This commentary is not about the murder. Frank Dryman was convicted of murder and should have spent life in prison, period.

The Montana Board of Pardons and Parole will surely sleep well the next few nights. On Friday they revoked the parole of 78 year-old Frank Dryman. He can apply for parole in five years – when he is 83.

Great Falls Tribune reporter John S. Adams (who is quickly becoming one of the better print reporters in the state) has the story HERE.

For those readers who have not followed the case, Frank Dryman was convicted of murder here in Montana and, after several new trials, was sentenced to life in prison – which is appropriate for murder in my book. In 1969, for some reason, the State of Montana paroled Dryman. He served 15 years.

A little over two years later (1971) Dryman disappeared. He supposedly led a productive life volunteering in his community including being on a “sheriff’s posse.” I did not read that he ever broke the law during this time.

A member of the murder victim’s family found him in Arizona in March 2010. He was brought back to Montana.

Maybe the inept members of the Montana Board of Pardons and Parole felt vindication by revoking his parole, which they are entitled to do.

Board member Teresa McCann O’Connor has seemed to telegraph what she will do in five years (if she is still on the board).

Adams reported:

McCann O’Connor added that if she is still serving on the board in five years, she will again vote to keep Dryman in prison.

That statement was totally unprofessional. Hopefully, Ms. McCann O’Connor has not said such absurd things to other prisoners because that gives them no reason to be rehabilitated or to even obey the rules while they are incarcerated. A statement like that to anyone up for parole takes away most, if any, hope for freedom, or even something to work toward. It creates a dangerous situation in the prison.

Ms. McCann O’Connor should step down or, better yet, be replaced by the Governor.

During the hearing, it was reported that several people spoke about the murder. In my opinion, the hearing was not about the murder, it was about the parole conditions that Dryman broke.

By the way and in case you are wondering, this is the same Montana Board of Pardon and Paroles who were so close-minded that they failed to grant Barry Beach a pardon in 2007.

People who watch the Montana justice system (including the victim’s family) must wonder what the circumstances were that convinced the State of Montana to parole Dryman in the first place for murder. And, since he was paroled in the first place after serving what the State of Montana felt was enough time in prison for murder, it seems a little much for the State of Montana to keep him in prison (and pay for his healthcare, food, room and board) for an additional five years (maybe more) before he gets another chance parole or dies.

The State of Montana would probably be better served to lock Dryman up for six months to a year for breaking the conditions of his parole, then reinstate his parole and let him go. He’s 78 years old, he would not be a detriment to himself or the community, he appears to have been a law-abiding citizen (except for the parole violation), and I’d bet he would obey the conditions of his release now.