade."

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

Don't have enough evidence to suggest one way or the other that Farren went by "Wade."

Hey Satch! It's because the family was looking for F. Wade Stanberry. Since it seems to have been an advert they took out asking for info I think they would use the name he'd go by or else no one would recognise him. If he was known as Farren I think they'd have said Farren W. Stanberry.
I'm thinking his friends may have known him as Wade.

Regarding the article, I wonder what the family thought when the coroner told them he thought he might be a dead transvestite? I mean, he could've been for all we know at this stage!

There is a hell of a lot of timeline issues with this case, that article has a two year difference! I just don't know what's what.

 

[Satch]

Hey Satch! It's because the family was looking for F. Wade Stanberry. Since it seems to have been an advert they took out asking for info I think they would use the name he'd go by or else no one would recognise him. If he was known as Farren I think they'd have said Farren W. Stanberry.
I'm thinking his friends may have known him as Wade.

Regarding the article, I wonder what the family thought when the coroner told them he thought he might be a dead transvestite? I mean, he could've been for all we know at this stage!

There is a hell of a lot of timeline issues with this case, that article has a two year difference! I just don't know what's what.

Agree!

And it could be that Farren preferred being called by his middle name more than his first name. But I also agree, we just don't know, I'll bet that manager at the National Hotel knew though!

Satch

 

[Odyssey]

I still need to catch up on today's posts, but I think I made a mistake in one of my posts yesterday. I said that nobody really realized he was actually missing until the 1990s when his uncle called the hotel. I think I was incorrect, as I had previously posted that his grandmother had called the hotel a few weeks after she last heard from him and was told that he had left without paying his bill. In the 90s when the uncle called, he was told that Farren was visiting a gay man.

That could easily explain why the manager remembered Farren, he had been aware that Farren was missing.

Sorry for the confusion, I've been out of the loop lately and was remembering wrong.

<modsnip>

Going to go get caught up on today's posts now.

 

[Ciriii57]

his grandmother had called the hotel a few weeks after she last heard from him and was told that he had left without paying his bill. In the 90s when the uncle called, he was told that Farren was visiting a gay man.

How do you think these 2 things square with eachother? Do you think it is possible that whoever said he was "visiting a gay man" maybe meant he was visiting him elsewhere, not the National, and never returned?

I am having a hard time even keeping all the different dates and locations in this case, none of them would seem to tally with eachother.
@Odyssey what did you think about that article listing 1982. It could very well be a mistake; however that means that there are 2 articles on Farren with incorrect/wildly varying dates. Odd coincidence.

I also have ANOTHER question about the hotel that is bugging me (sorry!):

Farren told his grandma he was staying with some other young men at the National Hotel. We know this to be correct as it tallies with the address given on his bank account.
A few weeks later his grandma was told he had left without paying his bill and left his posessions.

This was the kind of hotel that charged per room, not per occupant, I believe. You could have had 1 or 10 people in there but the rate would remain the same; that's why so many young men chose to share. So what bothers me is why the bill fell only on Farren to pay? Surely if he never came back then his roommates would just have to pay his share and stump up a bit more cash? The hotel manager didn't care as long as they got paid.
I am also bothered by his stuff being left; if these people were actually his friends then wouldn't they try and call someone or report it to police, not just leave his stuff abandoned in the room? If they weren't really his friends at all then more than likely they'd take or sell his stuff.
I am thinking that Farren actually had a room by himself at the National and he wasn't sharing. OR his roommates really weren't his friends at all and at the very least when Farren never returned they bolted without the paying the bill...maybe there's a worse scenario.

I also am thinking that Farren had been in San Francisco much longer than initially suggested. He had time to get and lose a job, make friends and set up potentially 2 bank accounts with an address listed.

 

[Odyssey]

Yeah, the dates will make you crazy. I think 1982 is a mistake but we really have no way of knowing.

