Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 12th, 2015 #81
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Did Leo Frank Confess?

Published by Editor on September 3, 2012
Did Leo Frank Confess? thumbnail

On the 99th anniversary of the verdict, we examine the murder of Mary Phagan and the trial of Leo Frank (Illustration: autopsy photo).

by Mark Cohen

THE CENTURY-OLD “cold case” Mary Phagan murder mystery — the violent rape and murder of teenager Mary Phagan and the subsequent lynching of the convicted killer, Jewish businessman Leo Frank — has now been conclusively solved by scholars using the extensive 1913 official investigation and trial records. In this once-in-a-lifetime event, the publishing, mass media, and academic establishments — who have for decades promoted the conspiracy theory that anti-Semites framed Frank for the crime because he was Jewish — have been proven to be wrong by the statements of Leo Frank himself.

Leo Frank

In addition to being an executive of Atlanta’s National Pencil Company, Leo Frank was also a B’nai B’rith official — president of the 500-member Gate City Lodge in 1912 — and even after his conviction and incarceration Frank was elected lodge president again in 1913. As a direct result of the Leo Frank conviction, the B’nai B’rith founded their well-known and politically powerful “Anti-Defamation League,” or ADL.

At the climax of the Leo Frank trial, an admission was made by the defendant that amounted to a confession during trial. How many times in the annals of US legal history has this happened? Something very unusual happened during the month-long People v. Leo M. Frank murder trial, held within Georgia’s Fulton County Superior Courthouse in the Summer of 1913. I’m going to show you evidence that Mr. Leo Max Frank inadvertently revealed the solution to the Mary Phagan murder mystery.

When Leo Frank mounted the witness stand on Monday afternoon, August 18, 1913, at 2:15 pm, he orally delivered an unsworn, four-hour, pre-written statement to the 250 people present.

The Leo Frank trial

Epic Trial of 20th Century Southern History

The audience sat in the grandstand seats of the most spectacular murder trial in the annals of Georgia history. Nestled deep within the pews of the Fulton County Superior Court were the luckiest of public spectators, defense and prosecution witnesses, journalists, officials, and courtroom staff.

Hugh M. Dorsey

Like gladiators in an arena, in the center of it all, with their backs to the audience, seated in ladder-back chairs, were the most important principals. They were the State of Georgia’s prosecution team, made up of three members, led by Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper. Arrayed against them were eight Leo Frank defense counselors, led by Luther Z. Rosser and Reuben Rose Arnold. The presiding judge, the Honorable Leonard Strickland Roan, sitting in a high-backed leather chair, was separated by the witness stand from the jury of 12 white men who were sworn to justly decide the fate of Leo Frank.

Crouched and sandwiched between the judge’s bench and the witness chair, sitting on the lip of the bench’s foot rail, was a stenographer capturing the examinations. Stenographers clicked away throughout the trial and were changed regularly in relays.

Reuben R. Arnold

Surrounding the four major defense and prosecution counselors were an entourage of uniformed police, plainclothes detectives, undercover armed security men, government staff, and magistrates.

The first day of the Leo Frank trial began on Monday morning, July 28, 1913, and led to many days of successively more horrifying revelations. But the most interesting day of the trial occurred three weeks later when Leo Frank sat down in the witness stand on Monday afternoon, August 18, 1913.

The Moment Everyone Was Waiting For

What Leo Frank had to say to the court became the spine-tingling climax of the most notorious criminal trial in US history, and it was the moment everyone in all of Georgia, especially Atlanta, had waited for.

Leo Frank posing for Collier’s Weekly. The photo would later become the front cover for the book The Truth About the Frank Case by C.P. Connolly. In the picture, the fingertips of Leo Frank’s left hand are firmly clasped around the base of a cigar, vertically projecting upward from his groin region. The significance of Leo Frank’s left fist would be revealed when the Mary Phagan autopsy, conducted on Monday, May 5, 1913, by Dr. H. F. Harris, was reported during the Leo Frank trial.

Judge Roan explained to the jury the unique circumstances and rules concerning the unsworn statement Leo M. Frank was to make. Then, at 2:14 pm, Leo Frank was called to speak. When he mounted the stand, a hush fell as 250 spellbound people closed ranks and leaned forward expectantly. They were more than just speechless: They were literally breathless, transfixed, sitting on the edges of their seats, waiting with great anticipation for every sentence, every word, that came forth from the mouth of Leo Frank.

But listening to his long speech became challenging at times. He had a reputation as a “gas jet” from his college days (see his college yearbook entry), and he lived up to it now with dense, mind-numbing verbiage.

Three Out of Nearly Four Hours: Distractions and Endless Pencil Calculations

To bring his major points home during his almost four-hour speech, Leo Frank presented original pages of his accounting books to the jury. For three hours he went over, in detail, the accounting computations he had made on the afternoon of April 26, 1913. This was meant to show the court that he had been far too busy to have murdered Mary Phagan on that day nearly 15 weeks before.

Leo Frank’s reputation as a “hot air artist” — and service as a debating coach — shown in his college yearbook entry

One point emphasized by the defense was how long it took Frank to do the accounting books: Was it an hour and a half as some said, or three hours? Can either answer ever be definitive, though? No matter how quickly one accountant works, is it beyond belief that another could be twice as fast?

The Ultimate Question Waiting to be Answered

Monteen Stover

The most important unanswered question in the minds of everyone at the trial was this: Where had Leo Frank gone between 12:05 pm and 12:10 pm on Saturday, April 26, 1913? This was the crucial question because Monteen Stover had testified she found Leo Frank’s office empty during this five-minute time segment – and Leo Frank had told police he never left his office during that time. And the evidence had already shown that Mary Phagan was murdered sometime between 12:05 and 12:15 pm in the Metal Room of the same factory where Leo Frank was present.

There weren’t a plethora of suspects in the building: April 26, 1913, was a state holiday in Georgia — Confederate Memorial Day — and the factory and offices were closed down, except for a few employees coming in to collect their pay and two men doing construction work on an upper floor.

Two investigators had testified that Leo Frank gave them the alibi that he had never left his office from noon until after 12:45. If Leo Frank’s alibi held up, then he couldn’t have killed Mary Phagan.

Everyone wanted to know how Leo Frank would respond to the contradictory testimony clashing with his alibi. And, after rambling about near-irrelevancies for hours, he did: Frank stated — in complete contradiction to his numerous earlier statements that he’d never left his office — that he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom during that time — placing him in the only bathroom on that floor of the building, the Metal Room bathroom, which is where Jim Conley stated he had first found the lifeless body of little Mary Phagan, and immediately adjacent to the Metal Room proper, where Mary Phagan’s blood was found, and where the prosecution had spent weeks proving that the murder had actually taken place.

Paul Donehoo

This was doubly amazing because weeks earlier Leo Frank had emphatically told the seven-man panel led by Coroner Paul Donehoo at the Coroners Inquest, that he (Leo Frank) did not use the bathroom all day long — not that he (Leo Frank) had forgotten, but that he had not gone to the bathroom at all. The visually-blind but prodigious savant Coroner Paul Donehoo — with his highly-refined “B.S. detector” was incredulous as might be expected. Who doesn’t use the bathroom all day long? It was as if Leo Frank was mentally and physically, albeit crudely and unbelievably, trying to distance himself from the bathroom where Jim Conley said he found the body.

Furthermore, Leo Frank had told detective Harry Scott — witnessed by a police officer named Black — that he (Leo Frank) was in his office every minute from noon to half past noon, and in State’s Exhibit B (Frank’s stenographed statement to the police), Leo Frank never mentions a bathroom visit all day.

And now he had reversed himself!

Why would Leo Max Frank make such a startling admission, after spending months trying to distance himself from that part of the building at that precise time? That is a difficult question to answer, but there are clues. 1) The testimony of Monteen Stover (who liked Frank and who was actually a supportive character witness for him) that Frank was missing from his office for those crucial five minutes was convincing. Few could believe that Stover — looking to pick up her paycheck, and waiting five minutes in the office for an opportunity to do so — would have been satisfied with a cursory glance at the room and therefore somehow missed Frank behind the open safe door as he had alleged. 2) The evidence suggests that Frank did not always make rational decisions when under stress: Under questioning from investigators, he repeatedly changed the time at which Mary Phagan supposedly came to see him in his office (and State’s Exhibit B shows that Frank, in the presence of his lawyers, told police that Mary Phagan was in his office with him alone between 12:05 and 12:10 pm); he reportedly confessed his guilt to his wife the day of the murder; he, if guilty, reacted out of all proportion and reason to being spurned by his teenage employee; and he maintained the utterly unbelievable position throughout the case that he did not know Mary Phagan by name, despite indisputably knowing her initials (he wrote them on the company books by hand) and interacting with her hundreds of times.

Mary Phagan

Frank had also said (to paraphrase his statement before the racial angle had been brought forward by his defense team) that to the best of his recollection when he was in his second floor office from 12:00 to 12:45 pm, aside from temporary visitors, the only other people continuously in the building he was aware of were Mr. White and Mr. Denham on the fourth floor, banging away and doing construction as they tore down a partition. That’s it, three people. One can understand investigators, after hearing Frank’s statement that there were only three people in the building, asking the question: If there are three people in the factory, and two of them didn’t do it, who is left?

Even if only one of these lapses is true as described, it is enough to show a pronounced lack of judgement on Frank’s part. A man with such impaired judgement may actually have been unable to see that by explaining away his previous untenable (and now exposed as false) position of “never leaving the office” with an “unconscious” bathroom visit, he was placing himself at the scene of the murder at the precise time of the murder. Thus are men who tell tales undone, even as they fall back upon a partial truth.

Georgia: Right to Refuse Oaths and Examination

Under the Georgia Code, Section 1036, the accused has the right to make an unsworn statement and, furthermore, to refuse to be examined or cross-examined at his trial. Leo Frank made the decision to make an unsworn statement and not allow examination or cross examination.

The law also did not permit Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey or his legal team to orally interpret or comment on the fact that Leo Frank was not making a statement sworn under oath at his own murder trial. The prosecution respected this rule.

The jury knew that Leo Frank had had months to carefully prepare his statement. But what was perhaps most damaging to Leo Frank’s credibility was the fact that every witness at the trial, regardless of whether they were testifying for the defense or prosecution, had been sworn, and therefore spoke under oath, and had been subject to cross-examination by the other side — except for Leo Frank. Thus it didn’t matter if the law prevented the prosecution from commenting on the fact Leo Frank had refused cross examination, opting instead to make an unsworn statement, because the jury could see that anyway. Making an unsworn statement and refusing to be examined does not prove that one is guilty, but it certainly raises eyebrows of doubt.

Leo Frank takes the stand

The South an “Honor Bound” Society

Could a sworn jury upholding its sacred duty question Leo Frank’s honor and integrity as a result of what Southerners likely perceived as his cowardly decision under Georgia Code, Section 1036? If so, greater weight would naturally be given to those witnesses who were sworn under oath and who contradicted Leo Frank’s unsworn alibis, allegations, and claims. It put the case under a new lens of the sworn versus the unsworn.

The average Southerner in 1913 was naturally asking the question: What white man would make an unsworn statement and not allow himself to be cross-examined at his own murder trial if he were truly innocent? Especially in light of the fact that the South was culturally white separatist — and two of the major material witnesses who spoke against Leo Frank were African-Americans, one claiming to be an accomplice after the fact turned accuser. In the Atlanta of 1913, African-Americans were perceived as second class citizens and less reliable than whites in terms of their capacity for telling the truth.

Today, we might ask: Why wouldn’t Leo Frank allow himself to be cross examined when he was trained in the art and science of debating during his high school senior year and all through his years in college, where he earned the rank of Cornell Congress Debate Team coach? (Pratt Institute Monthly, June, 1902; Cornellian, 1902 through 1906; Cornell Senior Class Book, 1906; Cornell University Alumni Dossier File on Leo Frank, retrieved 2012)

Odd Discrepancies

Newt Lee

Most Leo Frank partisan authors omit significant parts of the trial testimony of Newt Lee and Jim Conley from their retelling of the Leo Frank Case. Both of these black men, former National Pencil Company employees, made clearly damaging statements against Frank.

The evidence Newt Lee brought forward was circumstantial, but intriguing — and never quite adequately explained by Leo Frank then, or by his defenders now.

He stated that on Friday Evening, April 25, 1913, Frank made a request to him, Lee, that he report to work an hour early at 4:00 pm on Confederate Memorial Day, the next day. The stated reason was that Leo Frank had made a baseball game appointment with his brother-in-law, Mr. Ursenbach, a Gentile who was married to one of Frank’s wife Lucille’s older sisters. Leo Frank would eventually give two different reasons at different times as to why he canceled that appointment: 1) he had too much work to do, and 2) he was afraid of catching a cold.

Newt Lee’s normal expected time at the National Pencil Company factory on Saturdays was 5:00 pm sharp. Lee stated that when he arrived an hour early that fateful Saturday, Leo Frank had forgotten the change because he was in an excited state. Frank, he said, was unlike his normal calm, cool and collected “boss-man” self. Normally, if anything was out of order, Frank would command him, saying “Newt, step in here a minute” or the like. Instead, Frank burst out of his office, bustling frenetically towards Lee, who had arrived at the second floor lobby at 3:56 pm. Upon greeting each other, Frank requested that Lee go out on the town and “have a good time” for two hours and come back at 6:00 pm.

Because Leo Frank asked Newt Lee to come to work one hour early, Lee had lost that last nourishing hour of sleep one needs before waking up fully rejuvenated, so Lee requested of Frank that he allow him to take a nap in the Packing Room (adjacent to Leo Frank’s front office). But Frank re-asserted that Lee needed to go out and have a good time. Finally, Newt Lee acquiesced and left for two hours.

At trial, Frank would state that he sent Newt Lee out for two hours because he had work to do. When Lee came back, the double doors halfway up the staircase were locked – very unusual, as they had never had been locked before on Saturday afternoons. When Newt Lee unlocked the doors and went into Leo Frank’s office he witnessed his boss bungling and nearly fumbling the time sheet when trying to put a new one in the punch clock for the night watchman – Lee – to register.

The National Pencil Company building around 1913

It came out before the trial that Newt Lee had earlier been told by Leo Frank that it was a National Pencil Company policy that once the night watchman arrived at the factory – as Lee had the day of the murder at 4:00 pm – he was not permitted to leave the building under any circumstances until he handed over the reigns of security to the day watchman. Company security necessitated being cautious – poverty, and therefore theft, was rife in the South; there were fire risk hazards; and the critical factory machinery was worth a small fortune. Security was a matter of survival.

The two hour timetable rescheduling – the canceled ball game – the inexplicable sudden security rule waiver – the bumbling with a new time sheet – the locked double doors – and Frank’s suspiciously excited behavior: All were highlighted as suspicious by the prosecution, especially in light of the fact that the “murder notes” – found next to Mary Phagan’s head – physically described Newt Lee, even calling him “the night witch.” And, the prosecutor asked, why did Leo Frank later telephone Newt Lee, not once but two or more times, that evening at the factory?

A “Racist” Subplot?

The substance of what happened between Newt Lee (and janitor James “Jim” Conley – see below) and Leo Frank from April 26, 1913 onward is most often downplayed, censored, or distorted by partisans of Leo Frank.

From the testimony of these two African-American witnesses, we learn of an almost diabolic intrigue calculated to entrap the innocent night watchman Newt Lee. It would have been easy to convict a black man in the white separatist South of that time, where the ultimate crime was a black man having interracial sex with a white woman — to say nothing of committing battery, rape, strangulation, and mutilation upon her in a scenario right out of Psychopathia Sexualis.

Luther Z. Rosser, for the defense

The plot was exquisitely formulated for its intended audience, the twelve white men who would decide Leo Frank’s fate. It created two layers of African-Americans between Frank and the murder of Mary Phagan. It wouldn’t take the police long to realize Newt Lee didn’t commit the murder, and, since the death notes were written in dialect, it would leave the police hunting for another black murderer. As long as Jim Conley kept his mouth shut, he wouldn’t hang. So the whole plot rested on Jim Conley – and it took the police three weeks to crack him.

The ugly racial element of this defense ploy is rarely mentioned today. The fact that it was Leo Frank, a Jew (and generally considered white in the racial separatist Old South), who first tried to pin the rape and murder of Mary Phagan on the elderly, balding, and married African-American Newt Lee (who had no criminal record to boot) is not something that Frank partisans want to highlight. The Leo Frank cheering section also downplays the racial considerations that made Frank, when his first racially-tinged defense move failed and was abandoned, change course for the last time and formulate a new subplot to pin the crime on Jim Conley, the “accomplice after the fact.”

If events had played out as intended, there would have likely been one or two dead black men in the wake of the defense team’s intrigue.

Jim Conley knew too much. He admitted he had helped the real murderer, Leo Frank, clean up after the fact. To prevent Conley, through extreme fear, from revealing any more about the real solution to the crime, and to discredit him no matter what he did, a new theory was needed. Jim Conley certainly was scared beyond comprehension, knowing what white society did to black men who beat, raped, and strangled white girls.

The Accuser Becomes the Accused

Jim Conley

The new murder theory posited by the Leo Frank defense was that Jim Conley assaulted Mary Phagan as she walked down the stairs from Leo Frank’s office. Once Phagan descended to the first floor lobby, they said, she was robbed, then thrown down 14 feet to the basement through the two-foot by two-foot scuttle hole at the side of the elevator. Conley then supposedly went through the scuttle hole himself, climbing down the ladder, dragged the unconscious Mary Phagan to the garbage dumping ground in front of the cellar incinerator (known as the “furnace”), where he then raped and strangled her.

