Hi, I just thought of something while I was watching an episode of UM.

In the early 60's there were still homes for unwed mothers, no? (I'm watching the staircase story at the moment with the nuns, which made me think about this).

What if Sharon Marshall/Suzanne Davis were from one of those? Her mom wouldn't know she was missing/unidentified. What do you think? Should I see if there is a way to notify 'unwed mothers' from the early 60's who went to a home and gave her baby up? Or do you think that would pretty much be insurmountable?

In my opinion, whoever Sharon was, she had to have been abducted by Franklin Delano Floyd; most likely when she was a baby and thus, able to pretty much view him as her single father. Even if she was a child who was in some way willingly given up by her biological parents, finding her parents would be next to impossible at this point, since her age indicated she was born in the late 60's or early 70's, which means she could have long since been forgotten or the parents could be dead.

I would say Sharon's case is kind of like Nyleen Kay Marshall.

I was reading this on Matt Birkbeck's blog and found it interesting:

http://www.mattbirkbeck.com/1/archives/12-2010/1.html

I haven't had much to report over the last few months on the search for Sharon's identity. The trail had run cold with no new leads, until yesterday, when I spoke with Joe Stegall, a high school classmate of Sharon's at Forest Park. Joe reached out to me about a month ago, and we finally connected on the phone.
Joe had a crush on Sharon and relayed many of the similar experiences others described in their releationships with Sharon, especially her quick exit from phone calls whenever Floyd was around. But it was during those calls to Sharon's home that Joe said something interesting - he could hear a toddler in the background.
When Joe asked Sharon who it was she said it was her "little brother." According to Joe, the child was there in the house for some time, perhaps weeks, since he could hear him whenever he was on the phone with Sharon. I have no idea who the boy was or why he was in the home. It wasn't Michael, who was born two years later in 1988. Could the child have been another one of Floyd's victims and awaiting transfer or sale to someone else, much like Floyd sold Sharon's other children? I dont' know. It's just a guess.
Joe also mentioned that Sharon's son, Michael Anthony, was most likely named after Michael Anthony, the bassist in Sharon's favorite band, Van Halen.

i just finished Matt Birkbeck's book (well-written and worth reading, I would add) and it convinces me of two things, neither of which are very happy:

1. Michael Hughes is dead.
2. "Sharon Marshall" will never be identified.

Of these, my certainty as to the first is almost absolute. As to the second, it's not, but almost - IMHO, the people checking Charley, etc. for potential "matches" are wasting their time, since she was almost certainly never reported missing (and pre-1982, even if she had been, at one point, a report is more likely to gathering dust in a police station somewhere, rather then ever made it to a clearinghouse). FDF is clearly a sociopath and absolutely nothing he says is credible; he will never tell the truth about her.

i just finished Matt Birkbeck's book (well-written and worth reading, I would add) and it convinces me of two things, neither of which are very happy:

1. Michael Hughes is dead.
2. "Sharon Marshall" will never be identified.

Of these, my certainty as to the first is almost absolute. As to the second, it's not, but almost - IMHO, the people checking Charley, etc. for potential "matches" are wasting their time, since she was almost certainly never reported missing (and pre-1982, even if she had been, at one point, a report is more likely to gathering dust in a police station somewhere, rather then ever made it to a clearinghouse). FDF is clearly a sociopath and absolutely nothing he says is credible; he will never tell the truth about her.

I'm also reading A Beautiful Child right now, thanks to dynoguy's suggestion. I agree, and believe that if he ever told the truth at all, it was the bathtub story. So sad.

In other news, I found an insanely coincidental connection. My mother mentioned a girl her age who disappeared at 11 in 1961 from the city I was born in. Here is her page on Charley Project: http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/t/tompkins_karen.html

Astonishingly, some people on websleuths have theorized that she could be the mother of Suzanne/Sharon. I would have to read more into why they think so, but I just thought it was crazily coincidental that my mother mentioned this case while I was reading Matt Birkbeck's book. In fact, when my mother said her name, she even accidentally noted it as "Sharon." I'm not saying I believe the theory, but a coincidence it certainly is
!
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36329&highlight=karen+lynn+tompkins

It is particularly jarring to hear about the streets mentioned in the articles. I grew up there and it was and still is considered very safe. For this to have happened 50 years ago must have been even more shocking.