I wish we knew what ended up happening to Farren's stuff, I'm guessing it just got thrown out. If there was even a receipt among his belongings it would help a lot with pinning down the timeline.

It's certainly possible that Farren was staying with a group of guys at first, then got his own room or a room with a partner once he got a job. But then you're right, the dates make it seem like he had just gotten to SF when he vanished.

 

[Satch]

How do you think these 2 things square with eachother? Do you think it is possible that whoever said he was "visiting a gay man" maybe meant he was visiting him elsewhere, not the National, and never returned?

I am having a hard time even keeping all the different dates and locations in this case, none of them would seem to tally with eachother.
@Odyssey what did you think about that article listing 1982. It could very well be a mistake; however that means that there are 2 articles on Farren with incorrect/wildly varying dates. Odd coincidence.

I also have ANOTHER question about the hotel that is bugging me (sorry!):

Farren told his grandma he was staying with some other young men at the National Hotel. We know this to be correct as it tallies with the address given on his bank account.
A few weeks later his grandma was told he had left without paying his bill and left his posessions.

This was the kind of hotel that charged per room, not per occupant, I believe. You could have had 1 or 10 people in there but the rate would remain the same; that's why so many young men chose to share. So what bothers me is why the bill fell only on Farren to pay? Surely if he never came back then his roommates would just have to pay his share and stump up a bit more cash? The hotel manager didn't care as long as they got paid.
I am also bothered by his stuff being left; if these people were actually his friends then wouldn't they try and call someone or report it to police, not just leave his stuff abandoned in the room? If they weren't really his friends at all then more than likely they'd take or sell his stuff.
I am thinking that Farren actually had a room by himself at the National and he wasn't sharing. OR his roommates really weren't his friends at all and at the very least when Farren never returned they bolted without the paying the bill...maybe there's a worse scenario.

I also am thinking that Farren had been in San Francisco much longer than initially suggested. He had time to get and lose a job, make friends and set up potentially 2 bank accounts with an address listed.

Yes,

I estimate that Farren was in San Francisco for at least six months. It could have been more time. Much more time. Also concerning his travels, I think that he left in August of 1979. We know that he called his family often to make sure that he was safe.

I wonder if Farren ever came home for like Thanksgiving of 1979 or Christmas of 1979 to visit? It seemed that the main friction was between his Mother and he, probably not his Aunt and Uncle. I always would have wanted to ask Farren, what places did he want to see, or actually see on his journeys, and the people whom he met and befriended along the way!

I can't remember now if his Aunt and Uncle are still living. His grandmother passed not to long ago. And I know that the family committed to keeping the same phone number all these years, just in case Farren tried to call.

I think Farren was frightened of LE coming after him for not being able to pay his bills, and I think he took his own life by going down to the San Francisco Bay bridge late at night, and jumped.

He probably told friends and acquaintances at the hotel that he wanted to continue his travels. But I agree with @Ciriii57. If Farren was living with other people at the hotel, why would the bill pay reside with him? And I also agree that as "friends." why wouldn't they call the police after Farren had left for a long time, and not come back? Or were these "friends" also living a transit lifestyle where they moved from place to place and did not settle down for long periods of time. But I think Farren did settle down in San Francisco. It's seems that Farren did very well for himself for about nine months.

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

Hey guys!
I was thinking, in all reports it says that Farren left on a greyhound to travel East. What if this is a mistake (another one...) What if he only ever went West. If he never spent a chunk of time travelling the east coast this could explain why he seemed to have been in San Francisco for longer than a couple of weeks....coz he was!
Is there any evidence at all that he was in the East?

 

[Odyssey]

Yes,

I estimate that Farren was in San Francisco for at least six months. It could have been more time. Much more time. Also concerning his travels, I think that he left in August of 1979. We know that he called his family often to make sure that he was safe.