But this grotesque racially-tinged framing was to fail in the end — in part because because physicians noticed that the scratch marks on Mary Phagan’s face — she had been dragged face down in the basement — did not bleed, strongly suggesting she was already quite dead when the dragging took place.

Investigators arranged for a conversation to take place between Leo Frank and Newt Lee, who were intentionally put alone together in a police interrogation room at the Atlanta Police Station. The experiment was to see how Frank would interact with Lee and determine if any new information could be obtained.

Once they thought they were alone, Leo Frank scolded Newt Lee for trying to talk about the murder of Mary Phagan, and said that if Lee kept up that kind of talk, Frank and he would go straight to hell.

Leo Frank in the courtroom; his wife Lucille Frank behind him

Star Witnesses

The Jewish community has crystallized around the notion that Jim Conley was the star witness at the trial, and not 14-year-old Monteen Stover who defended Leo Frank’s character — and then inadvertently broke his alibi.

Leo Frank partisans downplay the significance of Monteen Stover’s trial testimony and Leo Frank’s attempted rebuttal of her testimony on August 18, 1913. Governor John M. Slaton also ignored the Stover-Frank incident in his 29-page commutation order of June 21, 1915.

Many Frank partisans have chosen to obscure the significance of Monteen Stover by putting all the focus on Jim Conley, and then claiming that without Jim Conley there would have been no conviction of Leo Frank.

Could they be right? Or could Leo Frank have been convicted on the testimony of Monteen Stover, without the testimony of Jim Conley?

It is a question left for speculation only, because no one ever anticipated the significance of Jim Conley telling the jury that he had found Mary Phagan dead in the Metal Room bathroom.

It was not until Leo Frank gave his response to Monteen Stover’s testimony – his explanation of why his second floor business office was empty on April 26, 1913 between 12:05 pm and 12:10 pm – that everything came together tight and narrow.

Tom Watson resolved the “no conviction without Conley” controversy in the September 1915 number of his Watson’s Magazine, but perhaps it is time for a 21st century explanation to make it clear why even the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the evidence and testimony of the trial sustained Frank’s conviction.

August 18, 1913: You Are the Jury

The four-hour-long unsworn statement of Leo Frank was the crescendo of the trial. (Later, just before closing arguments, Frank himself was allowed the last word. He spoke once more on his own behalf, unsworn this time also, for five minutes, denying the testimony of others that he had known Mary Phagan by name and that he had gone into the dressing room for presumably immoral purposes with one of the company’s other employees.)

The jury that convicted Leo Frank

Three Confessions

It is important to understand that Leo Frank’s startling admission of his presence in the death room at the critical moment did not stand alone in the jury’s eyes. Conclusive as it was, it was not Frank’s only confession.

The official record shows Leo Frank confessed to murdering Mary Phagan three times, though he would deny all three.

James Conley

• Confession Number One — April 26, 1913: Leo Frank’s murder confession number one was made to Jim Conley when Leo Frank told him he had tried to “be with her” (have sexual intercourse with Mary Phagan) and she refused him. According to Conley, Frank then stated he had hit her, knocking her down, then adding “I guess I struck her too hard and she fell and hit her head against something.” Some of Mary Phagan’s bloody hair was discovered on Monday, April 28, 1913, by Robert P. Barret on the handle of a lathe in the second floor Metal Room.

• Confession Number Two — April 26, 1913: According to the McKnight family, Leo Frank confessed to murdering Mary Phagan to his wife Lucille Selig Frank on the evening of April 26, 1913, at around 10:30 pm, saying to his wife that he didn’t know why he would murder — and asking his wife for his pistol so he could shoot himself. Lucille reportedly told her family, and her household cook and cleaning lady Minola McKnight, about what happened that evening. Minola McKnight told her husband Albert McKnight, and full documentation can be found in State’s Exhibit J (see the Appendix to this article). Decades later, Lucille Selig Frank refused to be buried in the Frank family plot next to her husband, leaving explicit instructions to the contrary.

• Leo Frank Murder Confession Number Three — August 18, 1913: This is the “unconscious bathroom visit” statement delivered by Frank to the court in his unsworn statement, placing him unequivocally at the murder scene at the critical time. Frank would also reaffirm this admission in a newspaper interview published by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on March 9th, 1914.

With Mercy — or Without?

Judge Leonard Strickland Roan gave the jury two options if they found Leo Frank guilty of the crime of murder: ‘With Mercy’ or ‘Without Mercy.’ If there was any doubt of Leo M. Frank’s guilt, the judge and jury could have sentenced him to life in prison instead of sentencing him to death by hanging. When the jury unanimously sentenced Leo Frank to death by hanging after deciding on a verdict of guilt, Judge Roan had the legal option to downgrade the jury’s death sentence, and only give Leo Frank life in prison – that is, if Roan disagreed with the judgement. But Judge Roan agreed with their collective verdict and recommendation.

Judge Leonard Strickland Roan

Many in the Jewish community, and other Leo Frank partisans, have suggested that Judge Roan doubted the verdict because of one of his apparently appeasing comments made orally to his former law partner, Luther Rosser. But if Roan actually doubted the verdict, he could have exercised his power many times to prevent Frank’s execution, and even given him a new trial if that would have served the cause of justice. But he did none of these things.

You are Hereby Sentenced to Hang on April 17, 1914; Happy Birthday

Certainty of Leo Frank’s guilt was so strong that — after reviewing his trial testimony for months, and after the Georgia Supreme Court’s majority decision upheld Leo Frank’s conviction and the fairness of his trial — Judge Benjamin Hill, on March 7, 1914, sentenced him to die on his 30th birthday: April 17, 1914.

Only absolute mathematical certainty of guilt warrants such a cruel sentencing date by a judge.

* * *

Appendix: Essential Reading

To gain a full understanding of the Leo Frank case, and the tissue-thin “anti-Semitic conspiracy” theories advanced by the media today, it is necessary to read the official record without censorship or selective editing by partisans. Here are the resources which will enable you to do just that.

• Leo M. Frank Brief of Evidence, Murder Trial Testimony and Affidavits, 1913

• Leo M. Frank unsworn trial statement (BOE, Leo Frank Trial Statement, August 18, 1913)

• Leo Frank trial, State’s Exhibit B

Original State’s Exhibit B:

Part 1 – http://www.leofrank.org/images/georg...les/2/0061.jpg

Part 2 – http://www.leofrank.org/images/georg...les/2/0062.jpg

Complete Analysis of State’s Exhibit B (required reading): The full review of State’s Exhibit B

• Leo Frank Case files from the Georgia Supreme Court, Adobe PDF format: http://www.leofrank.org/library/georgia-archives/

• Atlanta Constitution issue of March 9, 1914 (Leo Frank Answers List of Questions Bearing on Points Made Against Him, March 9, 1914)

• Compare the analysis of the bathroom statement by reading: Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey, followed by Argument of Mr. Frank Hooper — also compare with Tom Watson’s version

• Minola McKnight statement (Minola Mcknight, State’s Exhibit J, June 3, 1913) and cremation request in the 1954 Notarized Last Will and Testament of Lucille Selig Frank

• 2D and 3D National Pencil Company floor diagrams

The National Pencil Company in 3 Dimensions

3-Dimensional Floor Plan of the National Pencil Company in 1913: http://www.leofrank.org/images/georg...les/2/0060.jpg.

The Defendant Leo Frank’s Factory Diagrams Made on His Behalf:

2-Dimensional Floor Plan of the National Pencil Company in 1913. Defendants Exhibit 61, Ground Floor and Second Floor 2D Birds Eye View Maps of the National Pencil Company: http://www.leofrank.org/images/georg...les/2/0125.jpg. Plat of the First and Second Floor of the National Pencil Company.

1. State’s Exhibit A (Small Image) or State’s Exhibit A (Large Image).

2. Different Version: Side view of the factory diagram showing the front half of the factory

3. Bert Green Diagram of the National Pencil Company

• James “Jim” Conley’s testimony (James Conley, Brief of Evidence, August, 4, 5, 6, 1913)

• Staged late defense version of events

• The Jeffersonian Newspaper 1914-1917 and Watson’s Magazine (August and September, 1915) series on the case

• Defense and prosecution both ratify the original Brief of Evidence: Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence

• John Davison Lawson’s American State Trials 1918, Volume X

• Mary Phagan Kean’s analysis of the Leo Frank Case: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan

• State’s Exhibit A

Further Reading:



100 Years Ago Today: The Trial of Leo Frank Begins
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...-frank-begins/

Leo Frank Trial Week One
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...rial-week-one/

Leo Frank Trial Week Two
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...rial-week-two/

One Hundred Years Ago Leo Frank Mounts the Witness Stand
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...akes-the-stand

Leo Frank Trial Week Three
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...al-week-three/

Leo Frank Trial Week Four
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...ial-week-four/

Leo Frank Trial Closing Arguments: Luther Rosser, Reuben Arnold and Frank Hooper
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/1...ld-and-rosser/

Closing Arguments of Prosecutor Hugh Dorsey at the Leo Frank Trial
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/1...icitor-dorsey/

One Hundred Reasons Leo Frank is Guilty
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...ank-is-guilty/

Anti-Defamation League: One Hundred Years of Jewish Hate, October 1913 – 2013
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/1...years-of-hate/

Professor Emeritus of Judaic Studies: Leonard Dinnerstein’s Pseudo-history About the Leo Frank Case
http://theamericanmercury.org/2012/1...seudo-history/

Review of Tabloid Style Journalist Steve Oney’s the Dead Shall Rise: Who Really Solved the Mary Phagan Murder Case?
http://theamericanmercury.org/2012/1...n-murder-case/

Did Leo Frank Confess to the Murder of Mary Phagan?
http://theamericanmercury.org/2012/0...frank-confess/

Atlanta Constitution Newspaper (1913 – 1915):
http://archive.org/details/LeoFrankC...aper1913To1915

Atlanta Georgian Newspaper (April – August, 1913):
http://archive.org/details/AtlantaGe...ilToAugust1913

Atlanta Journal Newspaper (April – August, 1913):
http://archive.org/details/AtlantaJo...toAugust311913
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #82
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

CENTENNIAL REVIEW (Published on April 26, 2013): The Murder of Little Mary Phagan was written by Mary Phagan-Kean (Born: Friday, June 5, 1953) & published by New Horizon Press (September 15, 1989).

'The Murder of Little Mary Phagan' by Mary Phagan-Kean is an exceptionally insightful semi-autobiographical sketch detailing a fascinating journey exploring one of the most infamous & sensational criminal cases in the annals of early 20th century Southern legal history. What makes this book so intriguing is it provides an intimate view of the Frank-Phagan case from the adult grandniece of the teenage victim "Little" Mary Anne Phagan, a child laborer, who was murdered one hundred years ago on April 26, 1913 in Atlanta Georgia.

Anti-Gentile Hatecrime Hoax Debunked

This true crime monograph is widely regarded as the most even-handed book ever written about the Frank-Phagan affair and its contentious aftermath (1913-1986), it also provides facts & evidence about the case found in no other books. Most importantly, Phagan-Kean dispels one of the central anti-Christian, anti-Southern and anti-Gentile blood libel conspiracies perpetuated by the Jewish community about the Frank-Phagan Case -- the hatecrime hoax that has been reasserted in the popular culture for more than one hundred years as of 2013 -- the disingenuous thesis that Leo Frank was suspected, indicted, convicted, denied his appeals and hanged because of wide spread White Southern Christian anti-Semitism.

In the Yawning Darkness on Sunday, April 27, 1913

After old Newt Lee, the newly hired African-American nightwatchman at the National Pencil Company, punched the timeclock in Leo Frank's second floor business office at 3:01 o'clock a.m., he went down to the stygian basement for the purpose of using the racially segregated Negro toilet. When he completed his business at the cellar's Earthen-Closet and went to check the large sliding wooden and steel framed door of the cellar service ramp, something out of the ordinary appeared faintly in the gloom. As Lee held up his flickering smoky lantern closer, it appeared to be a dead child who had been horribly mauled. Lee stepped back in a state of shock and disbelief, briskly shuffled his feet to the head of the basement and climbed up the ladder to the ground floor lobby and then clambered up the flight of stairs to the second floor to call his superintendent Leo Frank. After 8 minutes of trying to reach his boss, no one answered, so Newt called the Atlanta police station.

The grizzly discovery launched an investigation that began precisely at 3:24 o'clock a.m. on Sunday, April 27, 1913, when the graveyard shift call-officer, W.F. Anderson was notified by telephone from a frantic Negro about the horrific discovery. A squadcar filled with officers and Britt Craig (a young, one year veteran Atlanta Constitution Journalist) was immediately dispatched by Anderson moments later. What happened next, was later revealed at the Leo Frank trial more than three months hence as first responders described in detail what events occurred upon their arrival at 3:40 o'clock a.m. until 7:00 a.m. when they finally reached Leo Frank by phone.

As dawn broke, after the police repeatedly failed to reach Leo Frank by phone, calling him all night long, they finally made contact at 7:00 a.m. and informed him they were coming to his residence to speak with him, though they did not tell him what specifically had been discovered at the factory. Police rushed over to the Selig residence & carried him directly to the morgue for identifying the dead body. After Leo Frank claimed to be unsure about the identity of the dead girl, police officers drove him to factory in an effort to have him pinpoint the approximate time of Phagan's arrival via his accounting books.

The timeline is born with "Saturday, April 26, 1913 at 12:03 o'clock p.m."

Inside Leo's business office at about 8:00 a.m., he opened his payroll ledger and told the police officers that Mary Phagan had arrived at about 12:03 pm on Saturday, April 26, 1913, asking for her pay envelope and upon receiving she had left. Frank went on to tell the police he had not left his business office until 12:45 p.m. on that fateful yesterday.

Monday, April 28, 1913 at 9:00 a.m.

The next day, Monday morning, April 28, 1913, Leo Frank would change the time of Phagan's arrival to his office from 12:03 pm, to between, "12:05pm to 12:10pm, maybe 12:07pm" (State's Exhibit B, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913; Atlanta Constitution, August 2, 1913).

Tuesday, April 29th, 1913

Leo Frank was arrested on suspicion of murder, Tuesday, April 29th at 11:35 o'clock a.m., it would be his last day of freedom. Two days after Frank's arrest, Jim Conley the factory roustabout was arrested on Thursday, May 1st, 1913.

Milestone in the Mary Phagan Murder Investigation

Something very interesting happened exactly one week after the murder of Mary Phagan on Saturday, May 3, 1913. The event was an unexpected surprise and major breakthrough that occurred when detectives stumbled upon one of the young female child laborers who was tendering her resignation at the National Pencil Company (NPCo). This significant former employee was fourteen year old Monteen Stover -- who was accompanied by her incensed stepmother -- making what astonishingly turned out to be a second attempt at collecting her pay envelope, because she had failed to retrieve it the first time on Georgia Confederate Memorial Day, when she came to the factory alone at five minutes past noon.

When police detectives thoroughly questioned Monteen Stover, she revealed something rather curious that would become the crux of the entire murder case: Little Miss Stover said, that when she had arrived at the NPCo exactly one week ago and made her first attempt to get her weekly wages, but was unable to do so because Leo Frank was not inside his office, like he normally was in the past at the normal payoff time, which was regularly designated as Saturdays at noon. More chronologically specific, Stover said Leo Frank's office was empty when she waited inside it from, 12:05 p.m. to 12:10 p.m., and that she knew this time because it was based upon the office's wallclock.

This was earth shattering news to investigators, because on Monday, April 28, Leo Frank in the presence of his elite attorneys (Luther Zeigler Rosser and Herbert Haas) made an unsworn stenographed deposition to a room full of Atlanta police detectives, where Frank precisely stated he was in his office alone with Mary Phagan between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m. (State's Exhibit B). Even more significant is that Leo Frank initially told the police on Sunday, April 27, 1913, not only that Mary Phagan had come to his office at 12:03 p.m., but that he had not left his office until 12:45 p.m.

Sunday, May 4, 1913, The Moment of Truth

Without Leo Frank knowing the police had discovered and questioned 14-year old Monteen Stover, Detectives John R. Black and Pinkerton Detective Harry A. Scott, approached Leo Frank in his jailcell on Sunday, May 4, and asked him to confirm again, if he had been in his office every minute on Saturday, April 26, from noon to 12:45 p.m., and Leo Frank responded with an affirmative 'Yes'. The officers then took a different angle and asked Leo Frank if he had been in his office every minute on Saturday, April 26, from noon to half passed noon (12:30 p.m.), and Leo Frank responded again with an affirmative 'Yes'.

It was then at 8 days after the murder of Mary Phagan, the police had discovered a possible discrepancy in Leo Frank's murder alibi. Leo Frank would maintain stoically up until his trial that he had never left his office, from noon, until he went upstairs to the fourth floor at 12:45pm, to tell two employees he was getting ready to leave the building for dinner (what they called a hot lunch in 1913).

Curious Inconsistency

As far as the police were concerned, the murder alibi of Leo Frank had possibly been unintentionally shattered by 14-year old Monteen Stover, but they would have to wait three and a half months to find out how Leo Frank would account for his new alibi timeline dispute, because that's how long Leo Frank would maintain that he never left his office, but then something electrifying happened... Something the Jewish community would continue to suppress for more than a century...

