Michael Dunahee, Missing Since 1991, and Norma's 2022 Account: A New Theory
By: Shane Lambert
Original time of writing: March 10th to 17th, 2025
Michael Dunahee's Disappearance: Toward a New Hypothesis
Michael Dunahee, a four-year-old boy from Victoria, British Columbia, vanished without much of a trace on March 24th, 1991. On the day of his disappearance, which was a Sunday, he was playing at a playground near Blanshard Elementary School. This was during a family outing, his parents were nearby, and the father was participating in a sports match that his mother watched.
Unraveling Canada’s Most Infamous Missing Child Mystery
The case is one of the enduring unsolved mysteries in Canada that involves a missing person. I would call it Vancouver Island's most famous case, perhaps only rivaled by the more modern case of Emma Fillipoff. Each case does extend beyond localities. In particular, the disappearance of Michael Dunahee might be the most famous unsolved case, perhaps even in Canadian history.
But despite exhaustive efforts, the case remains unsolved, and over three decades have passed. Over the years, countless tips and witness accounts have emerged.
This includes a tip from an elderly woman named Norma. In 2022, she emerged as an eyewitness to the abduction of Michael Dunahee, and perhaps her recollection offers a potential clue to what transpired that day back in March of 1991.
Eyewitness Breakthrough: Norma’s Shocking 2022 Revelation
Norma, who was 81 years old in 2022, would have been in her early 50s at the time of the abduction. She believes she saw part of what happened near Blanshard Elementary School that day.
In 2022, she recounted her memories of a young woman grabbing a blonde, blue-eyed boy wearing colorful pants by the arm. This does match the description of Michael Dunahee, including the clothes that he wore. Norma said the young woman took Michael across Wark Street toward a back alley. Additionally, Norma described a brown van, beige on top and darker below, which she linked to the event.
Clues Under Hypnosis: Digging Into Norma’s Memory
Authorities took her account seriously, which I think was the right to do. In my opinion, when a case is cold, then it only makes sense to treat someone seriously if they offer an eyewitness account unless given a reason not to.
On that matter, Norma underwent hypnosis to recall specific details, such as the van’s license plate, as part of the investigation. However, if she ever knew the plate, this was not a detail that she was able to reveal.
In this article, the woman Norma claims to have seen will be called "Mystery Woman." Furthermore, this article will proceed as though Norma's account of what she saw is genuine and that the boy being led away was, in fact, Michael. Importantly, this is a detail that isn't absolutely authenticated but I think that's the best way to proceed in the absence of any other leads in this otherwise cold case.
The Tackle That Changed Everything: Norma’s Recall
| Exact Quote | Paraphrase & Relevance | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | “I would hate to have to pass on and not know where that child is. It’s just not right. That poor little boy. And that’s my fault too, because I didn’t know what was happening,” she said. | Paraphrase: Norma feels guilty and desperate to know Michael’s fate, blaming herself for not recognizing the abduction at the time. Relevance: Establishes her emotional stake and motivation for coming forward 30 years later, framing her as a regretful witness. |
| 2 | “I’m driving down Wark Street and I see this young lad running kitty corner, across the park there, the front lawn. And then I see another one running right behind him and I said, ‘Oh boy, I better watch those kids.' The little one at the front ran across the street. She — the person behind him — was running and she dove at him and she grabbed him by the legs and pulled him down. So she tackled him just like playing football. And he went down hard. And I thought 'little bums', you know, kids, right?,” she recalled of that day, noting what she remembers still haunts her 30 years on. | Paraphrase: Norma claims she saw a boy running, chased, and tackled by someone she initially thought was a kid, only realizing later it was serious. Relevance: A potential core eyewitness account of the abduction, describing the physical act she believes involved Michael. |
| 3 | “So she gets up and grabs the little guy by the arm and she marches him across in front of me on Wark Street,” she recalled. | Paraphrase: The woman stood up, took the boy by the arm, and led him across the street in front of Norma’s car. Relevance: Details the next step of the abduction, showing control over the boy and movement toward a specific direction, critical for tracing events. |
