Author Topic: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991  (Read 70790 times)

never_lose_hope

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #60 on: January 08, 2009, 05:34:09 PM »
How great would it be to finally have answers!! Even if tragic.. answers.

solvy

  • Member
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #61 on: January 09, 2009, 04:13:44 PM »
It will lilely take some time to sort thru all the information, but I feel this man had nothing to do with Michael.  I think that LE knows who dun it here, but lack concrete evidence to convict.  Just my opinion tho.

mauvelilac

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #62 on: January 09, 2009, 04:18:42 PM »
I agree with you Solvy. I don't believe so either.

D1

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #63 on: January 09, 2009, 05:05:57 PM »
So shortly after this guy confesses to a couple of old child murders, his shrink turns him into the cops after which he is found dead of natural causes by the police when they go to arrest him. There they find a poster of Michael Dunahee and assumptions are that this could be the abductor. Pretty straightforward stuff all in all??

Coincidentally, some years ago a shrink from the Chilliwack area was allegedly told a similar story about Michaels abductor by the spouse of someone who claimed he had confessed to it. I do not know how Canada's laws work on this topic or whether the Canadian shrink would even be allowed to tell the police or not. Maybe he did tell?? Coincidentally, Terry Arnold was living in the Chilliwack area at the time the story was told to the shrink.
Arnold- http://mindytran.com/arnoldscrimes.htm

mauvelilac

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #64 on: January 09, 2009, 06:16:20 PM »
Shrinks are supposed to carry the same level of confidentiality  with their patients as lawyers have with their clients, same goes with doctors and priests and so on and so forth. Anything obtained and presented as evidence by a breach of said confidence should and would be dismissed. Yes, before anyone asks I took a three year law course in my younger days. A lot has changed, I realize but I doubt highly that would have.

D1

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #65 on: January 09, 2009, 06:24:06 PM »
Are the U.S. laws different from our's in this respect? Is it legal there or was it somewhat of an anomaly for the shrink to tell?
d1

capeheart

  • Member
  • Posts: 3532
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #66 on: January 09, 2009, 06:41:22 PM »
Usually any shrink is not allowed to divulge any information about their patient. I think there has to be a special order from the court in order to be able to have access to a file. I know in Canada, even when RCMP are doing any kind of a case, you cannot ask for a copy of the file that the officer has. You have to have a special order from the court to get the information. I believe it is the same in Canada as it is in the US, you cannot get a shrink's file to display before the court. I just wonder why this man would have a copy of the poster for Michael. We all know that there are many copies of missing children posted in public places, so why would he have Michael's????There could be a reason, he could have abducted him. I guess now there is not much of a chance of knowing if he did unless other evidence is found. Hopefully something comes out of the investigation. 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

D1

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #67 on: January 09, 2009, 08:47:10 PM »
I do know there was at least one case here in Canada where the psychiatrist told the police and then even testiified against her client. That was the case of Tony Gallup now convicted of murdering a little girl. This was from a fairly recent trial in Lethbridge Alberta. Why was it allowed here but not in other cases?

never_lose_hope

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2009, 09:06:54 PM »
Everything is confidential unless you talking about hurting someone else physically.. then they can't keep it confidential.

haunted

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #69 on: January 09, 2009, 09:17:09 PM »
Never: that sounds like it makes sense. Confidentiality and privileged information I would think can only go so far. I also wonder after a patient dies if there is as much of an obligation to protect information from sessions, if it could be used to say, solve a cold case.

D1

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #70 on: January 09, 2009, 09:29:35 PM »
There's  kind of a fine line between threatening to offend and being a risk to offend. I believe Gallop told his shrink that he was having trouble controlling himself and thought he may offend, which isn't alot different than having a client whom you know is a serial offender who can't control himself. One you are legally bound to turn in, and one you are obligated into silence. Thats a huge difference for such a slight change in perception.

In the latest case involving Dunahee, the shrink apparently told the cops while the perp was still alive even though there didn't seemed to have been any threats made. But that's the U.S.

It is unknown if the information given to the Chilliwack shrink was passed on to the police. The spouse of the man who allegedly confessed to the abduction may have been too scared to do so on her own.  So unless it was legal under these conditions, here's another lead that can never be pursued.

Interesting that these same conditions seem to apply in some way everytime that Terry Arnold is mentioned in or around where and when  a crime like this occurs. The identity of the woman was not disclosed, Suspicions it could be Arnold arise only from his being in the same area at the time of the disclosure.

After so many years Michael needs the wall of silence to break somewhere if anything is to happen but I doubt the most recent US guy is it. He confessed to two other earlier child killings, his memory hadn't failed him so while he was at it, why not confess to the rest if there were more?

« Last Edit: January 10, 2009, 03:48:52 AM by D1 »

Maureen

  • Member
  • Posts: 449
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #71 on: January 10, 2009, 08:58:57 PM »
There was a law that was enacted a few years ago that if a patient or a client told his /her psychiatrist doctor, priest or whatever that they were involved in a serious crime such as murder, rape, child abuse and whatever, it is against the law to report it. I know this for a fact because I had an incident with Clayton's case where a witness was admitted to hospital because he tried to commit suicide. I contacted the RCMP and when he tried to tell me doctor/patient confidentiality, I told him about this new law. His only comment to me was that I am doing well in my research of new laws. He did nothing about this. 

mauvelilac

  • Guest
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #72 on: January 19, 2009, 03:19:08 PM »
You know Des, I'm wondering about Ron. He contacted me a few months back about another child on here wanting me to do a composite for him. From our conversations, he didn't give me the impression he was psychic, quite the contrary. I kind of lost it with him around Christmas time, haven't heard from him since.

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #73 on: January 19, 2009, 05:31:21 PM »
Oh yeah, mooskie math.... now that was creepy!

CraftyGal

  • Member
  • Posts: 466
  • Remember adopt-Don't Shop!
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Wayne Dunahee - Abducted - Victoria BC 1991
« Reply #74 on: February 02, 2009, 05:47:34 PM »
Yeah and unfortunately I was the one who asked him to come here.  I was asked from someone on AMW through a private massage about Ron, so I gave them the information.  It was around the Cedrika case.  My internet friendship with Ron had started because of another missing child.  I was sent a picture with no information through a friend of mine.  The picture was of a young girl named Rachel who is missing from the States.  Ron said he had information and it went south pretty quick after that.

Craftygal