Apogee of the Leo Frank Murder Trial, August 18, 1913

At his murder trial, Leo Frank directly responded to the contradiction in his murder alibi caused by Monteen Stover's trial testimony. Leo Frank finally answered specifically why his office "might" have been empty at the exact same time he formerly claimed Phagan was with him alone in his window front office. Leo Frank changed his original murder alibi that he maintained for 3.5 months about having never left his office during the critical time, to explain the REAL reason why his office was empty on Saturday, April 26, 1913, between 12:05pm and 12:10pm, and not only was it deliciously ironic and a delectable twist, but in providing a newfangled explanation, he ineluctably gave away the solution to who killed Mary Phagan!

Unique Trial Analysis

Mary Phagan Kean also offers a uniquely neutral analysis of the month long capital murder trial, which began on July 28, and led to Leo Frank's August 25, 1913, murder conviction, after the jury deliberated for about two hours. The decision rendered by 12 White men, also included a "without mercy" recommendation to the presiding Judge, that a death sentence be meted-out for Leo Max Frank. Both the conviction & sentencing recommendation were affirmed the next day by the presiding Judge, the Honorable Leonard Strickland Roan, on Tuesday morning, August 26, 1913 at 10:30 a.m. Judge Roan sentenced the defendant Leo Frank to death by way of hanging as prescribed by the law, the execution date was first scheduled for October 10, 1913, but appeals postponed the execution date repeatedly for two more years.

Leo Frank's subsequent failed appeals, initiated from August 27, 1913 to April, 1915, and his eventual death sentence commutation by the corrupt Governor John M. Slaton, on June 21, 1915, led to a mob of 1200 angry citizens protesting at the Governor's mansion. The angry crowd was quelled and dispersed by a local armed militia.

The lawfirm of 'Luther Rosser, Morris Brandon, John Slaton and Benjamin Phillips'

Rarely ever mentioned in connection with Leo Frank's commutation is the fact that Governor John M. Slaton was part owner of the lawfirm representing Leo Frank at his trial and appeals. The lawfirm was officially called 'Rosser, Brandon, *Slaton* and Phillips' (the 'Slaton' was Governor John M. Slaton), and this politically powerful law group officially formed before Leo Frank's Trial began.

Governor Slaton had essentially commuted the death sentence of his own law client, after two years of failed appellate review at every level of the United States legal system. Thus naturally the public became outraged, because of the obvious conflict of interest and Slaton's betrayal to the constitutional oath of executive office.

Many people in the 21st century poignantly ask the question, "Can you imagine what the outcry would be if that exact same conflict of interest happened today?"

Leo Frank was whisked away by train to the Milledgeville State Penitentiary, located some 170 miles away on June 22nd 1915.

The Shanking of Leo Frank

About one month later, Leo Frank was attacked in prison and had the left side of his throat slashed at about 11:00 p.m. on Saturday, July 17, 1915. The shanking was conducted by fellow inmate William Creen. Leo Frank barely survived the attack. A fellow inmate who was serving a life sentence for murdering his wife, saved Leo Frank by stitching him up.

The Lynching of Leo Max Frank

On August 16, 1915, Leo Frank was abducted from prison in a well executed military commando style raid, by some of the most prominent citizens in the State of Georgia. Frank was driven for 8 hours North west to the edge of Atlanta and Marietta, then lynched at sunrise on August 17, 1913. The site of Leo Frank's lynching was at former Sheriff William Frey's Gin (now 1200 Roswell rd, Marietta, Georgia).

The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith

Seven decades after the lynching of Leo Frank, the well organized Jewish community applied political pressure and conducted backroom deals, lead by the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith, prominent individual Jews and politically influential Jewish groups, resulting in a highly political posthumous pardon without criminal exoneration for Leo Frank officiated on Tuesday, March 11, 1986.

Alonzo "Lonnie" Mann (b. August 8, 1898) who provided obviously falsified testimony for the pardon had died a year earlier on March 19, 1985

The Leo Frank case continues to capture the imagination of the public, now more than ever, as 100 years have passed since this celebrated criminal case began that eventually evolved into a double murder strangulation.

Brief Biography of Leo Frank (1884 to 1915)

Leo Max Frank, was born in Cuero, Texas, on Thursday, April 17, 1884, to local postmaster, Rudolph Frank, an immigrant of Germany (1869), and homemaker Rachel Jacobs Frank, who was a native New Yorker from Brooklyn. The Frank family moved 3 months after Leo's birth back to Brooklyn, where Leo was raised and educated in the NYC public school system. After completing college prep work at the Pratt Institute Highschool of Brooklyn (1898 - 1902), Leo Frank matriculated into the Ivy League Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. At Cornell in the Fall of 1902, during his freshman year, Leo Frank chose to major in Mechanical Engineering and became very active in several college groups (debate club), sports teams (basketball and tennis) and general college social life.

1905

During the summer break of 1905, between his Junior and Senior year at college, Leo Frank went with his wealthy uncle Moses Frank on an overseas sojourn, spending the summer traveling around Europe and visiting with extended family.

1906

In the fall of 1905, Leo Frank began his senior year of college. And after successfully graduating on June 21, 1906, with a bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering, Leo Frank bounced around from one job to another, until he visited his rich uncle Moses in Georgia, mid October of 1907. There in Atlanta, Leo Frank meet with a delegation of Jewish Businessmen to discuss a potentially lucrative industrial venture manufacturing pencils.

After visiting Atlanta for two weeks, Leo Frank made the very serious life changing decision, and decided he wanted to make a major career move. To fulfill this promise, Leo Frank would again go on another sojourn overseas to Europe, arriving at the port in Cuxhaven, Germany, this time to study with the world renowned Eberhard-Faber in Bavaria.

Leo Frank left NYC on November 7, 1907, ocean bound for Europe. Once in Germany, Frank began diligently studying the pencil manufacturing process. After his 9 month engineering apprenticeship was completed, Leo Frank returned to NYC, August 1, 1908, on the USS Amerika, and then briefly stopped at his home in Brooklyn to visit his family (Rudolph, Rachel and sister Marian) for a few days.

On August 4, 1913, Leo Frank embarked on a South bound train from Penn Station in Manhattan with his weathered leather luggage and relocated to the capital of Georgia. Frank arrived at Terminal Station in Atlanta on August 6, 1908, and started a new life in the Heart of the South. On Monday morning, August 10th, 1908, Leo Frank began his first day of work at the National Pencil Company, located at 37 to 41 South Forsyth Street in downtown Atlanta. On September 1, 1908, he was promoted to the factory's General Superintendent.

1910, Leo Frank Marries Lucille Selig

Two years later on November 30, 1910, Leo Frank married into an upper middle class German-Jewish family (Cohen-Selig), an established patrician Southern family whose ancestors founded the first synagogue congregation in Atlanta two generations prior. Leo Frank emerged as a rising star, becoming very actively involved with Jewish philanthropy and Atlanta's upper-crust society life. And even though Frank was born in Texas, and raised in Brooklyn, he assimilated rather quickly in Georgia and was elected B'nai B'rith President of the Gate City Lodge #174 in Atlanta, September, 1912, by its local 500 member Jewish fraternal order.

By 1913, with nearly 5 years of hands-on experience in pencil manufacturing, Leo Frank had reached the pinnacle of his career, running the factory as not only its director, but also as a stake holder through the acquisition of company shares. His high rank and partial ownership enabled him to receive $100 a month as a courtesy by the company directors while he was imprisoned.

1913

Founded on April 8th, 1908, the National Pencil Company had three divisions, 1) cedar slat mill for producing pencil shafts, 2) Smelting facility for producing lead pencil rods, and the HQ production facility where the industrial materials were processed. The National Pencil Co. headquarters was where Thirteen year old Mary Phagan had begun working as an entry level child laborer in the early Spring of 1912, or about a little more than a year (13 months) before she was murdered. Mary Phagan worked about 150 feet down the hall from Leo Frank's office on the 2nd floor, where she participated in the finishing production stages of the pencil manufacturing process. Mary Phagan worked in the metal department, known colloquially by factory employees as the "metal room", in a section called the tipping department (her workstation was adjacent to the only set of bathrooms located on the second floor). Using a knurling machine, Phagan's job involved inserting rubber erasers into the paper-thin brass metal tubes that were partially attached around the ends of pencil stock.

The Only Bathroom on the Second Floor was Located Inside the Metalroom

One of the most important details rarely mentioned by Leo Frank partisans about the "metal room", where Mary Phagan worked 6 days a week, was that the only bathrooms on the second floor were situated there - which became a critical detail to the solution of her murder. Moreover, Mary Phagan's work station was less than 4 feet away from the bathroom entryway and Leo Frank would regularly pass immediately by her everyday when he needed to use the toilet. And given that Leo Frank was known for drinking copious amounts of black coffee everyday, he would have passed by Phagan on a regular basis during the year she toiled at her workstation.

Death Announcement

Word of Mary Phagan's death had already reached all of Atlanta after a newspaper "Extra", published by the Atlanta Constitution at the behest of Britt Craig, was released on Sunday, April 27, 1913, just hours after the normal Sunday morning edition already appeared. A full front news page announcement in the Atlanta Constitution was released on Monday morning, April 28, 1913.

Forensic Evidence Discovered, Monday, April 28, 1913

It was the metal room, where an unusual 5 inch wide blood stain crowned with spatter droplets was found on the floor adjacent to the bathroom entryway, and hair soaked with blood that had dried, was found tangled around the solid iron handle of a lathe at an adjacent wall. These forensic discoveries in the metal room were initially made Monday morning, at 6:35 AM, on April 28, 1913, when an early bird employee named Robert P. Barret, arrived at work to start the fresh work week after the holiday weekend festivities. As Barret's hand reached for the handle of his lathe, his fingers became entangled with hair that was not previously there the prior Friday evening, April 25, at 6:00 o'clock p.m. when he left his workstation.

Once the word got out about the discovery of hair and blood forensic evidence in the metal room, it traveled like wildfire around the factory, employees erupted into emotional hysterics, flocked to the metal room, gawking at these unusual blood stains on the floor, and tangled tress of 6 to 8 hairs scrambled around and suspended from the handle of the bench lathe. A number of employees immediately recognized the hair as distinctly being Mary Phagan's, and testified to that effect at the Leo Frank trial.

A white powdery machine lubricant known as haskolene was found suspiciously smeared and rubbed into the fresh blood stains on the metal room floor. What was so significant about the location of the blood stains is that they were conspicuously in front of the girls dressing room and next to the bathroom door, adjacent to where Phagan's workstation was located. The powder smearing appeared to be an attempt to cover up the evidence, but the blood bled through the white powder, turning the dark maroon stains into variations of white, pink and red. The blood stain also had a star burst spatter pattern behind it indicating the direction of how it came into contact with the floor.

Botched Crime Scene Clean-up Job

The poorly conducted "clean-up job", gave the appearance to be a failed attempt at obscuring the blood stains, near where the murder victim - it was later revealed - was first seen by Jim Conley the factory sweeper. Conley testified he found Mary Phagan dead in the men's toilet.

Little Mary Phagan's Life (1899 - 1913):

The 55 hour work week Mary Phagan performed at the pencil factory for about 7.5 cents an hour (actually 7 and 4/11 cents an hour), earning her $4.05 was her small way of helping support her five siblings, and widowed mother Frances (who remarried a cotton mill worker named John William Coleman in 1912). Mary Phagan's step father knew Mary and her family quite well, for about 4 years, before marrying into the Phagan family. Mr. Coleman identified the hair found on the lathe machine as belonging to Mary Phagan, as did several other employees who worked in the metal room (See: Georgia Supreme Court Records, 1914).

Temporarily Layoff of little Mary Anne Phagan (b. Thursday, June 1, 1899)

During the week before Phagan's murder, a shortage of brass sheet metal at the factory had led to a reduction in her work hours and she was temporarily laid off by orders of Leo Frank on Monday, April 21, 1913, until the supplies could be replenished. Phagan's wages for the shortened work week came to just $1.20, for the 16 hours she had worked the previous Friday, April 18, (10 hours), and Saturday, April 19, (6 hours) prior to her being laid off on Monday, April 21.

Flash Back to the First 48 Hours of the Mary Phagan Murder Investigation

George W. Epps made statements on Monday afternoon on April 28, 1913, providing troubling allegations to Atlanta police, stating that Mary had told him in confidence that Leo Frank scared her, and he often made lascivious sexual innuendos and inappropriate insinuations toward her. According to Epps, Mary told him specifically that Leo Frank would sometimes run up in front of her, thus ostensibly blocking her way when she was trying to leave work at the end of the day, and during the work day he would pester her, get a little bit too close for comfort, touch her shoulders & stare at her lecherously and then smile. Phagan allegedly suggested to Epps she was growing ever more scared of her superintendent.

According to the unabridged Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Case file, George Epps, after the Leo Frank murder trial concluded, got kidnapped & ensnared in a witness tampering and subornation of perjury scandal by Leo Frank's legal defense team (Georgia Supreme Court Records, 1913, 1914).

Epps was lured to Alabama with the promise of a job and then coerced into signing a false affidavit under duress repudiating what he had told police. After George Epps was freed by his kidnappers, he later signed a true affidavit, describing the intimate details, moment by moment, of his being abducted and taken all the way to Alabama. The true affidavit described in details the dishonest trickery that unraveled when Epps was forced to sign a pre-written affidavit that was filled with lies and recantations.

In The First 24 Hours of the Mary Phagan Murder, Sunday, April 27, 1913

When the police arrived on the scene in the basement of the National Pencil Company at 3:45 p.m., they found Mary Phagan's mangled body on the remnants of a saw dust mound diagonal to the furnace, she had been strangled with a cord and what looked like a frilly strip or part of her petticoat wrapped around her neck and soaked with blood concealed the garrot (the cord used to strangle Mary). Her dress was soaked in urine as if someone had pissed all over her body.

When Atlanta Police scoured the basement there was evidence Phagan had been dragged by her feet face down from the basement's elevator entry, 140 feet, before she was dumped near the cellar's incinerator. Phagan's face was so scratched up, punctured, and covered with charred cinders, that at first the police were unsure of her race. They had to roll down a stocking from her knee to see for sure if she was White or Negro. However, Newt Lee remarked that he knew she was White because of the texture of her hair.

The autopsy would reveal Phagan had been hit on the face around the temple and right eyesocket with a left fist (Leo Frank was left handed), there was also a major gash on the back of her head. The knitted bloomers of Mary Phagan were still around her hips, but torn open across the vagina to the seam of the right leg, she had the appearance of having been violently raped, with blood and discharge present on her underwear. Phagan's face was beaten black-and-blue, and sunk deep into her neck was the 1/8th inch thick, 7 foot jute cord, that she had been strangled to death with. One of the state physicians who performed an autopsy, testified under oath, to several instances of sexual violence, and internal vaginal bruising, torn flesh and inflammation, suggesting some kind of rape either penile or by fingers occurred before she was killed.

Leo M. Frank, Factory Superintendent

When the detectives arrived at Leo Frank's in-laws home, the door was answered by Lucille clad in a white cotton bathrobe. The police asked if they could speak with Mr. Frank and Lucy welcomed them into her parents home. Like typical seasoned detectives, without telling Leo Frank why they were there and what it was all about, they closely observed Frank. Suspicion initially fell on Leo Frank at first sight, because he appeared to be extremely nervous, trembling, rubbing his hands, and ghastly pale. Police intimated Leo Frank appeared to be badly hung over, while he was bumbling, and Jim-jamming in an agitated state. When Leo Frank asked for a cup of coffee, one of the police officers jocosely suggested whiskey. Leo Frank then began asking questions faster than the police could answer them in time. Frank's voice sounded hoarse and he struggled with simple tasks like fixing his collar before leaving with the police. Moreover, Leo kept saying he hadn't had breakfast and kept asking for a cup of coffee as if he was trying to delay the the process of being taken to the industrial plant he managed.

The police asked Leo Frank if he knew Mary Phagan, and he immediately denied knowing any Mary Phagan, saying he would need to check his accounting ledger to be sure. Frank then made some passing remark about not really knowing the girls who worked for him.The significance of Leo Frank claiming to not know Mary Phagan become an important circumstance further into the investigation, because it was later determined by factory records, she had worked for him more than a year on the same floor as his office. Another incriminating fact against Leo Frank's claims of not knowing Mary Phagan, was the payroll ledgers revealed that she had collected more than 52 pay envelopes from Leo during her year of employment and during that time she logged an impressive 2,750+ work hours registed on the punch-clock at the factory from specifically: the Spring 1912, to Monday, April 21, 1913 (when she was temporarily laid off by Leo Frank, because of a shortage in metal). At the trial several employees testified indicating Frank knew Mary Phagan quite well and on a first name basis, others suggested they saw Leo behave inappropriately toward girls working at the factory.

Ugly Racist Framing of the Nightwatchman ("night witch") Newt Lee

On Sunday morning at 8:26 a.m., April 27, 1913, in the presence of the Atlanta police, Leo Frank pulled out Newt Lee's time card, eye balled it from the top downward and said it was punched correctly every half hour from the time between 6:00pm on April 26, 1913 to 3:00 am on Sunday, April 27, 1913. However, on Monday, April 28, 1913, Leo Frank changed his story and told the Atlanta Police that Newt Lee did not punch his time card at 4 disparate intervals, creating 4 hours of unaccounted for time. It put even greater suspicion on Newt Lee, because the old Negro lived less than half an hour away, the intervals suggested he had more than enough time to go home, potentially hide evidence and return to the factory.

