Montana fugitive missing for 38 years found running chapel in Arizona

2010-03-25T00:00:00Z Montana fugitive missing for 38 years found running chapel in ArizonaThe Associated Press The Associated Press
March 25, 2010 12:00 am  • 

A hitchhiker originally sentenced to be executed for the 1951 killing of a Montana man who picked him up during a blizzard has been found running a wedding chapel under an assumed name in Arizona 38 years after he skipped out on parole.

Frank Dryman was found after the victim’s grandson hired an investigator who tracked the fugitive to his Arizona City notary and chapel business, where he was known as Victor Houston.

Now 78, Dryman was awaiting extradition proceedings after his Tuesday arrest by the Pinal County sheriff’s office. A hearing was scheduled for Thursday morning in Arizona.

“I think this sends a message to other fugitives that they are never off the radar screen,” said Montana Department of Corrections spokesman Bob Anez. “It’s imperative that individuals be held accountable for their actions.”

Dryman initially received a hanging sentence after a quick trial in 1955. His case became the focus of a battle over the death penalty and frontier justice, and he received a new sentence of life in prison with the help of the Montana Supreme Court.

In 1969, after just 15 years in prison, he was paroled. The Montana Department of Corrections said that today, the soonest a person sentenced to life in prison could gain parole is 30 years.

Dryman disappeared three years later. No Montana offender had been missing longer.

“He just went into thin air in 1972,” said Clem Pellett, the victim’s grandson. “I don’t think that my grandfather’s death was well represented; it just got lost in all the ideologic conversation of the time.”

Pellett, a surgeon in Bellevue, Wash., pursued the case after first learning details last year while digging through old newspaper clippings in storage. He said the issue was never discussed in the family.

Pellett said he was driven by a sense of curiosity, and does not feel like he needs any revenge since he never knew his grandfather Clarence, and knew little about the murder.

Newspaper clippings from the time say that Clarence Pellett stopped to pick up Frank Dryman in 1951 during a spring blizzard near Shelby, a small town in northern Montana.

Pellett, who ran a cafe, was shot seven times in the back as he tried to run away, according to the accounts.

The private investigator hired by the grandson used scores of documents the family dug up from old parole records, the Montana Historical Society and Internet searches to trace Dryman to the Cactus Rose Wedding Chapel.

Pellett told Montana corrections officials of the discovery. Officials said Dryman acknowledged his identity to officers.

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said that Dryman had blended into local society and even cultivated friendships with previous county sheriffs.

Prosecutors in Arizona said they did not know if Dryman had an attorney. A call to the wedding chapel Wednesday was not answered.

“They can run from the law, but with perseverance and good investigative work, we almost always find them in the end,” Babeu said.

County officials said they didn’t know if Dryman was performing weddings. Under Arizona law, a couple must take out a marriage license, have a ceremony performed by an ordained minister or a Justice of the Peace and then return the signed license to court for recording.

If Dryman was ordained under a different name and was performing weddings, they would still likely be legal, according to a Phoenix-area divorce lawyer.

“They’re probably valid if they were otherwise performed as a legal ceremony in Arizona and recorded,” Scottsdale family law attorney Alexander Nirenstein said.

The Montana Department of Corrections said that Dryman will be sent back to the state prison. He will face a parole revocation hearing within the next few months — and possible resumption of his life sentence.

Pellett said he has learned his family has a long, coincidental history with Dryman. Records show that Pellett’s great aunt once testified in support of Dryman when the then 16-year-old was accused of robbing a liquor store.

“She came to his defense so that he was not labeled as a delinquent,” Pellett said.

Pellett, who only decided to hire a private investigator on a whim during a dinner party conversation, said he is not driven to see Dryman punished.

“The legal system will handle it,” the grandson said. “Whatever they decide is fine with me. I mean he is 78 years old.”

But Pellet, 56, said he would like to finish writing the family history of the long trial.

“I want to see if he wants to talk to me,” Pellett said. “I just want to get information. There are holes in the story he could really add to.”

Associated Press writer Bob Christie in Phoenix contributed to this report.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(3) Comments

  1. Countryboy
    Report Abuse
    Countryboy - March 25, 2010 12:40 pm
    Am I understanding this right, he had a parole violation?
  2. supersuz
    Report Abuse
    supersuz - March 25, 2010 12:27 pm
    Just a question, as i don't understand all the legality of parole etc...
    Once a person is paroled, isn't he basically free to continue their life as a civilian?
  3. Independent
    Report Abuse
    Independent - March 25, 2010 8:28 am
    It will be interesting to see how this plays out. For Corrections spokesman Bob Anez to try to take some credit is comical. Sheriff Babeu’s insinuation that law enforcement had anything to do with this is equally funny. Clem Pellett’s curiosity and ability to follow up gives us all an interesting start to the work day. I would hope we hear the outcome. Some sense of justice should prevail regardless of the time lapse.

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters. If you receive an error after submitting a comment, please contact us.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps:

    1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

    2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

    3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

    4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

    5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

    6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

    7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

    8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

    9. Don't write a novel. If your comment is longer than the article you're commenting on, you might want to cut it down a bit. Lengthy comments will likely be removed.
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick