On May 16, 1971, investigators in San Francisco (California, USA) uncovered the deaths of several members of a small communal religious group who had starved to death while living together. Though later and better-known incidents—such as the Jonestown massacre (1978) and the Solar Temple deaths (1994–1997)—garnered far more attention, the 1971 case is among the earliest documented instances in which doctrinal pressures and communal isolation appear to have contributed to multiple starvation deaths. Background The group involved was a small, locally organized communal sect that combined charismatic leadership with ascetic teachings encouraging strict dietary restriction and withdrawal from medical care and outside oversight. The leader’s teachings emphasized spiritual purification through fasting and separation from what members called “corrupting” societal influences. Contemporary press accounts described the group as insular and intensely committed to its leader’s directives. Discovery and investigation Police welfare checks were prompted after relatives and neighbors reported that members had become unreachable and that correspondence and money had ceased. When officers entered the residence on May 16, they found several deceased adults and a debilitated few still alive. Medical examiners attributed the deaths primarily to severe malnutrition and complications from dehydration and untreated medical conditions. Authorities questioned the potential for criminal liability and whether the deaths constituted suicide, homicide, or negligent manslaughter. Investigators documented diaries and letters that indicated group-sanctioned fasting and explicit instructions discouraging outside medical intervention. Prosecutors faced legal complexity: proving that a leader’s exhortations legally caused deaths is difficult, especially when adult adherents accept the doctrine voluntarily. Ultimately, criminal charges against leadership were limited or not sustained, a pattern echoed in other communal fatality cases of the era. Context and significance The 1971 case is significant for researchers studying harmful communal practices because it predates and helps contextualize later mass-fatality incidents associated with new religious movements. It demonstrates several recurring dynamics: centralized charismatic authority, isolation from mainstream institutions, doctrinal endorsement of self-neglect, and ambivalence in law enforcement and judicial responses. Scholars in sociology and religious studies have used early cases like this one to examine how religious freedom, mental capacity, and criminal responsibility intersect. Public-health officials and social-service agencies also cite such incidents when developing outreach and intervention protocols for insular groups resisting medical care. Limitations and uncertainties Documentation from 1971 is limited compared with later, high-profile cases; contemporary reporting varied in accuracy and tone, and some primary records remain sealed or incomplete. Precise counts of deceased and surviving members reported at the time differ across sources. While starvation and related medical complications were established causes of death by coroners, attributing legal causation to a single leader or doctrine remains contested in archival records. Legacy Although not as widely remembered as later tragedies, the May 16, 1971 case contributed to an evolving public and institutional awareness of the lethal risks posed by extreme communal practices that promote medical neglect and prolonged fasting. It informed later investigative, legal, and public-health approaches to similar groups, underscoring the need to balance religious liberty with protection from coercive or dangerous practices.