Intimations to Search Newt Lee's Shack

After Frank made his Monday morning, April 28, 1913, deposition to Atlanta Police that became known as State's Exhibit B, he told the police to check his body for scratches and visit his home to inspect his laundry. Leo Frank removed his shirt and the police found no visible scratchmarks on his body, and then accompanying the police to the Selig residence, Minola brought forth the dirty laundry basket and the clothes within it, that indicated no blood stains. Given Leo Frank's intimations about Newt Lee's timecard, the natural thing for the Atlanta police to do next was search Newt Lee's shack for evidence. And surprise-surprise, guess what they found?

Tuesday, April 29, 1913

Tuesday morning, April 29, 1913, the police entered Newt Lee's shack without a warrant (violating his constitutional rights) using a skeleton key, outside his residence at the bottom of a garbage burn barrel, they found a suspicious looking clean, but bloodied shirt. The shirt had blood stains high up on the armpits in the front, back, and inside, in such a manner the police immediately thought it was forged and planted there intentionally. What also made detectives think the shirt might have been fabricated to frame Newt Lee is because the shirt, aside from the oddly placed blood stains, appeared clean and did not have the distinctive "Negro odor" on it, as they later recalled, when they each had taken turns sniffing it on Tuesday morning, April 29, 1913.

Newt Lee's Blood Soaked Shirt

Three contrived elements perplexed Atlanta Police about Newt Lee's shirt, the fact it was clean, but covered with oddly placed blood smears, and had no funky "African scent". These factors taken together gave the suggestion the shirt was meant to incriminate Newt Lee, but naturally they thought why? When the police questioned Newt Lee about the shirt, he said someone gave it to him 2 years ago and he hadn't worn it since. At that moment, the police began thinking, perhaps someone was trying to implicate Newt Lee the nightwatch, because the "death notes" were written with Lee's job title misspelled as "night witch" (factory employees called the nightwatchman colloquially nightwatch) written on them. The time card contradiction seemed odd, because one day it was punched perfectly, the next it was supposedly missing 4 punches and then finally the odd shirt, all together were circumstances that began directing strong suspicion on Leo Frank, atleast in the minds of the Atlanta Police and detectives investigating the crime.

Leo Frank's last full day of freedom was Monday, April 28, 1913, because on Tuesday, April 29, 1913, at 11:30PM Leo Frank was arrested and would remain incarcerated until his hanging two years later at 1200 Roswell Rd in Marietta.

The Negro Janitor James "Jim" Conley

On Thursday afternoon, May 1st, 1913, the day watchman E.F. Holloway called the police to report that he saw Jim Conley washing out blood from his shirt in a factory sink. When the police arrived and examined it drying on an overhead pipe, they noticed it was rust, and returned the shirt back to Conley, but then arrested him.

The Atlanta police "swetted" Jim Conley using the 3rd degree methodology (good cop / bad cop) and after weeks of initial failure and 3 half-truth affidavits, Atlanta's finest finally got Conley to admit he was an accessory-after-the-fact to the crime. More importantly, the police finally got the details out of Conley the events leading up to him finding the dead body of Phagan in the men's toilet and how he transported the cadaver to the basement. They also were able to get an eye witness account of how Leo Frank was plotting and orchestrating a racist frame-up on the afternoon of April 26, 1913.

What Happened According to Jim Conley

Jim Conley admitted he was asked by Leo Frank to move the corpse of Mary Phagan to the basement and "ghost write" dictated "death notes" in his own words as if they were written by Mary Phagan, while she was in the middle of being raped. It was necessary they be written in Negro hand writing, to draw suspicion to another Negro. In the South it was considered the highest outrage for a Black man to rape and murder a White girl. The bigoted plot was Ivy League brilliant and sinisterly racist, because it put two Negroes between Leo Frank and Mary Phagan. All Jim Conley had to do was keep his mouth shut for the racist gambit to succeed, but it took the cops less than three weeks to crack him.

The Oddity of the Mary Phagan Murder Notes

The murder notes were a very contrived attempt to make it appear as if an ignorant semi-literate Negro was trying to charade the notion that Mary Phagan had written the "death notes" after she went to the bathroom in the metal room, was pushed down a hole and then sexually assaulted by Newt Lee in the basement. The "death notes" where unmistakably clear in their attempt to pin the crime and point suspicion on the "long tall slim Negro" night watchman Newt Lee ("night witch"), because the notes physically described Lee exactly, including his job title colloquially 'Night Watch' ebonicized as 'Night Witch'.

Looking back from the 21st century to 1913, the "death notes" cause many people to ask themselves, when or ever in history of the cosmos has a Blackman committed battery, rape, robbery, strangulation and mutilation of a White girl, and then stuck around to write some pseudo-literature as if they were being written by the victim herself in the middle of the rape and addressing the notes to her mother, describing what happened from the perspective of the victim.

"I write while he plays"... but the notes were unbelievable from the start, because Police thought never in history has someone written notes while they were in the midst of being raped.

The Trial of Leo M. Frank (July 28, 1913, to August 26, 1913)

Harry A. Scott of the Pinkerton National Detective agency was hired by Sigmond Montag, treasurer of the National Pencil Company to "ferret out the murderer no matter who it was". There was some conflicting testimony about what Leo Frank had said concerning a question Mary Phagan asked him (Mr. Leo Frank) at 12:02 pm or 12:03 PM on April 26, 1913. On Monday, April 28, 1913. Pinkerton Detective Harry Scott was told by Leo Frank that Mary Phagan asked him "Has the metal come in?". Leo Frank said he told her "No", but Scott told the jury, Leo Frank said to him that he told Phagan: "I Don't Know" -- it tended to create a scenario of three dimensional time and space with Leo and Mary walking together toward the metal room for the purpose of "finding out", as the brass was normally kept in the metal-room closet.

Star Witness Monteen Stover and the (THIRD) Leo Frank Incriminating Admission

The real star witness at the Leo Frank Trial it turns out was not only Jim Conley, but the 14-Year-old & 5'2" tall White girl Monteen Stover.

Monteen Stover who liked Leo Frank and defended his character at the trial, had inadvertently put Leo Frank's murder alibi into dispute. Leo Frank swore to his lawyers, the Coroner Paul Donehoo, police, and detectives during the investigation into Phagan's murder over a 3.5 months period, that he had never left his office on April 26, 1913, from twelve noon to 12:45pm. However, Monteen Stover had arrived at the factory to collect her pay envelope just minutes after Phagan arrived, but she did not bump into Mary Phagan walking down the stairs and Leo Frank was not in his office. Nor was Leo Frank aware that Monteen Stover had arrived and waited for him inside his second floor office for five minutes between 12:05 pm to 12:10 pm.

The jury naturally would ask themselves, how come Monteen Stover neither coming or going from the factory didn't bump into Mary Phagan between 12:04pm and 12:11pm, as it took about 1 minute (46 seconds) to reach Leo Frank's second floor office from the front door of the factory lobby and about the same time to leave the factory from the said office.

Leo Frank would change his alibi-story about never leaving his office and respond to the testimony of Monteen Stover stating, he might have "unconsciously" gone to the only bathroom in the metalroom during that exact time!

Leo Frank Gave the Jury the Solution to the Mary Phagan Murder Mystery on Monday Afternoon, August 18, 1913 at 2:46 pm

Now gentlemen [of the Jury], to the best of my recollection from the time the whistle blew for twelve o’clock [noon on Saturday, April 26, 1913] until after a quarter to one [12:46 p.m.] when I went up stairs and spoke to Arthur White and Harry Denham [at the rear of the fourth floor], to the best of my recollection, I did not stir out of the inner office [at the front of the second floor]; but it is possible that in order to answer a call of nature or to urinate I may have gone to the toilet [in the metal room at the rear of the second floor]. Those are things that a man does unconsciously and cannot tell how many times nor when he does it (Leo Frank Trial Statement, August 18, Brief of Evidence, 1913).

Crescendo of the Leo Frank Murder Trial: State's Exhibit A and Defendant's Exhibit 61

Leo Frank ineluctably entrapped himself beyond escape, because the only men's toilet on the second floor was located within the metal room, it was the metal room where the murder forensic evidence was found (bloody hair and bloodstains) and the prosecution had successfully built a month long case that Leo Frank had murdered Mary Phagan on April 26, 1913 in the metal room between 12:05pm and 12:10pm.

To make matters even worse, Leo Frank had made a statement (as stated above, known as State's Exhibit B) stenographed by G. C. Febuary on Monday morning, April 28, 1913, where Frank said Mary Phagan had arrived into his office alone between 12:05PM and 12:10PM on April 26, 1913, but Frank's office was empty according to Monteen Stover during that same time, when she came for her pay. And then it happened! Leo replied to this incongruity, by saying he might "unconsciously" have been inside the metal room's bathroom using the toilet, the exact place where Jim Conley had stated to the Jury on April 4th, 1913 that he found Mary Phagan dead, after Leo Frank told him he strangled her because she wouldn't have sex with him.

Be sure to read the *abridged* final closing statements of State's prosecution team leader, the Solicitor General Hugh Manson Dorsey and his Associate Frank Arthur Hooper in American State Trials Volume X (10) 1918 by John Davison Lawson LLD, for their unique take on the Leo Frank trial testimony and evidence. One should also read the really long winded *unabridged* closing arguments of Hugh Manson Dorsey published in 1914 as 'The Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey' (available on www.archive.org).

The Leo Frank trial would make history, because it would be the first time in the South, the testimony of two Negroes (James "Jim" Conley & Newton "Newt" Lee) would provide evidence that in part, led to the conviction and death sentence of a Whiteman by an all White jury, in the White racially conscious, Separatist and segregated Old South (a place where Jews were respected, highly regarded and treated as equals to Whites).

Firebrand Tom E. Watson

Many would argue the best post trial analysis of the Leo Frank "murder confession" is articulated by the criminal defense lawyer, and populist politician Tom Edward Watson, in his Watson's Magazine, January, March, August, September and October of 1915, and his weekly Jeffersonian Newspaper in some specific issues during the years of 1914, 1915, 1916, and 1917. Though some would argue his best analysis on the Leo Frank trial are found in Watson's Magazine issues August and September of 1915.

Appeals 1913 to 1915

Numerous half-baked and frivolous appeals petitions were made by the Leo Frank Legal Defense Team to the Georgia Superior Court, Georgia Supreme Court, US Federal District Court, and United States Supreme Court, all of these appeals were denied after careful review, with lengthy decisions written and rendered (see: Leo Frank Appeals 1913, 1914, 1915). In April of 1915, Leo Frank had exhausted all of his court appeals.

Commutation June 21, 1915

The departing Governor of Georgia, John M. Slaton, decided to commute the death sentence of his own lawfirm's client, Leo Frank, at the 11th hour, to life in prison on June 21, 1915, just days before the end of his last term as Governor. It was an act of political suicide, but it didn't matter, as Slaton was leaving office anyway on June 26, 1915, and he earned 25% of the lawfirm's lucrative profits. Slaton left Georgia and went on a tour of the United States.

The protest at the Governor's mansion formed to angrily protest the commutation, because it was a gross conflict of interest, not because of anti-Semitism. Rarely ever mentioned by Leo Frank partisans is the connection between Leo Frank's commutation and the fact Governor John M. Slaton was part owner of the lawfirm that represented Leo Frank at his trial and during his appeals. Rarely do books written by Jewish authors ever mention the lawfirm was called Rosser, Brandon, 'Slaton' and Phillips (the 'Slaton' was Governor John M. Slaton).

Leo Frank Prison Shanking, July 17, 1915

Leo Frank got shanked in prison by a fellow inmate named William Creen, who used a 7 inch butcher knife to slash the left side of Leo Frank's throat. To add anti-Semitic psychological warfare to the incident, rumors began circulating the knife had been used for slaughtering hogs. Leo Frank barely survived the attack, thanks to inmate doctors who came to his aid in the nick of time and stitched him up. The tender wound was slow to heal in the hot & humid summer of 1915.

The Lynching of Leo Frank

One month after the shanking and almost 2 months after Leo Frank received his controversial clemency, a well organized group of about 25 to 35 men, many of whom were from Georgia's highest strata of politics and society, organized themselves into the 'Knights of Mary Phagan'. This newly formed group of Georgia's elites, sought to fulfill the conviction of the Jury and death sentence judgment ratified by Judge Leonard Strickland Roan. From their point of view, this band of men sought to deliver righteous retribution in the form of "Southern Style Vigilante Justice", which is called by the mainstream: Lynching.

From Milledgeville to Atlanta

After more than 2 months of careful planning, Leo Frank was kidnapped from the minimum security Milledgeville penitentiary infirmary on the evening of Monday, August 16, 1915, at 10 p.m., then driven all through the night for 8 hours and lynched in the early hours of August 17, 1915, from a mature oak tree's sturdy branch a few miles away from where Mary Phagan had formerly lived at one time.

Post Lynching, August 17, 1915

Once word got out about the lynching, Leo Frank's dangling body became a public spectacle, photographs were taken and the pictures of Leo Franks lifeless suspended body, became popular post cards. Leo Frank was cut down and one hot-headed yahoo started stomping on his face and chest and other people had to pull him away and calm the savage down.

How the Most Definitive Book on the Leo Frank Case was Born

The book 'The Murder of Little Mary Phagan' is written by the namesake of the murder victim, Mary Phagan's great niece named Mary Phagan Kean. When Phagan Kean was 13 years old, she discovered her given name was no mere accident or coincidence. When people heard her name, they started asking her questions about whether she was related to the famous little Mary Phagan who had been murdered long ago by Leo Frank on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913.

Phagan-Kean would learn a startling secret when people started asking her questions about her curious name, so she asked her family if she was somehow connected to the Mary Phagan who was murdered so long ago in the National Pencil Factory. When her family revealed the truth about her blood relation, she immediately became insatiably interested in learning about the investigation, and its aftermath.

Instantly becoming a life long student of the case at age 13, Phagan-Kean has since devoted every free moment of her life studying volumes of legal documents, and reading every surviving newspaper account surrounding the rape and strangulation of her great aunt, 13 year old Little Mary Anne Phagan (1899 to 1913) and the biography of Leo Max Frank (1884 to 1915).

B'nai B'rith

Leo Frank was the President of the 500 member Atlanta Chapter of B'nai B'rith beginning in 1912, and even after his conviction, he was unanimously re-elected again in September 1913, until his term expired in September 1914.

As a result of his 1913 conviction, the case turned into a national scandal and eventually evolved into a sensational cause celebre for the Jewish Community. Leo Frank's conviction, would become the galvanizing force of false "anti-Semitism", catalyzing the formation of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, born in October, 1913, or ADL for short. The lynching of Leo Frank sparked the revival of the defunct and nativist ethnic nationalist Ku Klux Klan (KKK) on November 24, 1915.

The KKK considers themselves the "immune system of the United States of America", providing an immunal, White blood cell response to what they perceived as an infection of the United States of America, as a host-body, by a collectively organized Jewish virus/parasite community. The ADL considers itself on the other hand, the foremost civil rights group in America and the world, defending Jews and Israel against criticism, calling it "anti-Semitism".

Misrepresentations

Jewish Scholars overwhelmingly produced the lion share of all the written "persecution and victim-centric" books, articles, web sites, scripts, video, media, songs, Broadway plays, documentaries, miniseries and texts about the subject of Leo Frank and Mary Phagan, and almost unanimously allege widespread Antisemitic Gentiles were behind it all, "a text book case of Anti-Semitism"; the railroading, and framing of an innocent Northern Jewish Man because of Gentile anti-Jewish racism, prejudice and religious hatred. Leo Frank partisan books often leave out volumes of the relevant facts, evidence, affidavits and testimony concerning the Leo Frank case, dishonestly spinning the facts convenient to creating doubt about Leo Franks guilty verdict and making racist blood-libel smears against non-Jews.

If you have any doubts about Leo Frank's guilt study the brief of evidence and Georgia Supreme Court records!

1982 and 1983: The Alonzo Mann Media Circus

In 1982, Alonzo Mann, a lonely, broke and senile octogenarian, who also happened to be the former office boy of Leo Frank for three weeks in April, 1913, came forward in 1982 at the behest of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith to provide new statements about what he saw on April 26, 1913.

In 1982, which was about 69 years after the murder of Mary Phagan and trial of Leo M. Frank, Alonzo "Lonnie" Mann went public with a questionable story, claiming he had withheld information from the Leo M. Frank legal defense team, police, Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey, Judge Leonard Strickland Roan, the Jury of 12 White men, Appeals Courts, Slaton's Commutation hearing and seven decades of people.

Alonzo Mann said that, he went back to the National Pencil Company Factory five minutes after he left it at noon on April 26, 1913, and saw the Negro Janitor Jim Conley, carrying the body of Mary Phagan on his shoulder, and Jim Conley reached out his hand for Alonzo Mann and said to the young boy, "if you tell anyone , I will kill you". Alonzo Mann, claimed he ran home and told his family and his mother told him not to tell anyone.

These statements given by Alonzo Mann in the 1980's made no sense at all and came off as a desperate web of lies according to many people who heard his newfangled claims.

First, why would White parents in a White racial separatist Georgia of 1913, tell their White son not to tell the police about a "murdering", and thus ostensibly guilty black janitor Jim Conley, with the result being an "innocent" clean cut White boss, Leo Frank, who gave their son a highly prized job, wrongfully going to gallows? Instead of a guilty Negro?