I wonder if Farren ever came home for like Thanksgiving of 1979 or Christmas of 1979 to visit? It seemed that the main friction was between his Mother and he, probably not his Aunt and Uncle. I always would have wanted to ask Farren, what places did he want to see, or actually see on his journeys, and the people whom he met and befriended along the way!

I can't remember now if his Aunt and Uncle are still living. His grandmother passed not to long ago. And I know that the family committed to keeping the same phone number all these years, just in case Farren tried to call.

I think Farren was frightened of LE coming after him for not being able to pay his bills, and I think he took his own life by going down to the San Francisco Bay bridge late at night, and jumped.

He probably told friends and acquaintances at the hotel that he wanted to continue his travels. But I agree with @Ciriii57. If Farren was living with other people at the hotel, why would the bill pay reside with him? And I also agree that as "friends." why wouldn't they call the police after Farren had left for a long time, and not come back? Or were these "friends" also living a transit lifestyle where they moved from place to place and did not settle down for long periods of time. But I think Farren did settle down in San Francisco. It's seems that Farren did very well for himself for about nine months.

Satch

I'm not sure if his aunt and uncle are still alive. Farren's uncle was actually through marriage and he never met Farren. He married Farren's aunt after Farren was already missing.

@Ciriii57 We dont have any evidence of where he was prior to the hotel. All we know is what he told his grandmother. He could have gone straight to SF from Oregon and told his grandmother something different.

The Greyhound station was right next door to the hotel, on the opposite side from the building where the remains were found. So he could have even left and come back again.

 

[Ciriii57]

You know, I'm not even thinking that he told his grandma something else, I just wonder if we don't have enough information to build a true picture.
Thanks for the info about the Greyhound station, interesting, so it would have been possible to literally just slip away quite quickly.

Question: does anyone have an idea how long it would take someone to travel by Greyhound from Oregon to the East coast, maybe travel around a bit, possibly work some jobs and then make your way to San Francisco and have time to get a job, lose a job and open 2 bank accounts. Is this a possibility in terms of the timeline we have of August '79-May or early June '80 ??

It is incredible to me that there is so much conflicting or just plain wrong information with this

And it really, really saddens me that no one seems to remember this kid. He must have impacted someone's life; worked with someone, lived with someone, loved someone...especially if he did travel coast to coast.

I don't suppose LE would consider telling us anything else? Especially regarding times/potential sightings? If any?
<modsnip>

 

[Odyssey]

I think he only had one bank account, the Wells Fargo one with the 40-some dollars. The other unclaimed property was unclaimed wages from Marriott, like someone didn't pick up their final paycheck.

The LE up in John Day were actually really helpful, they had no problem discussing the case with me, they just didn't know much because they didn't really have the resources to investigate a San Francisco disappearance. (The people I spoke to weren't the same ones who were there when the report was first made.) I think all they really knew was what the family had told them. They were the ones who told me that he had previously broken both his wrists.

When I gave them the information about the remains, they jumped on it and seem to genuinely want to find answers but it's a tiny police department. If you wanted to contact them, I think they'd gladly talk to you but I don't think they know anything more than we do, except possibly some of the family dynamics. <modsnip>

I'm really not sure how long it would take to do all that traveling. I've never been on a Greyhound bus in my life... I actually think it was pretty brave of Farren to just take off on his own to see the world like he did. It's not something I could ever imagine myself doing. Maybe with a companion, but I'd be too terrified to go off on my own like that, even now in my 50's.

 

[Ciriii57]

I think he only had one bank account, the Wells Fargo one with the 40-some dollars. The other unclaimed property was unclaimed wages from Marriott, like someone didn't pick up their final paycheck.

Thanks for explaining that. It makes me even more sad tbh...I can think of only a couple of reasons why someone needing money wouldn't collect a paycheck. None of them good.
I wonder if it was normal to get paid weekly or monthly and if it was say every Friday. It could help narrow down a specific weekend when he vanished for instance. Although if he'd lost his job maybe not. What do you think the chances are that Marriott would keep old employment records? Not good I'd guess?!