| 4 | “I looked at the boy and he had blonde hair, blue eyes, and he was being pulled. He had these bright coloured pants on like different colours, blues and yellows and reds,” Norma said. | Paraphrase: Norma noticed the boy had blonde hair, blue eyes, and colorful pants as he was being dragged. Relevance: Matches Michael Dunahee’s description (blonde, blue-eyed, colorful clothing), strengthening her claim of witnessing him specifically. |
| 5 | “Then they started to walk down King and I looked over and there was a back alley type thing over there. And there was this brown van, it was parked there. The guy was standing on the outside, holding his driver’s door open looking at the situation. The side door was flung open and there was a brownie coloured blanket hanging out of the van,” she continued. | Paraphrase: They walked toward King Street, where Norma saw a brown van with a man by the driver’s door and an open side door with a blanket hanging out. Relevance: Introduces the van and a second suspect (The Man in the Van), suggesting a planned abduction with a getaway vehicle, a key lead in the case. |
| 6 | “One of the reasons I moved was because of that, because I couldn’t drive down Bay Street and go past Wark. I couldn’t go down King Street. It was a nightmare in my head. I couldn’t do it. It’s haunting me because I didn’t do something about it. I didn’t help that little guy.” | Paraphrase: Norma moved away because the memory of not helping the boy haunted her whenever she drove near the abduction site. Relevance: Highlights the psychological toll on her, reinforcing her credibility as a witness deeply affected by what she saw, and her inaction as a lingering regret. |
The Van Debate: Chevy or Ford in Michael’s Abduction?
The presence of a brown van is interesting. This is a topic that I looked at in another blog post on this website a few years ago. I published that post before Norma arose as a potential eyewitness.
But there was another witness, one who was ten years old, who drew a picture of a van that she claimed Michael went into. In my opinion, the picture the child drew resembles a 1981 Chevrolet P30 Grumman Step Van. According to modern artificial intelligence, my guess on the van was likely right.
However, the CityNews article that recounts Norma's memory shows a vehicle that is meant to resemble the one she saw. This picture would more likely depict a Ford Econoline Van from the mid-1960s.
A Ford Econoline looks different than a 1981 Chevrolet P30 Grumman Step Van. But this is a matter that can be sidestepped.
I don't know whose account to go with, the account of a 10-year-old who drew a picture pretty fresh from memory or the account of an 81-year-old remembering details from more than 30 years prior. For the sake of proceeding, I will consider the van to be real and part of the abduction and set aside the debate of the year, make, and model.
Why an Old Van Spells Trouble for This Case
Regardless, of which model you go with, an interesting point arises.
The abduction of Michael Dunahee took place in 1991. But the newest of the vehicle models is possibly from 1981 with the Econoline possibly being much older.
That suggests that the owner owned the vehicle for quite some time, discounting second-hand purchases. Either vehicle is the type of vehicle that does not provide clear visual access to the back area. I think that would make them more attractive to those planning clandestine activities.
Mystery Woman Unveiled: A Rare Female Abductor?
One thing that really stood out to me with Norma's abduction depiction is the age of the Mystery Woman. Firstly, Norma felt that she was looking at another child. However, when she got a closer look at the Mystery Woman, she came to the opinion that she was looking at a young woman, aged 18-25.
When dealing with non-family abduction, there are not many known child abductors who fit this description. Throwing out custody battle abductions between parents, the prototype of a child abductor in Canada is a man in his 30s or 40s. The Mystery Woman is much younger and a different sex than what is typical.
Stats vs. Reality: Does Gender Flip the Script?
As for official studies, one study known as "Abducted then Murdered Children: A Canadian Study" from 2016 analyzed 93 cases of non-family abduction in Canada. The study found that 92% of the abductors were male. The Mystery Woman does not fit the typical profile of an abductor -- but yes, there is that 8% to think about.