Second, why would White parents allow their son to report to work on Monday Morning, April 28, 1913, right after their son was threatened with death on Saturday April 26, 1913? Alonzo Mann Reported for work Monday morning, April 28, 1913 when all the forensic revelations were made at the National Pencil Company and he too witnessed them.

Third, if Alonzo Mann admitted in 1982 he lied under oath at the Leo Frank trial in 1913 (about leaving at 11:30 am instead of noon), what's not to say he wasn't lying again in 1982 / 1983, when he said he had gone back to the factory at 12:05pm after leaving at noon?

70 years after the trial, he was asked why he came back, and he said it was about a baseball bet he made with Schiff, but everyone knew Herbert Schiff was not meant to come to work that day - including Herbert Schiff who hinted as such at the trial.

Fourth, Alonzo Mann said he came back to the factory at 12:05pm, this was about the time Monteen Stover said she came to the factory, how come Monteen Stover didn't walkin on this horrifying scene either?

Fifth, when Jim Conley was arrested and held by police there was no risk of Alonzo Mann being "killed", he could have safely approached the police.

The ADL tried to use the Alonzo Mann hoax to get a posthumous exoneration for Leo Frank at first in 1982-1983, but it failed. But they didn't give up, three long years of political machinations, back room wheeling and dealing continued until a second attempt was made.

1986: ADL Second Attempt, Partially Successful

In 1986, pressure from the powerful Jewish community, Jewish groups and ADL (Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith), resulted in the highly political March 11, 1986 posthumous pardon of Leo Frank without exoneration of the crime.

There was only one problem with the highly political pardon of Leo Frank, because Alonzo Mann had died March 19, 1985 and no one could question him about the incident. The politically corrupt Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles forgave Leo Frank with a pardon, but kept Leo Frank's GUILT intact and thus did not disturb the verdict of the Leo Frank Trial Judge and Jury.

On March 11, 1986, a pardon without exoneration of guilt was issued by the board:

Without attempting to address the question of guilt or innocence, and in recognition of the State's failure to protect the person of Leo M. Frank and thereby preserve his opportunity for continued legal appeal of his conviction, and in recognition of the State's failure to bring his killers to justice, and as an effort to heal old wounds, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, in compliance with its Constitutional and statutory authority, hereby grants to Leo M. Frank a Pardon.

A most grotesque symbol of ADL power reminded the American people who really runs politics in America.

Even with the posthumous pardon, it was specified the guilt of Leo M. Frank remains permanently intact, because his official conviction was not changed, disturbed or tampered with from 1913 to 1986. As of March 11, 1986, Leo M. Frank remains guilty in the eyes of Black Letter and Settled Law forever more, though he was forgiven of his crime by the board, he was not forgiven by the public that detests rapist-pedohiles and child killers. Leo Frank's partisans cite the posthumous pardon as proof of Leo Frank's innocence.

A number of fictionalized media dramatizations and treatments have been made about the case in the form of miniseries, Broadway plays, Hollywood dramas, political docudramas, video blogs, and songs, conducted across the international media landscape, all mostly created by Jews making a mockery of the life of a little Christian girl, who is used as nothing more than a cheap plot device to launch Leo Frank's persecution hoax at the hands of evil anti-Semitic Goyim.

Attempts for more than 100 years are continually being launched to idealize and rehabilitate the image of Leo Frank as an innocent and stoic Jewish victim of American anti-Semitism. The efforts to transfigure Leo Frank from a perverted pedophile, rapist and strangler into a holy Jewish religious martyr of collective Gentile prejudice has continued unchallenged in the popular culture for more than 100 years.

The blood libel against the Leo Frank prosecution team, European-Americans and people who think Leo Frank is guilty, continues to this day by the organized Jewish community.

Three Leo M. Frank incriminating statements considered admissions equivalent to murder confessions From the 1913 Brief of Evidence

1. Jim Conley, Saturday, April 26, 1913, circa noon to 1:00 PM (See Jim Conley affidavits and trial testimony in the brief of evidence (1913) and Georgia supreme court case file about Leo Frank (1913, 1914).

2. Lucille Selig Frank, Saturday Late Evening, April 26, 1913, 10:30 PM (See State's Exhibit J, Brief of Evidence, 1913)

3. The Public, Monday, August 18, 1913, (Leo Frank's four hour unsworn trial statement, August 18, Brief of Evidence, 1913). Leo Frank's explanation on the witness stand to the trial jury, why Monteen Stover had found his office was empty between 12:05pm and 12:10pm on April 26, 1913, with an unconscious bathroom visit: (Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913, p. 186).

The Fourth Leo Frank Admission that Amounted to an authorized Jailhouse Murder Confession Published in the Atlanta Constitution
4. Leo Frank confirmed his August 18, 1913, murder trial bathroom admission-confession in the March 9, 1914, issue of the Atlanta Constitution.

Leo Frank's defenders won't ever dare to mention the "unconscious" bathroom murder trial confession that Leo Frank made on the witness stand when he was giving his four hour unsworn statement at the trial on Monday afternoon, August 18, 1913, between 2:15pm and 6:00pm. Thoughtful and analytical interpretations of the statement Leo Frank made to counter Monteen Stover's testimony are always left out of most Leo Frank revisionist books, even though it proves Leo Frank's guilt indisputably when juxtaposed with State's Exhibit B and Jim Conley testimony about finding Mary Phagan dead in the metalroom bathroom (see: State's Exhibit A, item #9), at the behest of Leo Frank (see: Leo Frank's trial statement, Monteen Stover's trial testimony, State's Exhibit B, Jim Conley's trial testimony and affidavits, brief of evidence, 1913).

Leo Frank is the only person in early 20th century US history to make what amounted to a murder confession at his own trial, leaving most people shocked.

See: The final closing arguments of Hugh M. Dorsey, Frank Arthur Hooper (American State Trials, Volume X, 1918, John D. Lawson) and Tom Watson's analysis of Leo Frank's trial admission amounting to a murder confession (Watson Magazine, September, 1915).
Be sure to study, the Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913, and the 1,800 page Leo M. Frank Georgia Supreme Court Case File (1913, 1914).

This Review Published on April 26, 2013

Excellent sources of research and information about the Leo Frank Case include:

0. The Leo Frank Case Inside Story of Georgia's Greatest Murder Mystery 1913 - The first neutral book written about the murder of Mary Phagan and trial of Leo Frank.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/TheLe...GreatestMurder

1. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean (Available on www.Archive.org). Written by Mary Phagan Kean, the great grand niece of Mary Phagan. A neutral account of the events surrounding the trial and appeals of Leo Frank, including his posthumous pardon. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan is well worth reading and it is a refreshing change from the endless number of Jewish authored modern and contemporary books, disingenuously transforming the Leo Frank case into a neurotic, anti-Gentile, race obsessed tabloid controversy.

WWW: https://archive.org/details/TheMurde...LeoFrankIn1913

2. American State Trials, volume X (1918) by John Lawson tends to be biased in favor of Leo Frank and his legal defense team. This case commentary review provides an *abridged* version of the Brief of Evidence, leaving out some of the important testimony and evidence when it republishes parts of the trial testimony. Be sure to read the abridged closing arguments of Luther Zeigler Rosser, Reuben Rose Arnold, Frank Arthur Hooper and Hugh Manson Dorsey. For a more complete version of the Leo M. Frank trial testimony, read the 1913 Leo Frank Case Brief of Evidence.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/Ameri...kAndMaryPhagan

3. Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey in the Trial of Leo Frank. Some but not all of the 9 hours of arguments given to the Jury at the end of the Leo Frank trial on August 22, 23, and 25, 1913. Only 18 libraries in the United States have copies of these statements in book format. This is an excellent book and required reading for students of the Leo Frank case to see how Hugh Dorsey, in sales vernacular, 'closed' the panel of 13 men (the trial jury of 12 men plus Judge Leonard Strickland Roan).

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/Argum...ankMurderTrial

4. Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913, Brief of Evidence. Only three original copies from 1913 and 1914 exist at the Georgia State Archive.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/LeoM....dantInError.In

Three Major Atlanta Dailies: The Atlanta Constitution, The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Georgian (Hearst's Tabloid Yellow Journalism). The most relevant issues center around April 28th to August 27th 1913.

5. Atlanta Constitution Newspaper: The Murder of Mary Phagan, Coroner's Inquest, Grand Jury, Investigation, Trial, Appeals, Prison Shanking and Lynching reported about the Leo Frank Case in the Atlanta Constitution Daily Newspaper from 1913 to 1915.

WWW: http://archive.org/details/LeoFrankC...aper1913To1915

6. Atlanta Georgian newspaper covering the Leo Frank Case from late April though August, 1913.

WWW: http://archive.org/details/AtlantaGe...ilToAugust1913

7. Atlanta Journal Newspaper, April, 28, 1913, through till the end of August, 1913, pertaining to articles about the Leo Frank Case:

WWW: http://archive.org/details/AtlantaJo...toAugust311913

Leo Frank confirms he might have been in the bathroom at the time Monteen Stover said his office was empty (12:05 pm to 12:10 pm): See the Atlanta Constitution, Monday, March 9, 1914, Leo Frank Jailhouse Interview

WWW: http://archive.org/details/AtlantaCo...14Issue10Pages

U.S. Senator Tom Watson

8. Tom Watson's Jeffersonian Newspaper (1914, 1915, 1916 and 1917) and Watson's Magazine (1915). Tom Watson's best work on the Leo M. Frank case was published in August and September 1915. Watson's five major magazine works written serially on the Frank-Phagan affair, provide logical arguments confirming the guilt of Leo M. Frank with the superb reasoning of a seasoned criminal attorney. These five 1915 articles published over numerous months are absolutely required reading for anyone interested in the Leo M. Frank Case. Originals of these magazines are extremely difficult to find.

8.1. The Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (January 1915) Watson's Magazine Volume 20 No. 3. See page 139 for the Leo Frank Case. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankCase

8.2. The Full Review of the Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (March 1915) Volume 20. No. 5. See page 235 for 'A Full Review of the Leo Frank Case'. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/TheFu...kCaseMarch1915

8.3. The Celebrated Case of The State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank By Tom Watson (August 1915) Volumne 21, No 4. See page 182 for 'The Celebrated Case of the State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank". Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/TheCe...CaseOfLeoFrank

8.4. The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert By Tom Watson (September 1915) Volume 21. No. 5. See page 251 for 'The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert'. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/TheOf...tSeptember1915

8.5. The Rich Jews Indict a State! The Whole South Traduced in the Matter of Leo Frank By Tom Watson (October 1915) Volume 21. No. 6. See page 301. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/RichJ...StateOfGeorgia

Tom Watson's Jeffersonian Weekly Newspaper

9. The archive of Tom E. Watson Digital Papers, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, contains the full collection of Jeffersonian Newspapers: http://www.lib.unc.edu/dc/watson

Modern Leo Frank cult members (known as Frankites) are posing as neutral reviewers and attempting to convince people not to read Tom Watson's analysis about the Frank-Phagan affair. Watson's analysis of the case is the controversial forbidden fruit of truth that have been censored for more than 100 years. For a nearly complete selection of: Tom Watson's Jeffersonian newspaper articles specifically related to the Murder of Mary Phagan and Leo Frank Case.

WWW: https://archive.org/details/the-jeff...01-03-05-09-10

Tom Watson Brown, Grandson of Thomas Edward Watson

10. Notes on the Case of Leo M. Frank, By Tom W. Brown, Emery University, Atlanta, Georgia, 1982.

WWW: http://www.archive.org/details/Notes...ndItsAftermath

Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Archive:

11. Leo Frank Trial and Appeals Georgia Supreme Court File (1,800 pages).

WWW: http://archive.org/details/leo-frank...ords-1913-1914
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #83
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

‘The Silent and the Damned: The Murder of Mary Phagan and the Lynching of Leo Frank’, authored by Robert Seitz Frey (born 1955) & Nancy C. Thompson (First edition published 1988, second release 2002, Kindle version 2012), is yet another pseudo-scholarly treatment of the Mary Phagan murder case, amounting to nothing more than a maudlin hagiography about the life & tribulations of Leo Max Frank (1884 – 1915). These are conclusions most people will arrive at after fact-checking this book & its references against the primary sources of this famous case, therefore this monograph can accurately be summed up in total as: shamelessly weak on the facts & based on contemptuous omissions.

Here’s a tiny little snapshot of examples concerning the minor errors that fill every chapter of this book:

The authors of this book quote from Leo Frank’s 1906 college yearbook, concerning a number of facts about him, for instance stating he weighed 130lbs, but the original source they cited actually says he was 145lbs (Cornell Senior Class Book, 1906, pages 344 & *345*). Mary Phagan was NOT born in Marietta, Georgia, during the year 1900, she was born hundreds of miles away in Florence, Alabama, on June 1st, 1899. “John Phagan” (the wrong name listed as Mary Phagan’s biological father) did not passaway in the year 1911, William Joshua Phagan (the correct name of Mary Phagan’s biological father) died from measles more than a decade prior, in February of 1899 (yes, Mary Phagan was indeed a posthumous daughter). Leo Frank did NOT marry Lucille Selig in October of 1910, but specifically November 30th (Frank-Selig Wedding Certificate, 1910; Atlanta Journal, Dec 1st, 1910, society pages). Leo Frank’s father, Rudolph Frank, born in 1844, was not 67 years old in 1913, because in 1913 he turned 69. This list of minor errors literally goes on on and on…

26 years of Garbage-In-Garbage-Out: 1986 to 2012:

To be fair, even meticulous authors can make mistakes, but when the hard facts mangled outnumber the book’s pages, something is definitely amiss. There seems to be a pattern here, because I noticed the same level of carelessness concerning the facts found within the author’s Master’s degree thesis (“The Case of Leo Frank M. Frank in The Continuum of American History: An Assessment of Christian Responses”. Masters of Arts Degree in History, June 1986, Baltimore Hebrew College, Maryland). What seems to matter most in the political charged world of academia and mainstream book publishing industry are the perpetuation of politically correct conclusions, not the facts. Moreover, what is most disconcerting about this book is not the minor errors that fill every page, but the major errors found woven together throughout every chapter. The most significant errors found in this book involve misquoting and misrepresenting the Leo Frank trial transcript of testimony, evidence and exhibits contained within the 3,000 pages of official court legal records. Therefore for clarity and brevity, we will review some of the most striking examples below, because to list all the authors willful misrepresentations would result in the creation of a booklet on the long side.

The One Hundred Year Old Anti-Semitic Hate Crime Hoax: Anti-Semitism Convicted the Pedophile who Raped and Strangled a Little Girl

The Atlanta Police investigation into the bludgeoning, rape, strangulation & mutilation of Mary Phagan that lead to the murder indictment and trial of Leo Frank has been often described over the last 100 years by Leo Frank’s defenders as an anti-Semitic miscarriage of justice fueled by racial prejudice against the “Yankee Jew”, but nothing could be further from the truth once we closely examine the official trial records and appeals petitions.

This peculiar & complex criminal affair is one of the most well documented in the annals of Southern jurisprudence, so there is really no excuse for the vagrantly sloppy research contained within this pathological “Gentile-vs-Jews” tribally myopic disinformation book. Moreover, the Official Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence (1913) – ratified by the trial judge, defense & prosecution teams – and Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court records (1913, 1914), survived in their entirety into the 21st century & are easily accessible to researchers, students & scholars, so there really is absolutely no justification for these authors falsifying these official legal records publicly available from the State of Georgia’s Archives.

Students of the Leo Frank Case naturally ask the Question: Why would these authors invest so many years of their lives studying the subject at hand and working on this book, yet still allow an uncountable number of factual errors in this latest edition — especially since their inclusions can be so easily verified for whether or not they are accurate or not?

The suppositions contained within this book, reveals an ugly racial extremist agenda by its creators, which ultimately answering this question definitively.

Directed at European-American & African-American Southerners, the activist authors waste no time deliberately making unfounded blood-libel insinuations, promoting century-long hate crime hoaxes, and perpetuating false accusations about vast anti-Jewish conspiracies against Leo Frank. Which is why most of the claims & conclusions in this rendition of the Leo Frank epic saga, do not even stand up to minimal college level academic scrutiny or high school level basic fact-checking.

From a Wider Lens this Book is Overwhelming with Racist Suppositions of Anti-Gentile Hate

This hate filled propaganda book wrongfully indicts the whole state of Georgia, by suggesting its police, government officials & citizenry, willfully, & collectively participated in railroading & then assassinating an “innocent” man, primarily because he was Jewish, not because it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Leo Frank pounded in the face of a little girl before he raped, and strangled Mary Phagan, being sentenced to death for the crime by both a Judge and Jury (the jury was asked by the presiding judge for a sentencing recommendation). TIn context, despite the reality that German-Jews were generally regarded in the Old South by Gentiles of all classes, as upstanding, productive & law abiding citizens. Furthermore, the consensus of Southern Jewish & Gentile historians has always been, then & now, that European-American Southerners in the segregationist South, treated & respected Jews as White equals, but the same can not be said for how Blacks were treated during the Southern progressive era & the generations afterwards leading up to the civil rights movement.