I'm really working on the idea that Farren went somewhere looking for work, planned to come back but something happened. Bit vague I know. I don't think he was in such desperate straights yet that he'd fall into prostitution, drugs or commit suicide. It seems to me he still had options at this point.

<modsnip - Websleuths does not condone members becoming personally involved in cases by initiating contact with family members, friends, case players, law enforcement, or the media.>

I'm still hoping to find someone who remembers him, or something relevant at least from social media so I'm continuing with that.

Some good news- Farren was certainly not a victim of Randy Kraft. He happened luckily to be in town at the time when Kraft was Portland and didn't return til August.

Ciriii

 

[Ciriii57]

Been trying to rack my brains to work out this letter from Farren's Aunt and I just can't! It has me totally baffled.

Rand went above and beyond

To the Editor:

www-bluemountaineagle-com.translate.goog

It has to be a typo or misremembered. They can't have been dropping him off after he went missing. And even if the year was supposed to be June 1979 it still doesn't make sense as that's before his 18th birthday, so not likely and anyway it was after that that he left. The ONLY ONLY way that it makes any sense is if Farren returned from SF earlier and everyone subsequently forgot they had seen him...I don't think so!

I do believe that they dropped him off at the Joaquin Miller Campground at somepoint, you would remember the event. But I can't for the life of me work out why; it seems to have always been an isolated campground in the middle of nowhere. I can't imagine how he got from there to San Francisco. I can't find that this route has ever been used for public transport, it just seems to be halfway to nowhere. I can only think he must have hitchhiked :

 

[Ciriii57]

I wish we knew what ended up happening to Farren's stuff, I'm guessing it just got thrown out. If there was even a receipt among his belongings it would help a lot with pinning down the timeline.

Regarding his possessions-How did they know they were actually Farron's possessions? Surely they could have been left there by any one of the group staying in that room; especially if they all "did a bunk" to avoid paying.

IF there was his wallet and identifying papers then that doesn't seem like the kinds of things you would just throw in the trash? Wouldn't you hand them to LE after a while? Besides which, I would think that he would take his wallet with him wherever he was going.

Sorry about all the posts-these things keep coming into my mind.

 

[Satch]

I think he only had one bank account, the Wells Fargo one with the 40-some dollars. The other unclaimed property was unclaimed wages from Marriott, like someone didn't pick up their final paycheck.

Hey Everyone!

I am also thinking that the $40 and change that we KNOW is Farren's for his unclaimed bank account listed is one of the few things in this case not in despite.

I forgot, what was the money amount listed under F. Stanberry? And was that linked to Marriot money, or we just don't know? I really think that F. Stanberry still has to be Farren. Does anyone feel otherwise? I have the Wells Fargo Bank unclaimed funds for Farren in a saved document on my PC. But I don't have the F. Stanberry one. Can someone screenshot and re-post the second one if you can? (The paycheck one.)

Satch

 

[Satch]

Regarding his possessions-How did they know they were actually Farron's possessions? Surely they could have been left there by any one of the group staying in that room; especially if they all "did a bunk" to avoid paying.

IF there was his wallet and identifying papers then that doesn't seem like the kinds of things you would just throw in the trash? Wouldn't you hand them to LE after a while? Besides which, I would think that he would take his wallet with him wherever he was going.

Sorry about all the posts-these things keep coming into my mind.

Exactly,

What were Farren's possessions left behind? And I we sure that they were not shared possessions of the other men with whom he was staying? Did they bunk together to avoid paying? Maybe they did so because they couldn't, not because they were being deceptive.

I had forgotten that Farren's Uncle never actually knew Farren! But I remember reading about him searching for Farren night and day. He described Farren as a "Country boy at heat." Who would not have the ability to stage his disappearance. Farren loved bowling as well, and his Uncle when through all these city and county bowling leagues to find any mention of Farren with no luck. The Family did find one Farren, but they checked it out, and the Uncle said that "It was not our Farren."