The Mystery Woman's demographics have always struck me as odd. Since Norma originally thought the Mystery Woman was a child, my thoughts have always taken me toward the lower end of the age range, that being an 18-20-year-old. A female abductor is rare in Canada but, using that range, an 18-20-year-old woman abducting a child by herself is even more rare.
The Missing Link: Why Women Rarely Abduct Alone
When it comes to studies involving crimes, there is a major limitation: lots of crimes simply don't enter the statistical records. But one driving force behind abductions is the male sex drive. That could explain why we see more men as abductors than women.
In the time I had to prepare this blog post, I couldn't find a case of a woman aged 18-25 acting alone in child abduction. This suggests that it is either extremely rare or not publicly reported on as much. My research is largely digital so some relevant cases might not be digital yet. But in researching this, I used AI extensively and nothing turned up.
Yet, close examples or near examples are out there. News searches for terms like "young male child abductor Canada," "18-25 male abductor Canada," and "teenage male child abduction Canada" yielded cases such as Nicole Shanks. She abducted a baby in 2021 but she was 32 years old (Woman who snatched 8-day-old baby found not criminally responsible/CBC News article/March 17th, 2022).
Another case involved a 56-year-old woman abducting a child from a babysitter in 2021 (Steinbach RCMP locate abducted child RCMP news), far outside the age range I was looking for. I do think there is probably an example out there of an 18-25-year-old female abducting a child while acting alone in Canada. But, if that example is out there, it evaded my research.
The Man in the Van: A Dark Puppet Master?
That it's extremely difficult to find an example is all that's relevant to me. It led me to an assumption, which I am going to put in the "Take it or leave it" category, a simple assumption, admittedly problematic, and not supported by concrete evidence -- and yet probably correct in my opinion.
In the case of Michael Dunahee, in my opinion, there is a man in the van. This would be the same man and van that Norma recounted.
Getting back to the Ford Econoline Van or Chevy Step Van, there is probably a man sitting in it who has control over the Mystery Woman. He is supervising and managing the abduction, which is all his brainwave. He is using the Mystery Woman as a buffer. If things go wrong, The Man in the Van is going to hightail it and let the Mystery Woman deal with the authorities on the matter.
Stockholm Syndrome Twist: From Villain to Victim
If she is only 18-20 years old, then my guess is that the Mystery Woman is a former child abductee herself. Even if she is older, then she could be.
I would guess that The Man in the Van kidnapped her sometime after 1981, the year of the vehicle that I have presumed to be a Chevy Step Van. The Mystery Woman has been brainwashed since being abducted, she had all kinds of mental problems in 1991, and those problems probably include Stockholm Syndrome.
This syndrome, Stockholm Syndrome, is a psychological phenomenon where hostages or victims of a crime develop a bond with their captors, often displaying sympathy, loyalty, or even affection toward them despite the danger or abuse they endure. The term originated from a Norrmalmstorg bank robbery in 1973.
In that robbery, Jan-Erik Olsson attempted to rob Kreditbanken, taking four employees hostage after police intervened. Over six days, the hostages—Birgitta Lundblad, Elisabeth Oldgren, Kristin Enmark, and Sven Säfström—were held in the bank's vault. Some of them expressed trust in their captors, fearing police tactics more, and even requested the police to leave.
Stockholm Syndrome: Abduction Cases
The bonds are hard to understand but could simply be part of human evolution, like everything else about us. It might be to the general advantage of a captive to find his/her captor endearing because it might pay to be on that person's good side while in their custody.
Stockholm Syndrome has been used more broadly in the decades since the bank robbery in Sweden. Anyone captive might develop it, even in contexts outside of hostage situations. I think the Mystery Woman is a former child abductee who developed Stockholm Syndrome after coming under the custody of her abductor. I think that's why she is out tackling a kid and luring him toward a van with a man waiting. This is something that women aged 18-25 don't normally otherwise do.