The real purpose of this book is meant to be is another deracinating bludgeon in the 100 year long racist Jewish culture war that began in 1913 and continues today with renewed ferocity. This conflict is lead by an insidious & agitating minority within the organized Jewish community that has always historically been known to be at perpetual war against the majority’s hegemony. The expressed intention of creating this conflict is demoralizing White-Americans for their once prevailing tradition of ethnic solidarity, ironically by some of the most ethnically paranoid zealots, racial extremists & xenophobic people on earth. You can see this general tendency reflected in most of the books written on the Frank-Phagan case by Jews and their partisans who take the prevailing Jewish position that “anti-Semitism was behind it all”.

More people than at any other time in history are asking the forbidden question: Why is it that most of the same people who incessantly express concern about widespread anti-Semitic racist conspiracy theories, often promote the status quo of Apartheid Israel as an ethnocentric ‘Jewish State’, one that is indisputably known for having committed state-sanctioned racist crimes against humanity during the last 60+ years — one seen by the world as a violent pariah that provides no voting, political, social or civil rights for the non-Jewish people illegally occupied under International Law?

The bottom line is that racism, prejudice & bigotry directed against other people is wrong no matter who it comes from & unacceptable no matter who it is directed at, & yet these authors blinded by bigoted tunnel vision are so pathologically obsessed with anti-Semitism, they failed to mention all the delicious and juicy details of the diabolically anti-Black racist plot Leo Frank botched when his gambit to frame his African-American nightwatchman Newt Lee, with a conspicuously forged time card and planted bloody shirt, fell apart in 48 hours into the investigation of Mary Phagan’s death. The authors also conveniently omitted the well documented tirade of anti-Black gutter racism spewed by Leo Frank’s legal defense team against the Negro Jim Conley during the trial’s closing arguments.

From the perspective of Leo Frank Case historians not suffering from pathological tribal myopia, who have spent several uninterrupted years studying the official trial & appeals records, & read every single local Atlanta newspaper account of the whole ordeal from 1913 to 1915, this ill-conceived book does not measure up to the level of scholarly research & historical accuracy you would expect from the experienced technical writers who authored this latest edition. Simply put, they omitted, fabricated or twisted out of context the vast majority of the witnesses words who testified in this case. This is easily confirmed by reading the developments, coroner’s inquest & trial testimony published in the Atlanta Journal, Constitution & Georgian newspapers, from April through August of 1913, that all together can be easily compared to the official trial transcript digest of testimony (see: Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913).

Brimming with half-truths, misrepresentations, fabrications and omissions, most of which are not obvious or known to the average person reading this book, the authors chose to leave out the SUPER vast majority of relevant pre-trial evidence uncovered by investigators against Leo Frank during the critical first 48 hours and subsequent Coroner’s Official Inquest (April 30 to May 8) that revealed some very interesting facts. Anyone who takes the time to study the several thousand pages of official Leo Frank case legal documents (that fortunately survived into the 21st century, despite underhanded efforts to purge them), will quickly come to the conclusion that the authors of this book never bothered to carefully read, study & sift the appeals records in the Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Case Files, nor do they accurately report what was really argued at the trial & why it mattered. It’s easy to understand why people cringe in disbelief when they read this impetuous book, particularly at how recklessly it was formulated.

Spoiler Alert: This book is another clumsily concocted attempt to rehabilitate the image of the convicted child strangler, Leo Max Frank, the prominent Atlanta president of B’nai B’rith, from September 1912 to 1914, whose conviction galvanized the Independent Order of B’nai B’rith founding of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) on October 20, 1913.

So now we come around full circle to the reoccurring question that comes to everyone’s mind as they fact check this book: Why would Nancy C. Thompson-Frey and Robert Seitz Frey go to such extreme lengths to obfuscate the facts and twist the events of the Leo Frank Case?

Perhaps the longtime modern leader of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL), can give us the answer:

“The authors are to be commended for this calm, dispassionate, yet chilling story of how bigotry can kill a man and destroy a system of justice…. Must reading!” -Abraham H. Foxman, National Director, Anti-Defamation League [ADL of B’nai B’rith].

The ADL, Born in Blood:

The conviction of Leo Frank, so often cited as the impetus for creating Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in 1913, has ever since then, resulted in numerous books having been written about the Leo Frank Case in this same vein of manufacturing mythological anti-Semitism where there was none, attempting to re-write history, rehabilitate Leo Frank into a hero-martyr & cover-up an embarrassingly heinous scandal that can’t be buried.

ADL & Abraham Foxman’s Hate Crime Hoax:

Two or more pages on the ADL web site suggests that racist mobs of people were shouting murderous anti-Jewish slogans into the open court room windows at the Judge & Jury during the 1913 summer trial of Leo Frank, & that anti-Semitism was the reason Leo Frank was convicted, Direct ADL and Abraham Foxman Quote:

“Hang the Jew, Hang the Jew.” This was the cry of the furious mob outside the Atlanta courthouse where Leo Frank, a Northern Jew, stood trial after his arrest in 1913 for a murder he did not commit. Anti-Semitism hung heavy in the courtroom as Frank was found guilty and sentenced to death. On the 95th anniversary of the Lynching, Abraham Foxman wrote an Op-Ed published on the ADL web site claiming people were shouting “Kill the Jew” into the open windows of the courtroom and intimidating the Leo Frank trial jury (see: History of the ADL on their main website www.adl.org and Abraham Foxman’s Op-Ed August, 2005).

The Century-Long Anti-Jewish Hate Crime Hoax Uncovered:

If there was even a drop of anti-Semitism leading up to the indictment or during the Leo Frank trial, why is it not mentioned in Leo Frank’s numerous petitions and appeals between 1913 – 1915? Why is it not mentioned in any of the three major local Atlanta newspaper accounts (Constitution, Georgian and Journal) that had teams of reporters inside and outside the courtroom meticulously documenting the events of the trial? Surely, something so noteworthy of a mistrial, disruptive mobs of yahoos screaming bloody racist murder into the windows of the trial’s courtroom, would have been mentioned. This book commended by Abe Foxman is guilty of perpetuating it’s own version of this ADL Hate Crime Hoax.

Frey and Thompson, Chapter 4, The Verdict, Quote:

Through the blistering days of summer the trial unfolded amidst the very real presence of an anti-Jewish mob spirit. The streets were thronged with people demanding the conviction of “the damned Jew.” The crowd, some allegedly armed, applauded, jeered, and laughed through out the trial. Judge Roan had made repeated, but timid, efforts to maintain a semblance of order. Spectators in the courtroom sat directly behind the jurors. The jury could surely feel the palpable presence and sentiment of the crowd. Because of the heat, the windows in the city hall building were open and the heads of people standing in the street were practically level with the sills of these open windows. A group of men sat on the roof of a shed outside the window just ten feet behind the judge and the witness chair. “The mob was breathing vengeance in the very face of the judge and jury.”

In reality, Jews were not historically known in the South for committing such malicious & perverted sex crimes of extreme violence. Italians, Greeks and Russians were European sub-species that were thought to be more prone to crime and were ranked significantly below Jews and Anglo-Saxons. If anything, it would have been infinitely easier to convict the Negro James “Jim” Conley or Newton “Newt” Lee with less evidence against them, than Leo Frank, who was very well connected in the organized Jewish community, especially because he was Atlanta president of the 500 member Jewish fraternal organization B’nai B’rith.

Leo Frank the Serial Pedophile:

Now that the State of Georgia is scanning all legal records of Leo Frank’s trial and appeals, slowly making them available online, the public is soon going to learn about another unpublicized pedophile-rape committed by Leo Frank, one involving a very sadistic twist. More than a year prior to the rape-murder of Mary Phagan on April 26, 1913, Leo Frank raped one of his young child laborers, causing her to become pregnant. She was shipped off to a home for unwed teenage mothers in Ohio. After initially defiling the little girl, Leo Frank descended between the legs of this child, plunged his teeth so rabidly into the inner most region of her thy (adjacent to her genitals), that he permanently scarified her flesh. Luckily she survived to tell of the incident during Leo Frank’s appeals (Georgia Supreme Court Records, 1913, 1914). This revelation of psychopathic perversion is left out of Leo Frank partisan books, because it tends to corroborate the 19 pre-teen & teenage girls, who were former employee’s of the National Pencil Company, that testified under oath at Frank’s murder trial, affirming & sustaining his reputation for behavioral patterns of aggressive sexual predation against little children.

What the authors also left out of this unworthy book is the Mary Phagan murder investigation:

During the Coroner’s Tribunal (late April to May 8, 1913), Leo Frank testified under oath he had never used the bathroom all day on April 26, 1913 – not that he didn’t remember using it, but that he hadn’t used the bathroom at all. Leo Frank also repeatedly swore to an alibi during the official Coroner’s Inquest on Monday, May 5th, 1913 and Thursday, May 8th, 1913, stating that he never left his office after Mary Phagan had arrived & left him alone on April 26, 1913, between noon and 12:20pm. Prior to Leo Frank making these statements at the Coroner’s Inquest, he also gave the exact same murder alibi to Atlanta Police Detective John R. Black and Pinkerton Assistant Superintendent Harry A. Scott on Sunday, May 4th, 1913, while imprisoned in jail.

Meet 14-year old Monteen Stover:

What Leo Frank didn’t know at the time he stated his murder alibi about having never left his office or going to the bathroom, is that another one of his child laborers, one he also temporarily laid off, named Monteen Stover, had come to his office to collect her wages. Stover arrived just minutes after Mary Phagan & found Leo Frank’s office perplexingly empty as she waited between 12:05pm & 12:10pm. When Monteen Stover revealed this timeline incident at the trial, it resulted in Leo Frank completely changing his 4-month-long-maintained murder alibi. About half an hour into Leo Frank’s trial statement, that he had given orally to the jury, he explained where he might have supposedly been & why his office seemed empty during that critical time & in doing so, Leo Frank solved the murder of Mary Phagan…

Grand Jury Indictment of Leo M. Frank:

On Saturday, May 24, 1913, after a two week murder investigation and hearing numerous witnesses testify under oath, the Fulton County Grand Jurors, voted unanimously, 21 to 0 against Leo Frank, indicting him for the murder of Mary Phagan. Several of the grand jurymen were Jews, placing serious doubt about the perpetual cri-de-wolf of anti-Semitism concerning the investigation into the murder of Mary Phagan that led to the indictment of Leo Frank. With all the real instances of anti-Semitism in the world, artificially fabricating instances of it only cheapens the genuine cause against it. And there are no shortages of snake oil salesmen, con artist professors & fear-mongering activists who make a living off of inventing anti-Semitic hate crime hoaxes (read my review of Leonard Dinnerstein’s ‘The Leo Frank Case’).

What’s the real reason the Grand Jury indicted Leo Frank? The authors of this book failed to mention the full extent of who testified & who did not testify at the Grand Jury hearings, so that the reader would be unable to draw their own conclusions about what was revealed & why the Grandjurors likely voted unanimously against Leo Frank. With this list of witness names, the average researcher could easily read what these same witnesses later restated at the Leo Frank trial in the summer of 1913. Moreover, Jim Conley did NOT testify at the Grand Jury hearings, but Monteen Stover DID, & this among other things is the crux of suppression by these authors: Monteen Stover, the girl who defended Leo Frank’s character & ironically cracked his alibi wide open.

State of Georgia vs. Leo M. Frank:

The 4-week long Leo Frank murder trial began with its first witness on the afternoon of Monday, July 28, 1913, with Newt Lee the last to testify that afternoon session. Day after day, witness after witness, the curiously intriguing details of State’s witnesses were conveniently left out of this book, “The Silent and the Damned”. Such utter contempt for legal history is inexcusable.

By Monday, August 4, 1913, Jim Conley testified at the trial for three grueling days, stating he found Mary Phagan dead adjacent to the metal department’s bathroom entryway (State’s Exhibit A, Key item #9), that is after Leo Frank allegedly confessed to assaulting Phagan in the metal room when she refused to have sex with him. Leo Frank’s legal defense dream team – made up of the best legal minds in all of Georgia – spent 3 days using every trick in the book to try and trip up & impeach this Negro accessory-after-the-fact to the murder of Mary Phagan, but Rosser & Arnold were unable to do so & what they actually did was foolishly draw out of Conley information about Leo Frank’s predilection for oral sex and escapades with Atlanta prostitutes at the factory. Conley also described “accidentally” walking in on Leo Frank during assignations no less than two times, but these cowardly authors felt it necessary to leave out all the relevant details that would paint the scandalous culture of what was really going on at the factory.

Jim Conley Admits to Writing the Murder Notes:

The murder notes found by the dead body of 13-year-old Mary Phagan dumped in the rear of the basement, describe her going to “make water” (urinating) at the only place she would have gone to the bathroom in the factory: Namely, the metal department’s bathroom, it would have been the only bathroom Phagan would have used when she left Leo Frank’s office on the second floor, because there was no accessible bathroom on the first floor of the NPCo, & the toilet in the rear of the dark-dingy basement was racially segregated for “Negroes Only”. Leo Frank forgot to jimmy open the locked door on the first floor lobby leading to the office space of former Clark Woodenware company, that had departed on January 17, 1913, because the police found the door locked when they arrived, as the owner of the building later said it should have been. Ultimately, Leo Frank had boxed himself in as the culprit via his deviously racist plot to frame the old, tall, dark-complected, balding, married Negro, with no criminal record, Newton “Newt” Lee, known colloquially at the factory as the nightwatch.

The Tight and Narrow Solution:

On the second floor of the National Pencil Company, Mary Phagan worked in the metal department, colloquially known by factory employees as the metal room, & her work station was right next to the entryway of the men’s toilet by a matter of a few foot steps. Leo Frank to reach the toilet would literally walk by Mary Phagan’s work station each day from the time she worked there between the spring of 1912 to Monday, April 21, 1913, when she was temporarily laid off because of a shortage in brass sheet metal. The authors never adequately explain how Leo Frank could tell the police, the coroner and trial jury that he did not know his employee Mary Phagan’s name, given the fact she worked under his tutelage for 55 hours a week registering her timecard on the punch clock, over 53 weeks, logging more than 2,700 hours of labor sticking little rubber erasers into short-thin brass banded tubes wrapped around the edges of pencil bases.

Leo Frank’s Delicious ironic Admission on the Witness Stand:

The most significant omission by Nancy Thompson Frey & Robert Seitz Frey are the clear-cut details about Leo Frank’s trial testimony playing out to the solution of the Phagan murder mystery, after Leo sat down on the witness stand, during the last week of his 29-day trial.

Leo Frank made a loquacious & mind-numbing unsworn 4-hour statement to the Jury on Monday, August 18th, 1913. Leo Frank changed his sworn murder alibi that he maintained for 4 months about having never left his office around the time when Phagan arrived & departed.

According to Leo Frank, when did Mary Phagan arrive in his business office on Saturday, April 26, 1913?

During the late morning on Sunday, April 27, 1913, Leo Frank told Atlanta Police officers that Mary Phagan came into his office about a few minutes after twelve (12:03pm). On Monday, April 28, 1913, he told Atlanta Police that Mary Phagan arrived in his office “between 12:05 and 12:10pm, maybe 12:07pm”. At the Coroner’s Inquest he changed the time to 12:10pm to 12:15pm. At his trial when he gave his statement to the jury it was then that Leo Frank changed the time for the 4th time, saying Mary Phagan came into his office between 12:12pm & 12:17pm. We might ask as 21st century observers are these four critical time inconsistencies given by Leo Frank, about the time he saw Mary Phagan in his window front second floor office, the behavior of an innocent man? And why did Phagan’s moment of arrival continue to slowly inch away minute by minute, as the days, weeks and months went by, from his original stated meeting time of about 12:03 pm?

In the shocking climax of the most sensational murder trial in Southern history, Leo Frank mounted the witness stand & told the 13 men sworn to try his fate – twelve jurymen and judge Leonard Roan – the real reason why Monteen Stover found his office empty. Leo Frank reversed himself, and told the jury that he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom in the metal room to account for Monteen Stover’s testimony!

Leo Frank said (direct quote on witness stand):

Now, gentlemen [of the jury], to the best of my recollection from the time the whistle blew for twelve o’clock [on Saturday April 26, 1913] until after a quarter to one [12:45 p.m.] when I went up stairs and spoke to Arthur White and Harry Denham [on the fourth floor], to the best of my recollection, I did not stir out of my office [located at the front of the second floor]; but it is possible that in order to answer a call of nature or to urinate I may have gone to the toilet [in the metal room located at the back of the 2nd floor]. Those are things that a man does unconsciously and can not tell how many times nor when he does it (Leo Frank Trial Statement, August 18, Brief of Evidence, 1913, p. 186).

The Solution to the Murder of Mary Phagan:

Leo Frank made this newfangled explanation as to why Monteen Stover found his second floor office empty between 12:05pm & 12:10pm, which was timeline wise, precisely when the bludgeoning, rape & strangulation of Mary Phagan occurred in the metal room according to case the prosecution built at the trial. When 200 plus people packed in the courtroom heard Leo Frank’s “unconscious” metal room bathroom admission, they likely involuntarily shivered & felt cold chills down their spines, especially after hearing about the wound on the back of Mary Phagan’s head, blood on the floor near the metal room bathroom & the discovery of her broken off hair with dried blood on it, found tangled around the solid iron handle of Robert P. Barret’s lathe in the metalroom.

