Attorney General Jackley Announces Centerville Man Convicted by Jury in Triple Murder Trial

Attorney General Jackley Announces Centerville Man Convicted by Jury in Triple Murder Trial

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announces that a Centerville man has been found guilty by a McCook County Jury, for a 2024 triple homicide that occurred in Centerville, SD.

Jay Ostrem, 65, was found guilty Friday of three counts of First-Degree Murder. He faces a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. Sentencing is scheduled for May 14, 2026.

“Today’s verdict delivers justice for the victims and their loved ones. We are grateful for the hard work of law enforcement and prosecutors, and we continue to keep the families in our thoughts,” said Attorney General Jackley.

Victims in the shooting death were identified as Paul Wyland Frankus, 26; Zachary Frankus, 21; and Timothy Richmond, 35. The incident was reported near 10 p.m. May 27, 2024, at a residence in Centerville.

South Dakota’s Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) led the investigation. The case was prosecuted by the South Dakota Attorney General’s Office and the Turner County State’s Office.

                                                                                                  -30-

4 thoughts on “Attorney General Jackley Announces Centerville Man Convicted by Jury in Triple Murder Trial”

  1. If 1st degree murder X3 isn’t grounds for capital punishment, why have the death penalty???

    1. At the outset, I should note that I am opposed to the death penalty, so you should put what I say in proper context given that.

      So, to hear the state officials tell it throughout the history of the death penalty in South Dakota, it is typically reserved for cases that shock the conscience. Examples of this include a man who raped a little girl before killing her, or a group of men who took another man out into the wilderness and made him clean himself in a nearly freezing creek while they took turns beating him with rocks. The state tends to pursue those cases that display a certain viciousness or depravity not seen in other cases. I am not sure I buy this justification, but I just wanted to relay the most common things I’ve heard argued by state officials.

      1. It’s a sad time when the murder of three people doesn’t “shock the conscience!”

        1. Not saying it doesn’t, but there is a difference between shooting someone and torturing someone before killing them. I dont think it should matter for purposes of the death penalty, but there is a difference there and we have to at least recognize it.

Comments are closed.