Christy Dunn’s disappearance prompted concern at work before investigators focused on her home, her financial activity and eventually her son.
ANDERSON, S.C. — The investigation that would eventually produce a murder charge against Christy Dunn’s son did not begin with a body, an arrest or a reported act of violence. It began when Dunn stopped showing up and someone from her workplace asked deputies to make sure she was safe.
On June 27, 2025, Dunn’s employer contacted the Anderson County Sheriff’s Office because the 52-year-old woman had not been seen for about a week. Deputies went to her residence on Standridge Road but could not find her. What started as a welfare check became a missing-person investigation and, over the next 14 months, a homicide inquiry involving property searches, forensic specialists, financial and cellphone records, surveillance video and witness interviews. In August 2026, authorities charged Dunn’s son, 32-year-old Justin Queen, with murder and destruction of human remains.
The first questions centered on what Dunn had left behind. Her personal belongings remained at the residence, according to investigators, as did her vehicle. The continued presence of those possessions did not explain where she was, but it gave detectives a reason to examine whether her absence was voluntary. Authorities said Dunn had been living with Queen and her grandson, Queen’s son, before she disappeared. The household therefore became a central setting in a case that had begun only as an attempt to locate a missing woman.
Investigators also noticed that life around Dunn’s property had not entirely stopped after she vanished. The sheriff’s office said her debit card continued to be used after she was reported missing. Her vehicle was moved as well, and detectives said Queen was the only person who drove it. Authorities have not released a full account of those financial transactions or every movement of the vehicle, so the public record does not show precisely how each event fits into the prosecution’s eventual theory.
Within weeks, the inquiry reached the land around Dunn’s home. Local reports citing the sheriff’s office say detectives and forensic investigators searched the property in July 2025 with the Anderson County Coroner’s Office and a forensic anthropologist from Clemson University. In a burn pit, they found what appeared to be human bones. A subsequent warrant allowed another search, which produced additional remains. The Clemson specialist confirmed that the material was human, authorities said, and it was later submitted to a DNA laboratory in Texas for further testing.
The discovery changed the nature of the investigation but did not immediately produce an arrest. Authorities continued examining the case for more than a year. They eventually said they believed the burned remains belonged to Dunn, although the reports reviewed through Oct. 17 did not show a later public announcement that DNA testing had conclusively identified them. The distinction between investigators’ belief and a formally announced laboratory identification remains one of the unresolved details in the public account.
As word of the charges emerged in August 2026, the case also reached people who had known Dunn as a neighbor rather than as the subject of an investigation. Christine Chapman told WYFF that she had hoped Dunn would be found alive. She described Dunn as “a sweet woman” while reacting to the news that investigators believed the missing woman had died. The brief comment reflected a possibility that had remained open publicly during the missing-person phase but narrowed sharply once authorities announced their homicide theory.
That theory was built from more than the remains. The sheriff’s office said investigators reviewed financial and cellphone records, surveillance footage and other evidence. Witnesses also reported that Queen had previously been seen in the woods with Dunn. Officials have not provided detailed public accounts of those sightings. The sheriff’s office ultimately said detectives determined that an assault occurred inside Dunn’s residence and that her body was then taken to the burn pit on the property.
Authorities have not said what they believe caused the alleged assault, what weapon was used, if any, or why they believe Dunn was killed. No motive has been publicly announced. Those gaps are significant because the facts released by investigators describe the broad outline of their case rather than the full evidentiary presentation that could later be tested in court. Queen has been charged, not convicted, and the state will have to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt if the case proceeds to trial.
Queen was already outside the community by the time detectives secured the homicide warrants. He was incarcerated at Kirkland Correctional Institution in Columbia on a separate child-neglect matter. Law&Crime reported, citing prison records, that he began serving that sentence two days after the June 27, 2025, welfare check for Dunn. Investigators continued working on his mother’s disappearance while he was in state custody, gathering evidence until the 10th Circuit Solicitor’s Office concluded there was sufficient probable cause to seek the new charges.
The sheriff’s office served Queen with the murder and destruction-of-human-remains warrants on Aug. 27, 2026. He was then transferred from Kirkland to the Anderson County Detention Center. At his first appearance, FOX Carolina reported, a judge denied bond on the murder charge and set a $10,000 surety bond on the destruction-of-remains count. Queen remained in custody because of the murder case. The reviewed sources did not identify a later trial date or publicly reported plea to the new charges.
One part of the published timeline requires correction when the reports are compared. Law&Crime said the bones were discovered in July 2026, a year after Dunn vanished. Local outlets that reported directly from the sheriff’s office announcement, including FOX Carolina, WSPA and the Anderson Independent Mail, instead place the forensic search in July 2025. They also describe the investigation as lasting approximately 14 months before Queen was charged. Their consistent chronology supports July 2025 as the search date used in this account.
The case therefore moved through several distinct stages: concern from Dunn’s workplace, a welfare check, a missing-person inquiry, discovery of human remains, months of records and witness analysis, and finally review by prosecutors. That progression helps explain why an arrest did not immediately follow the recovery of the bones. Investigators say the eventual charges rested on the totality of the evidence, not simply on the location where human remains were found.
Important questions still have no public answer. Authorities have not announced a motive or fully described Dunn’s final known movements. The reviewed reports do not show a definitive public DNA announcement or disclose all of the evidence prosecutors say connects Queen to the alleged assault. The sheriff’s office has said the investigation remains ongoing, leaving open the possibility that additional forensic or court information could clarify those points.
For now, the case stands at a very different place from where it began. An employer’s attempt to check on an absent worker has become a murder prosecution against Dunn’s son, while investigators say the remains recovered from the property are believed to be hers. Queen remains accused of murder and destruction of human remains, and the unresolved evidence will be subject to the safeguards and proof requirements of the criminal court process.
Author note: Last updated Oct. 17, 2026.