Forensic Evidence:

Descriptions of the 5 inch wide blood stain & spatter smeared with haskolene diagnal to the metal room’s bathroom door discovered by child laborer Magnolia Kennedy, was most significant, because Jim Conley testified he found Mary Phagan dead near the metalroom bathroom (toilet) entryway. However the lynch pin that brought it all together was State’s Exhibit B, Leo Frank’s deposition to Atlanta police on Monday, April 28, 1913, where he stated Mary Phagan came into his office between 12:05 and 12:10pm, maybe 12:07pm, that created an unbreakable chain of circumstantial evidence, when Leo Frank finally explained his absence during that exact same time. On Sunday, April 28, 1913, Leo Frank told police that Mary Phagan came into his office at 12:03pm, which essentially gave them both enough time to reach the metal room before Monteen Stover arrived.

The significance of it all was in the critical first 48 hours of the Mary Phagan murder investigation that Leo Frank first stated Mary Phagan arrived at 12:03pm and then “12:05pm to 12:10pm, maybe 12:07pm” based on his own wall clock, before he got wind of Monteen Stover, who he never mentions seeing that tends to result in Leo Frank threading the eye of the needle.

Case Closed:

Leo Frank admittedly put himself precisely in the metal room where all the forensic evidence indicated Mary Phagan had been killed, at the exact same time he told the police that Mary Phagan was alone with him in his office. Leo Frank got caught in an inescapable lie, because it is impossible to be at two locations at the exact same time.

Flash Backwards Dateline Sunday morning, April 27, 1913:

Mary Phagan had been found dumped in a mutilated state at the back section of the National Pencil Company’s factory cellar, her 4’11” tall & 107lbs of dead-weight had apparently been dragged 140 feet face down from the basement elevator shaft located at the front section, across the hard earthen floor, leaving a clearly visible trail according to the first responders who arrived before 4:00 a.m on Sunday morning, April 27, 1913. The Coroner theorized she likely wasn’t murdered in the basement, because the dirt encrusted scratches all over her face didn’t show any signs of bleeding or scabbing. Physicians performing autopsies on Mary Phagan, later pointed out back in 1913, that once the heart stops beating, the body ceases the healing process. Thus the Mary Phagan Autopsy revealed she was already quite dead when she had been dragged from the elevator shaft and that the basement was probably not the initial scene of her bludgeoning, rape & strangulation. It was a simple CSI forensic revelation Leo Frank never anticipated when he ordered his pet janitor Jim Conley to remove the cadaver of Mary Phagan from the metal room and dispose of it at the rear of the basement. The police realized that if Mary Phagan likely hadn’t been killed in the basement, there were only two other likely options, the first floor lobby which was the highest traffic place of the factory, or the metal room at the rear of the second floor where conspicuous forensic evidence had been found. It should be noted again: The door to the large office space of the Clark Woodenware company on the first floor had been locked since January 17, 1913, when they departed & there was no other forensic evidence found around the lobby. This caused the police to put their entire focus on the 2nd-floor’s metal room located opposite to Leo Frank’s office. Pinkerton detective McWorth an agent of Leo Frank mysteriously kept discovering forensic evidence three weeks after the murder in the factory lobby: A bloody stick and Phagan’s pay envelope, but the police had scowered that area, so how could they have missed those items? McWorth was relieved of his duty on suspicion of planting evidence, but those items were entered into evidence by the defense at the trial.

Student’s of the case are left wondering why did Leo Frank go to such unusual lengths to coverup the crimes origins, by having Phagan moved 2 floor down & then attempt to frame his Negro nightwatchman Newt Lee with “death notes” hand written by Conley, but not bother to meticulously clean up Phagan’s bloodied and broken off hair tangled around the handle of the bench lathe in the metal room? Why didn’t Leo Frank make any real effort to clean up the 5 inch wide fan-shaped stain of Mary Phagan’s blood on the floor, located front diagonal of the doorway to the bathroom (toilet) inside the metalroom? Was this evidence planted to frame Leo Frank who was not under suspicion when it was found in some kind of an ugly anti-Semitic conspiracy or was the bespectacled Leo Frank lacking in prescience, therefore rendering him simply myopic?

Perhaps intelligent book smart people, sometimes lack basic common sense. Ironic is the fact that in 1913, only 1 in 100 murders were ever solved, and here was one that was almost too easy for the Atlanta Police.

The Trial Exhibits Obfuscated by the Authors:

Looking back on the case nearly a century later, the significance of everything comes to light when one looks closely at Leo Frank’s Defendant’s Exhibit 61 and State’s Exhibit A (Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913), precise architectural floor plans, revealing the only set of bathrooms (toilets) on the 2nd floor, were located inside the metal room at its inner-most corner. Thus providing a commonsense conclusion that Leo Frank ineluctably incriminated himself well beyond a reasonable doubt with his “unconscious” bathroom visit contradicting himself, and thus making his murder conviction a nobrainer for any jury & every level of the United States appeals courts in 1913 or 2013.

Robert Seitz Frey is a Racist Anti-Gentile Domestic Jewish Extremist:

There was no anti-Semitic conspiracy to convict Leo Frank, he looked the jurymen straight in their eyes and calmly said that essentially, he might have “unconsciously” been at the prosecution’s theory of where the original crime scene was located, at the exact time the murder was theorized to have occurred. In the 20th or 21st century, what would any other jury, possessing average intelligence, have done in the same situation? The verdict of guilt was not difficult or challenging by any stretch of the imagination when based upon commonsense.

As a whole, Leo Frank’s trial statements to the jury were, generally speaking, filled with unmitigated and incomprehensible blunders that left most legal minds dumbfounded & flabbergasted in 1913, & today.

Still Left Unanswered by Leo Frank’s Defenders:

Most people wonder, how could Leo Frank claim to the Atlanta police that he was in his second-floor business office alone with Mary Phagan between 12:05pm and 12:10pm on April 26, 1913, and also simultaneously be “alone” in the metal room bathroom located down the hall as he told his Trial Jury on August 18, 1913?

Looking back in time as 21st century time travelers of the imagination, the Leo Frank trial was without a shadow of a doubt no nail biter, it is certainly not a “cold case” today, & it definitely was not some kind of collective anti-Semitic framing against the “Yankee Jew” by racist Southerners, but instead, what it was, is the first time in Southern history that a legitimately indicted man, made an admission at his own murder trial, that unequivocally amounted to a murder trial confession. So perhaps we could ask legal scholars: How many times has something this dramatic happened in American jurisprudence?

Leo Frank’s Confirmation of his Guilt?:

Six months after Frank’s August 25 conviction, on March 9, 1914, the Atlanta Constitution published an authorized pre-written Q & A interview of Leo Frank conducted while he was incarcerated at the jailhouse during his appeals, where he once again admitted, as he had done on August 18, 1913, stating again that he was using the metalroom’s bathroom, unknowingly at the exact same time Monteen Stover was waiting alone for him to collect her pay inside his temporarily empty office between 12:05pm and 12:10pm, thus again contradicting his deposition to Atlanta police that Mary Phagan had been with him inside his office, alone with him, between 12:05 pm & 12:10 pm, maybe 12:07pm, on Saturday, April 26, 1913.

This is why I encourage people to read the official Leo Frank trial brief of evidence (1913) contained within the Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court records, to learn specifically why this married dynamic duo, Nancy C. Thompson and Robert Seitz Frey, can not be considered — by any stretch of the imagination — reliable, honorable and trustworthy to retell this epic saga.

So what do you call people who intentionally obfuscate facts, evidence & testimony, to transform a perverted sexual predator and child killer into an innocent & noble martyr of anti-Semitism?

Buy this book today & fact check it against the official legal documents of the Leo Frank Case.

You might also consider buying this book now on www.Amazon.com and use it as a teaching guide to show precisely how the well organized Jewish community works in concert with individual Jews to regurgitate their racist anti-Gentile narratives to wage a viciously ugly culture and racewar against Southerners, European-Americans and all of Western Civilization.
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #84
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

JEWISH SUPREMACISTS POISONING THE MINDS OF CHILDREN WITH ANTI-GENTILE BOOKS.


Elaine Marie Alphin, An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank

A multi-part review by Leo Frank scholars about the book, “An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank“, the book was authored by children’s book writer Elaine Marie Alphin and released to the public in March, 2010. Elaine Marie Alphin wrote this book on the Leo Frank case intended for the audience of high school and college students.

Review Introduction by M. C., followed with the book review by Allen Koenigsberg.

Generic Book Information:

Title: An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank
Author: Elaine Marie Alphin
Reading level: Young Adult (High School and College Students)
Library Binding: 152 pages
Publisher: Carolrhoda Books
Published Date: March, 2010
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0822589443
ISBN-13: 978-0822589440
Product Dimensions: 10 x 7.4 x 0.7 inches
Shipping Weight: 1.3 pounds

Prerequisites:

Before reading any reviews of ‘An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank’ here and on amazon.com, it is important for one to first familiarize oneself with the Author, Elaine Marie Alphin, her background, and the side she takes in the Leo Frank case, which is all clearly revealed on her web site, located here: http://www.lernerbooks.com/anunspeakablecrime/.

After reviewing the contents of Elaine Marie Alphin’s website, and becoming familiar with the views she expresses on the case, and the opinions she asserts, one should then follow through with reading the abridged version of the book, “An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank”, which provides numerous excerpts of the text pages of her book. Available to peruse free in its limited form, online from Google books, located here: An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank By Elaine Marie Alphin (Google Books Online). Though the free Google books version of her work is limited to an extent, there is still enough of the book available to give one an idea of her bias, sympathies and some of the racial assertions she makes — which will be quoted here.

Borrow, Don’t Buy!

Should one want to read the actual physical book, the best recommendation is to avoid purchasing it, because irregardless of the political position or side one takes on the Leo Frank case, the book is weak on the facts and filled with countless errors, several of which will be discussed at length. In these regards the best option is to save money and instead inquire to determine if one can borrow a free copy from a local library or through inter library loan. If a copy of the book is not available at your local library, consider buying a used version of the book, instead of a new copy. The used price of this item on Amazon.com should give you an indication of whether or not the reviews of this book are mostly accurate or inaccurate.

A complete digitized version of this book will likely make it’s way online in the future as all books are ultimately destined.

Start By Reading the Official Leo Frank Trial Documents:

To put everything in proper context, it is strongly urged, before obtaining a free copy of this book in question from the library, to carefully study primary sources of Leo Frank case legal documents concerning the trial and appeals (see the Georgia Supreme Court Archive 1913+ available). By reading and studying the dry leaves of the official records in the Leo Frank case one can make their own independent interpretation of the facts and evidence, without the skewed biases of the unilateral artificially created majority position created by secondary source writers who are typically Leo Frank partisans and weave together falsehoods on the trial and aftermath.

Becoming fairly acquainted with the Leo Frank trial evidence and testimony, reading the 1913 to 1915 newspaper accounts of the case will enable one to better understand the chain of events, so as to be able to clearly see the problems, flaws and issues (and what was left out) with Elaine Marie Alphin’s interpretation of the Leo Frank saga and why her version of the Leo Frank affair lacks truth, veracity and legitimacy. More importantly, understanding the facts and evidence in the Leo Frank case should make it clear why Elaine Marie Alphin can not be considered a reliable academic or scholarly source.

Is Elaine Marie Alphin perpetuating the bogus and artificially created popular-culture myth surrounding Leo Frank that his conviction was a vast bigoted anti-Jewish conspiracy and bigoted political-social injustice? Was Leo Frank really suspected and convicted on trumped up evidence because Leo Frank was a Northern Jew? These are questions that can only be answered by studying the primary sources of the Leo Frank case and early 20th century Georgian history.

From the Prosecution Side of the Leo Frank Equation: Elaine Marie Alphin, has joined the ranks of open and vocal Frankites (Leo Frank cult members), who have for the last century been perpetuating numerous lies, smears, slanders and defamation against the people associated with the “prosecution side” of Leo Frank case, the smears often include making broad sweeping racist, prejudiced and bigoted statements against Southerners. Elaine Marie Alphin, achieves these crass political and antagonistic social ends, utilizing a plethora of media tools and proselytizing media methodologies on her website, including using portions of her book, informational PDFs, audio and video, to: Frankite, “politically correct” and “transsexualize” the Leo Frank case from the prosecution of a pedophile, rapist and murder, flipping it into the struggle of a Promethean stoic hero, a noble Jewish martyr mellow dramatically being thrown on the funeral pyre of ethnoreligious racism, anti-Jewish prejudices and bigotry.

Reflections of the Jewish-Gentile Culture and Race War

From the European-American Perspective: Elaine Marie Alphin’s book represents pouring high octane gasoline on the smoldering Jewish-Gentile relations, the manifested and subtle “Jewish-Gentile ethnoreligious cultural race war and conflict” – which the “Leo Frank Case” was not in its beginnings, but has artificially become by Frankite agitators and trouble makers.

A Dirty Bloody Race War Between Jews and Gentiles

Tom Watson called Leo Frank partisans and followers of the Leo Frank pedophile-rapist-strangler exoneration cult – Frankites. The word seems quite appropriate, as years, decades, generations and now a century later, there are people still misrepresenting the Leo Frank trial testimony, evidence, and appeals records in an attempt to socially, historically and politically exonerate and rehabilitate Leo Frank.

Elaine Marie Alphin and other Leo Frank partisans have been using the Leo Frank case to instigate a vicious culture and race war between Jews and Gentiles, and it’s working quite well, the rage in response to the lies, smears and fighting words are smoldering like a series nuclear bomb tests detonated underground, with a steady stream of smears against Southerners, Christians and European-Americans as a whole coming from the Frankite camp with renewed ferocity.

To make matters worse Alphin is not even subtle about her disgusting smears against European-Americans, from beginning to end, Elaine Marie Alphin’s book takes every opportunity to engage in loathsome monstrous race baiting, trolling, hypocritical racism and she plays countless unsubstantiated accusations from the racecard deck. You can’t help but feel nausea as you turn the leaves of this “high-production” value book, with each and every weirdo tribally obsessed admonishment she uncouthly forces into the paragraphs of this culture-war Jewish-Gentile racial propaganda book.

From the European-American perspective, this book reads like the subtle instigation of that eternal war of revenge that has been tightly cycling through and between tribes of people throughout history and as a result Alphin has perpetuated the Leo Frank case into a 100 year culture war between Jews and Gentiles.

Famosus Libellus: Blood Libel Smears Against Everyone Not on the Side of Leo Frank

In the 100 year tradition of the Frankite Smear Mongers, Elaine Marie Alphin in her book basically perpetuates the worst kind of blood libel and racist slander possible against Southerners, Georgians, European-Americans, Christians, local newspapers and Atlantian Police detectives – the Latin phrase famosus libellus means a libelous writing.

Alphin suggests the Police suspected, railroaded, and framed Leo Frank because of anti-semitic and regional bigotry at the time, and the immediate emergence of Leo Frank into the status of prime suspect was catalyzed by the “media frenzy” which impelled the Police to do so (Elaine Marie Alphin WWW, Feb. 2011). Her statements suggest the Leo Frank case was a state sponsored antisemitic railroading, framing and murder supported by the general culture at the time, because Leo Frank was a Northern Jew lynch-crucified on a tree at the blind hands of regional and racial prejudices.

Evidence, Not Racism

People who have studied the Leo Frank case, know that Leo Frank was suspected, because of a mountain of evidence that immediately emerged against him, not because of virulent anti-Semitism, anti-Jewish prejudices, bigotry, media pressure or media frenzies. Jewish and Southern historians note that Anti-Semitism was virtually non-existent in the South and Jews were a respected people that participated successfully in Southern politics, business, law, manufacturing, finance, culture and education. Ironically, white racial separatist Southern culture suited the racially conscious collective Jewish community with a kind of genetic harmony, because Jews happily embraced their own brand and version of racial separatist philosophies in a Jewish assimilation context.

Smears Against the Honor of Southerners: Murder “Innocent” White Jews and Let Free “Guilty” Black Murderers

The ultimate insult.

The substanceless and slanderous statements don’t just stop with the “anti-semitic prejudiced police” and “instigating local newspapers media frenzy”, she implicates Southerners too – All of them. Her statements about Southerners amounts to the worst kind of blood libel defamation, because she is suggesting they didn’t suspect, convict, and lynch Frank because of the mountain of genuine ineluctable evidence which emerged against him, overwhelmingly proving his guilt, but instead because he was an “innocent” White Jew and a “guilty” black man was not worthy enough, in terms of some kind of value, to pay the price for the murder of little Mary Phagan (“even though Conley did it”). You have to read it to believe it! Websites can change, but chiseled in stone book editions can’t.

Does that overt supposition asserted in her book, like many others, pass the common sense test?

Hogwash

The assertion Alphin uses throughout her audio, video and writing tends to indicate she is implicating the whole of Southern people as part of of a vast murderous antisemitic conspiracy directed against Leo Frank because he was a Jew.

More than 100 years ago in 1913, Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold tried the same thing at the trial. Alphin stoops to the lowest, basest and most desperate position possible in her assertions, just like the original Leo Frank Defense team did when they realized they had a losing case, like them, she resorts to playing the antisemitism card to it’s fullest. (See: the two final speeches of Reuben Rose Arnold August and October 1913)

One Hundred Years of Smears: The Vast Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theory Against European-Americans

Elaine Marie Alphin is making what amounts to the false accusation of “Jewish Blood Libel” against the good people of Georgia and the South, it is the same one being made over the last one hundred years by the Jewish Community. A new artificially created Mythology of Leo Frank is born.