Real-Life Parallels and Variance in Abductee Behaviors: Stayner and Hearst Connections
I didn't find a known example of an abducted child later helping his/her own abductor perform a subsequent abduction. However, I do know of a near-example: Steven Stayner, an American example.
A pedophile named Kenneth Parnell abducted Steven Stayner, who was seven years old at the time, in 1972. Parnell raised Stayner as his own child until 1980.
Around then, Parnell had solicited Stayner’s help in abducting another child but this is where there is a change. Stayner refused to help, Parnell abducted another child anyway, and then Stayner took that child, Timothy White, to the authorities. This led to everything unraveling for Parnell
The example connects to The Mystery Woman and The Man in the Van, as I've hypothesized them because it's a real-life example that shows that an abductor might solicit help from a former abductee.
 |
| Star Tribune. March 3rd, 1980. |
Patty Hearst Example
Patty Hearst was 19 years old when the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA) abducted her in February 1974. Between that time and her arrest in 1975, she aided the SLA as they committed their crimes.
Her defense argued she developed Stockholm Syndrome, she was convicted anyway, and she spent time in prison before Jimmy Carter commuted her. In 2001, Bill Clinton granted her a full pardon. Her case remains a notable example of abduction and the psychological complexities that resulted.
Down and Out in the Canadian Rockies
A BLEAK GLIMPSE INTO RESORT TOWN LIFE FROM A WORKER'S PERSPECTIVE
Get your copy of this engaging ebook now
Available on Amazon for Kindle or as a physical copy
Profiling the Mystery Woman: Who Is She Really?
| Attribute | Details |
|---|---|
| Sex | Female |
| Age | 18-25 (as of March 24th, 1991) (presumed based on Norma's account); my inclination is that The Mystery Woman is 18-20. |
| Birthdate Range | March 25th, 1966 - March 24th, 1973 (calculated based on her estimated age on the date of Michael Dunahee's abduction, using Norma's description); March 25th, 1970 - March 24th, 1973 if she is 18-20. |
| Role | Suspected abductor of a boy, presumably Michael Dunahee; by eyewitness account. She has been described as tackling Dunahee and to have ushered him away from the Blanshard Elementary School playground. |
| Additional Context | Seen heading toward a beige and brown van, which I have assumed to be either a Ford Econoline Van or a P30 Grumman 1981 Chevy Step Van (unconfirmed). |
| Psychological Note | May have Stockholm Syndrome, resulting from being abducted and raised by her abductor, presumably The Man in the Van. |
Could She Be Out There? An Appeal to the Mystery Woman
There are missing girls in Canada that fit the birthdate range. I've looked at them but decided not to start listing names because this is all speculative. But I do think an appeal is worth making, even if The Mystery Woman is not firmly grounded in anything except Norma's account. My reasoning is simply that it couldn't hurt.
If the reader is The Mystery Woman, then I think there will be public sympathy for you if you were a child abductee yourself. There was public sympathy for Patty Hearst, even though she participated in crimes.
If you, The Mystery Woman, are reading this, then I would think that you could contact the police and reveal what you know, maybe even after preparing a statement with a lawyer. In doing so, two unsolved missing child mysteries might be solved.
Next Steps: Norma’s Role
Then there's Norma, the witness. If it has not been done already, I think she should look at the pictures of missing girls in Canada who were born between March 25th, 1966, and March 24th, 1973 to see if any of them resembled The Mystery Woman at all.
This is actionable without much effort. As stated, I don't want to start listing missing children with birthdates that overlap with The Mystery Woman's because of the false hope it could create.
I don't want to oversell my opinion. I realized every time I made an assumption, there was a chance that I went down a rabbit hole with no rabbit in it. But I still think this angle is worth being a part of the theories regarding Michael's disappearance in a case that is cold and has drained police budgets.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment