On June 16, 1971, law enforcement authorities and public-health officials reported what has been described in contemporaneous press coverage and later scholarly summaries as the first known case in which deaths by starvation were directly linked to the practices of a religious sect. The incident drew attention from local and national media, medical examiners, and legal authorities because it raised questions about the limits of religious freedom, the responsibility of group leaders, and the state’s duty to protect vulnerable members. Contemporary reports indicate the case involved a small communal religious group that followed extreme dietary rules enforced by leadership. Several adult members and at least one minor were found dead after prolonged food deprivation. Medical examiners attributed the cause of death to malnutrition and dehydration; subsequent investigations focused on whether the deaths were the result of voluntary fasting as a religious observance, coercion by leaders, or a combination of both. The available sources from the period emphasize uncertainty about intent and the extent of duress experienced by group members. The 1971 case has been treated in later legal and academic discussions as a watershed moment in how authorities respond to religiously framed self-harm or group-imposed harm. Prior to this incident, there had been reports of deaths associated with ascetic practices or extreme dietary regimens in various religious traditions, but this event marked one of the first instances in modern U.S. reporting where starvation deaths were explicitly tied to the coercive dynamics of a communal religious organization and investigated as potential criminal conduct. The response combined criminal inquiry and social services involvement. Prosecutors examined whether leaders could be charged with manslaughter or other offenses for encouraging or enforcing the diet; child-protection agencies investigated the welfare of any minors in the community. Medical and psychiatric experts were consulted to assess the cognitive capacity and voluntariness of adherents who had participated in the fasting. Public debate followed about the balance between protecting religious liberty and intervening when group practices posed a clear risk to life. Historians and legal scholars who have reviewed the record caution that details remain limited and that some contemporary accounts blended factual reporting with sensationalism. Records from coroners’ offices, court filings, and archived newspaper coverage form the primary sources for reconstructing the event, but gaps persist about internal group dynamics and the exact chain of command that led to the fatal outcomes. Later scholarship placed the 1971 case in a broader pattern of the 20th century’s increased public attention to new religious movements and communal groups, especially as mass media and law enforcement became more attuned to possible abuses within closed communities. The incident influenced subsequent policy and practice: child-protection standards, protocols for investigating deaths in communal settings, and guidelines for distinguishing protected religious practice from criminal conduct were all affected by the legal and ethical issues raised. It also contributed to a growing literature on how state agencies should respond when claims of religious motivation intersect with clear physical danger. Because contemporary documentation is uneven and some primary records are inaccessible or incomplete, historians advise caution in drawing definitive conclusions about the motives of individual followers or the precise legal outcomes in every jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the June 16, 1971, case is widely cited as the earliest well-documented instance in modern U.S. history in which starvation deaths were linked to the practices of a religious sect and became the focus of criminal and child-welfare inquiry.