I also remember that when the family had John Day Oregon Police send Farren's files to San Francisco police, that the San Francisco police department lost the files. And Odyssey, If I remember correctly was able to reach out to John Day police, to confirm that those 3 UID's found at the Market Street Hotel where not Farren. And I remember talking to Odyssey that were were so sure that one of them, WAS Farren. Odyessy asked the detective why those ID discoveries weren't Farren. And the detective said, that at one time, Farren had both of his wrists broken (OUCH!) and none of the three UID's had a broken wrist.

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

Does anyone feel otherwise? I have the Wells Fargo Bank unclaimed funds for Farren in a saved document on my PC. But I don't have the F. Stanberry one.

@Satch hey! No I am in total agreement I actually think they're both our Farren. But we can't prove it.
I've found both entries and screenshotted them, you can click on the link to view them as for some reason I can't upload a screenshot.

Screenshot_20230518-205704.jpg

drive.google.com

Screenshot_20230518-205653.jpg

drive.google.com

Now, if both are Farren's then that means he had almost $145 (that's $588 today!!!) I would have thought that was plenty to tide him over. Unless he owed somebody big time?

Did they bunk together to avoid paying? Maybe they did so because they couldn't, not because they were being deceptive.

Sorry Satch! My bad!! "Did a bunk" is a British expression meaning leaving without paying. I was wondering if his roomates left without paying (did a bunk) and also left some things behind.
I'm certain, as you say, that they were sharing in order to save money.

I'm just wondering how a hotel that caters to transients and homeless could ensure that everyone didn't leave without paying their bill? I assume you had to pay for the week in advance, which raises 2 questions:
1) how could Farren owe money to the hotel if you had to pay the week ahead/in advance or presumably be thrown out of your room?
2) or unless Farren was so well known and trusted that he was allowed to pay late...which begs the question ...he must have been staying there more than a few weeks to gain the managers trust?!

And again I have to ask, why did the manager say a decade later that he was "visiting" a gay man if he was a resident at the hotel? Was Farren visiting this man somewhere else...but then, how would the hotel manager know his business?
Or was Farren staying at a different hotel with his friends when he called his grandma the first time and later moved in with a gay man at The National and mentioned this in another call to his grandma and then she subsequently confused what was said in what call and when, just remembering the main info?

 

[Satch]

I'm just wondering how a hotel that caters to transients and homeless could ensure that everyone didn't leave without paying their bill? I assume you had to pay for the week in advance, which raises 2 questions:
1) how could Farren owe money to the hotel if you had to pay the week ahead/in advance or presumably be thrown out of your room?
2) or unless Farren was so well known and trusted that he was allowed to pay late...which begs the question ...he must have been staying there more than a few weeks to gain the managers trust?!

And again I have to ask, why did the manager say a decade later that he was "visiting" a gay man if he was a resident at the hotel? Was Farren visiting this man somewhere else...but then, how would the hotel manager know his business?
Or was Farren staying at a different hotel with his friends when he called his grandma the first time and later moved in with a gay man at The National and mentioned this in another call to his grandma and then she subsequently confused what was said in what call and when, just remembering the main info?

All great points!

Maybe because the hotel catered to transits, the homeless, and low-income people, that there were special provisions that could be made if you had financial trouble? Many of the hotel guests at National were coming off the street with nothing. So to get thrown out, it would seem that you would REALLY have to be late in paying, or be a trouble-making tenant. Farren sounds very loving, helpful, and trustworthy. Probably the kind of person who would be very willing to listen and help those in need. Which makes his case even more heartbreaking.

It also does not make sense that if they are all sharing expenses, say 3-4 men in the room, that the bill would fall on Farren's lap? Or that he was visiting a gay man there, "Staying with a group of young men" which Farren communicated via phone call is not visiting!

The only way it becomes visiting, is if Farren left the National and went someplace else to reside, but than came back to the National to visit a gay man, presumably a friend. But if the hotel manager remembers that, than he would also remember Farran staying there when he was residing there. And it sure seems like he resided there for a long time. A time enough to build friendships. gain trust. possibly have sex with people he loved and build a safe haven in San Fransisco.

Earlier in the thread, we were able to map out the nearby shops and stores around Market Street back in 1980. We concluded that Farren really had just about everything that he needed within walking distance of the Hotel. Today, a place like that would be known in the States as a "Mini-Mall." I conclude that Farren was thrilled living in San Fransisco, before losing his job. I even think that if his Mother would have sent him that money. And this was Farren's money. SHE HAD NO RIGHT TO WITHHOLD THAT FROM HIM! If his Mother would have helped him out, or even if he would have asked any other family members for help and gotten some funds, he never would have gone missing!

Here is the value of Farren's unclaimed $40 in the bank, in 1980, what it would be worth today in 2023: (Google Search)

Value of $40 from 1980 to 2023:

$40 in 1980 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $147.26 today, an increase of $107.26 over 43 years.

Satch

 

[Odyssey]

Exactly,

What were Farren's possessions left behind? And I we sure that they were not shared possessions of the other men with whom he was staying? Did they bunk together to avoid paying? Maybe they did so because they couldn't, not because they were being deceptive.

I had forgotten that Farren's Uncle never actually knew Farren! But I remember reading about him searching for Farren night and day. He described Farren as a "Country boy at heat." Who would not have the ability to stage his disappearance. Farren loved bowling as well, and his Uncle when through all these city and county bowling leagues to find any mention of Farren with no luck. The Family did find one Farren, but they checked it out, and the Uncle said that "It was not our Farren."

I also remember that when the family had John Day Oregon Police send Farren's files to San Francisco police, that the San Francisco police department lost the files. And Odyssey, If I remember correctly was able to reach out to John Day police, to confirm that those 3 UID's found at the Market Street Hotel where not Farren. And I remember talking to Odyssey that were were so sure that one of them, WAS Farren. Odyessy asked the detective why those ID discoveries weren't Farren. And the detective said, that at one time, Farren had both of his wrists broken (OUCH!) and none of the three UID's had a broken wrist.

Satch

I only contacted John Day LE about the UID that was found in the building next door. I didn't feel the other two were promising enough.

I don't remember hearing that San Francisco lost Farren's file, but I do remember that an Oregon State crime lab lost the DNA sample that Farren's mother had submitted. There is DNA in Namus now, I'm not sure if they found the missing sample or were able to get a new one from Farren's mother.

I'm not sure if the UID was ruled out because of the broken wrists, I think I was just speculating that it was the only way he could have been ruled out so quickly. I don't think there was DNA available for the UID (and Farren's DNA was missing too at the time), so it wasn't a DNA rule out. The LE in John Day was able to see the dentals for the UID and thought it was very similar to Farren's. He was pretty sure it was a match, then he got a response that it wasn't.

Maybe I'm just in denial but to this day I am wondering if that UID really was Farren. I remember reading a news article around that time about the SF Medical Examiners office being so understaffed that everything was backlogged for almost a year, yet they responded that it wasn't a match after only 2 days. The whole thing was just really strange.

 

[Mfleish]

This case has caught my interest. I've read through the thread and Pillar Point Doe was mentioned in 2020.
Pillar Point Doe - DNA Doe Project Cases
The article says, "Authorities speculate they may have been killed at another location and then transported to the scene, possibly from the Tenderloin area of San Francisco." This is where the National Hotel was.
The person has now been identified, but no further details released as they were waiting on confirmation by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office.
If this was Farren, his profile would be down, correct? Unless they are still working on confirmation?

I'm also kind of confused that the missing date is 5/30/1980, but the aunt said they dropped him off at a campground in June 1980. Has that been cleared up at all?