Alphin in the tradition of the Frankite cult is unleashing the ultimate century-old smear against Southern European-Americans, saying the people of Georgia openly, maliciously, intentionally and collectively convicted and assassinated an “innocent” man because Gentiles are collectively antisemitic hate mongers (for no reason?), this 100 year old hideous Frankite position is one which can not be substantiated by any reliable sources or factual evidence, and is made despite the fact there was virtually no recorded antisemitism in the South.

Southerners are politely demanding that these false accusations stop.

From the Far-Right Southerner Position:

Conservative Perspective on Elaine Marie Alphin: Elaine Marie Alphin like all the other Frankites of the last 100+ years are showing their true colors, they are the subversive subset and part of a much larger morbid movement within the blood stream of Western Civilization, a perfidious conglomeration of treacherous people undermining the United States, instigating a no holds barred dirty cultural war, from within, and against the people of the United States of America with these race war instigation fighting words. Her statements are a challenge to the honor of the good people of the South, European-Americans, Christians and American patriots, she is part of the movement instigating an unnecessary ethnoreligious cultural race war between Jews and Gentiles in the libraries, schools, colleges, universities and Internet. Many Southerners incensed by these insane accusations against them consider Elaine Marie Alphin to be a cultural terrorist trying to defame their Southern forefathers including, all Georgians, Georgian Police, Detectives, Government Officials and the DA’s Office with racial propaganda. To top it off Elaine Marie Alphin wants to be a pedophile cheerleader and exonerate a pedophile murderer.

According to Elaine Marie Alphin, Direct Quote:

A black watchman found Mary’s body brutally beaten and apparently raped. Police arrested the watchman, but they weren’t satisfied that he was the killer. Then they paid a visit to Leo Frank, the factory’s superintendent, who was both a Northerner and a Jew. Spurred on by the media frenzy and prejudices of the time, the detectives made Frank their prime suspect, one whose conviction would soothe the city’s anger over the death of a young white girl. (2011)

Take a closer look at the last part of this particular Elaine Marie Alphin Quote, “…one whose conviction would soothe the city’s anger over the death of a young white girl….” … this suggestion on her web site is more subtle and couched, compared to what she more openly and directly suggests in her book about racist White Southerners consciously choosing an “innocent” White Jew over a “guilty” Black Negro…

In the early part of her book, “An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank”, Elaine Marie Alphin, suggests the most perverse smear and outlandish claim that White racial separatist Southerners of 1913 are essentially so depraved, loathsome and antisemitic, that they would rather openly let a “guilty black pedophile-rapist and strangler” go free and instead railroad and frame-up an “innocent” White Jew. This instance will be discussed later with direct quotes from her book, but this little snap shot is to give you more of a warm up idea about one of the newest racial propaganda books to come out of the woodwork and into the limelight concerning the Leo Frank anti-Semitism hoax from 1913 to 2010 and onward.

Factoid: Back in the day circa 1913 to 1915, there was actually a large and successful national group which formed, calling itself the Leo Frank Defense League and their efforts live on today 100+ years later through the generations of new Leo Frank Mythologists.

More on the Elaine Marie Alphin Quote: “…Spurred on by the media frenzy and prejudices of the time, the detectives made Frank their prime suspect…”

The Prejudices of the Time (“media frenzy”)

From the time of the discovery of Mary Phagan’s dead body at 3:17AM on Sunday, April, 27, 1913, till the time Leo Frank was arrested about 56 hours later at 11AM on Tuesday, April 29, 1913, not a single word, sentence, paragraph or page was uttered by the media that was antisemitic, anti-Jewish, instigating or pushing Leo Frank as the prime suspect because he was Jewish or because the regional prejudices (including north vs. south tensions at the time) spurred the police on to arrest Frank and make him a prime suspect.

The prevailing artificial culture created by Frankites surrounding Leo Frank in terms of both its regionalism (or a civil war tension, 50 years after the civil war) and Gentile anti-Jewish racism claims are grossly over exaggerated.

Anti-Semitism was Virtually Non-Existent: Shared Freedom

The fact Anti-Semitism was virtually non-existent in the South is historically well known, and Jews shared in the liberties and religious freedoms that Christians enjoyed. Jews were respected as equals to Whites and Christians in the South, and many Jews were very successful and held prominent positions in politics, education, law, finance and business. The White Racial Separatist South was a free market boon to the Jewish community against the modern claims of the loudest opponents of Western Civilization.

The Media Frenzy Impelled Anti-Semitism and Bigotry?

Not a single anti-Semitic sentence open or covert was ever published in the “media frenzy” suggesting to wrongfully convict Leo Frank from the time of Leo Frank’s arrest on Tuesday, April 29, 1913 at 11AM to the affirmation of his conviction by Judge Leonard Strickland Roan on August 26, 1913.

More than a bakers dozen of higher level judges agreed Leo Frank got a fair trial.

Anti-Semitism: The Media Never Tipped off the People About a Leo Frank Murder Confession.

It was police leaks that made it into the media, not the other way around.

If anything the newspapers at the time “covered” for Leo Frank. In fact the newspapers at the time, never even revealed to the public that Leo Frank made what amounted to a shocking and blunderous murder confession on August 18, 1913 when Frank “unconsciously” went to the bathroom in the metal room at the same time he said Mary Phagan arrived in State’s Exhibit B. If anything they tended to side with him more than he should have fairly and neutrally received during his trial, the newspapers wanted a good fight, because the good fight ensures a total sellout of every newspaper published about the topic. Leo Frank got better coverage than deserving of him.

Ironically, concerning Leo Frank’s 4 hour testimony on August 18 1913, the newspapers said superficially it was far and away one of the best at the trial – even though it was a “ratcheting” rambling disaster filled with damaging and questionable statements which the prosecution attacked ruthlessly. The newspapers never provided deeper analysis on what Frank had said, the newspapers and “Alphin-created” media frenzies had clearly been neutral or favorable to Leo Frank when all things are considered and put on the balancing scale (See: The Atlanta Constitution, April 28, 1913 to August 27, 1913).

Not Even Tom Watson Made the Suggestion

In the last 100 years there has not been found a single piece of reliable primary source evidence, open or covert, that suggests Leo Frank – should, would, or could – have been arrested because he was a “Northern Jew”, nor was there any prejudiced groups of people or individuals calling for the police to make Leo Frank the prime suspect because he was Jewish. Nor was their any playing on prejudices, because Frank was a Yankee Northerner. The police made Leo Frank the prime suspect because a mount everest of suspicious clues Leo Frank created himself which tended to overwhelmingly pointed to the guilty finger inward, it was not because of a media frenzy or prejudices of the time. Leo Frank was not a very good manipulator against the police.

Leo Frank Incriminated Himself

The voluminous amount of evidence which came out against Leo Frank within the first 56 hours of the murder discovery will be discussed in long winded detail and is reviewed exhaustively on this web site. Both sides of the Leo Frank case including the prosecution and defense will be given representation on this site. This site intends to apply a telescope, magnifying glass, microscope, wide angle lens and electron microscope on every detail of this case, including putting testimony and evidence through the common sense test (which is sorely needed).

Could a Jew suggest a Blood Libel Smear Couched as the Antisemitism Card, would it have little place in the South?

The Ant-Semitism Card that was played at the Leo Frank trial, left Southerners perplexed. The Jewish community of Atlanta was not only highly assimilated, respected and perceived to be equal and Southern, their was virtually no anti-semitism, especially since thriving Jewish businesses, created countless thousands of jobs for the Gentile community. And despite Alphins expressions that Southern laborers in the South were paid much less than Northern laborers in the North, the locals did not perceive it that way, they were getting much better wages in the city verses their kinsmen that worked as farm staff or worked in the rural areas.

Atlanta was a thriving, alive and growing city. Jews were considered to be God loving people who went to “church”, and when Southerners described Jews going to “church” that didn’t mean they weren’t Jewish or that Jews went to church, that was just the Southern Christian and familiar way of expressing their general respect for Jews who were perceived on the surface as being a moral and righteous people (PvLF, 2009) because they went to their own temple synagogue services each weekend, where they sang, prayed and respected the Creator. On the surface Jews were considered good White people and most Southerners believed it was more than skin deep.

Steve Oney, derailed one of the central Anti-Semitism claims of the ADL and Bnai Brith, he corrected an important historical myth when he stated, authoritatively, that there is no evidence that crowds shouted “Hang the Jew or I’ll hang you,” through the allegedly “open windows of the steamy” Atlanta courtroom where Frank stood trial in the August heat of 1913. The Leo Frank trial court room was the coolest place in the city and had fans and ozoneators (precursors to air conditioners) cooling the air in the court rooms with closed windows. Even with the windows closed, no one was shouting outside “Hang the Jew or We’ll Hang You” or any variation of that Anti-Semitic Hoax.

According to Frey, even after the Frank case had played to its tragic climax in the later half of 1915, Victor Kriegshaber, a German-Jew, was elected president of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, in 1916.

Jews Thrived in the South

Jews thrived in the South financially and lived the patrician good life, compared to their fellow Jew yorkers shivering their tooshies off in the cranky 6 to 8 months combined of shitty weather throughout the entire NY calendar year. There were certainly more opportunities to make big money in New York, but “quality of life” is not measured by working your ass off and life away to be buried in a solid gold coffin in NYC. The South had the advantage of milder winters and a lot more elbow room, plus the girls in NY are more stuck up, cold and have constipated personalities, where as the Southern girls are a lot prettier and friendlier on average.

Leo Frank Prime Suspect Because of Evidence, Not Bigotry and Media Pressure

The police made Frank their prime suspect and arrested him within 56 hours of the discovery of Mary Phagan, because many red flags went up concerning things pertaining to what Leo Frank said and what others said about his behavior on that infamous day, especially by the “Night Witch”, Newt Lee, AND NOT because of media pressure, frenzies or prejudices against Frank’s heritage and his former address in Brooklyn five years ago where he grew up.

Leo Frank, the Only Suspect to Act Peculiarly.

Before the police even told Leo Frank about the murder on the morning of Sunday, April 27, 1913, when they paid him a visit, they cautiously observed him, Frank was shivering and quivering like a crack baby (yes, they actually had pregnant women addicted to coke at the time). The body language of Leo Frank tended to be suspicious and he ended up giving himself away since no one else questioned or examined by police and detectives acted so nervous or behaved so peculiarly. This was obvious for detectives and the immediate analysis within the first 48 hours needed to have all eyes turned on him for numerous reasons which will be discussed at length.

Collar and Tie: April 27, 1913, Morning Time

Leo Frank the Superintendent was like anyone else who put on a tie day in and day out, like the average police officers and investigators who paid him a visit at 7AM on Sunday Morning, April 27th 1913, they could put on a collar and tie with their eyes closed, as surely as Frank had done so with ease for the last five years or more during his tenure at the National Pencil Company. However, on that morning of Sunday, April 27, 1913, when the police arrived, Frank had difficulty doing very simple tasks, he struggled and fumbled with his shirt, collar and tie. There were notions Frank was trying to delay going to the factory and trivialize things, these things would turn into questions for the police: Why?

Nervous Rapid Fire Questions

A visibly hung over and strung out Leo Frank was trembling, nervous, shaking, quaking, firing off questions at a million miles a second before the police could even attempt to answer them, and Frank was God awful ghostly pale blue. The voice of Leo Frank was trembling and terribly hoarse possibly from excessive chain smoking the night before, because these behaviors and physiological reflections were noted they may have raised possible red flags of suspicion early on for the police when they started adding things up later.

One simple observation by the police: Leo Frank was the only person freaking and bugging out to the max before the police even told him what it was about when they arrived at his house at 7AM on Sunday, April 27, 1913.

Psychology of Behavior and Emotions

When things in context do not make any sense and seem out of place, the psychology of body language also reveals a lot as well, these things are considered within their context as part of the many intuitive mental tools developed in the arsenal of every police detective investigator since the dawn of civilization, because it was part of their criminal science before they had the nanoscopic forensic sciences we have today. Intuition, wisdom and common sense are some of the most powerful tools then and today, even with the advent of modern sciences, the conscious mind is the most powerful tool in the universe.

Newt Lee Marinated and Interrogated

Once Newt Lee was arrested at the scene of the crime, he would have been drilled and jack hammered into exhaustion about every minute detail of the last 24 hours leading up to the discovery of Mary Phagan’s beaten, strangled and raped body, it would have all been recorded on paper. Another powerful tool in the police is the stenographer, one who captures things down and for later police and detective teams to cross reference it.

April 27 1913

What Newt revealed to the police about the behavior of his boss Leo Frank the day before on the afternoon of April 26, 1913, would be interpreted as suspicious by any intuitive detective and reasonably intelligent police staff member, at the very least it raised eye brows, suspicion and little red flags.

The First Arrest Was Very Revealing About Leo Frank’s Behavior

Given the demanding nature of the police and the relatively recent timing of the approximately ~16.5 hour aged murder and its 2nd alerted discovery by police at about ~3:45AM on April 27, 1913, the police would have wanted to know immediately everything that occurred within the 16.5 hours between Phagan’s arrival at the factory (based on Phagan’s Mom, Mrs. Coleman saying on Sunday that Mary Phagan had left for the factory at 11:45) noonish on April 26, 1913 and the 1st discovery of her dead body at 3:15AM in the morning the next day on April 27, 1913. The murder could only have occurred at the factory given common sense and Leo Frank admitted to being one of the only people at the shuttered factory from noon onward who had seen her last. In a virtually empty factory on August 26, 1913 Leo Frank admitted he alone was the last person to see her alive. Naturally this would have raised suspicions against Leo Frank.

Minty Fresh Memory: The Bossman is acting Distressed!

Even though Newt was tired because he had an hour less sleep and was deep into his shift, Newt Lee’s recollection would have been spearmint fresh about his arrival at just minutes before 4PM (3:57 PM) at the factory on April 26, 1913. Newt Lee would have recounted Leo Frank’s suspicious actions which were odd and out of place. Leo Frank was acting very NOTICEABLY weird, nervous, frenetic and unusual toward Newt Lee that day given what happened that day in the factory.

Calm and Cool to High Strung

On April 26, 1913 at 4PM Frank was bustling and behaving in a way that was not like his normal haughty, calm, cool and collected self as the be-throned king and bossman sat in his swivel chair in the second floor window front office and was the B’nai B’rith President.

Using common sense test: Do you think the police couldn’t figure out Newt Lee, the man framed in the contrived murder notes, was innocent considering Lee had started work 4 hours and then 6 hours after Phagan went missing at the factory? Was Phagan locked in a cage for 4 or 6 hours in the basement, until Newt Lee arrived to kill her? most probably not. The police also couldn’t come up with a motive for Newt Lee to set himself up and taken at face value Newt Lee “acted” like an innocent man by attempting to call the Superintendent Leo Frank for 8 full minutes and even though he failed reaching Mr. Frank at his home, Newt was successful when he called the police. The murder notes which obviously seemed to point to Newt Lee the long slim tall negro “nightwitch”, would make it seem odd that he would alert the police about the lifeless body of Mary Phagan. It was not considered typical negro behavior at the time for one to beat, rape and strangle a White girl to death, sit around and write literature pointing to yourself and then calling the poh-po-lice.

The Murder Likely Happened Within Minutes of Her Arrival.

The police and detectives were looking for things out of place, leads and clues which is standard protocol.

Newt Lee’s statements and Leo Frank’s noticeably different behavior don’t necessarily make anyone guilty per say, but it naturally would create some level of suspicion in the intuitive minds of police and detectives, when added to the fact Frank admittedly was the last person to see Phagan alive and the only person in the virtually empty building on his floor on a Saturday State holiday. The murder notes written in classical ebonix caused the police to acknowledge them as possibly “negro” notes and would have made Leo Frank aware of this when they put them in front of him to read.

Keep in mind that at this time Leo Frank does not even dare mention his employee the Negro Jim Conley to the Police at the early stages in the investigation. What makes Frank’s silence even more ironic, is that Leo Frank knows Jim Conley can write, because Frank has Conley’s signed pocketwatch pawn-layaway contracts in his top desk drawer.

The contrived murder notes written in quaint Southern Negro ebonix meant the police had to track down the Black writer and would naturally want to speak with every African-American employee at the factory.

Newt Lee Friday, April, 25, 1913, Circumstances Not Prejudice Made Leo Frank the Prime Suspect

Newt Lee going over the events on April 26, 1913, with the police, leading up to the discovery of the body, would have meant he specifically recounted every detail he remembered about Leo Frank telling him [Newt Lee] to come in to the factory an hour earlier when they spoke together at payroll on payday Friday, April 25, 1913 at 6pm the day before the infamous murder and then once Newt arrived an hour early like he was told to do, arriving on April 26, 1913, at 4pm in the afternoon, instead of his normal and usual 5pm in the evening (1 hour difference), a big red flag went up, when Leo Frank then assertively requested Newt Lee out of the factory at 4 PM, telling him to leave for 2 to 2.5 more hours and go have a good time, this would also raise red flags considering the evidence of the crime in the basement and the metal room. The Police would naturally ask why does Leo Frank try to create 2 to 2.5 more available hours in an empty factory during the late afternoon to evening period on a Saturday and State holiday?

Newt Lee Suggests He Would Rather Sleep for 2 hours. The police asked why not just let him nap in the packing room?

Despite Newt Lee resisting Leo Frank’s request to leave the building by telling Leo Frank he [Newt Lee] was tired because he had an hour less sleep last night, followed by Newt Lee requesting permission to sleep in the packing room for an hour or so, it was perceived as being avoided and rejected by Leo Frank. Newt begrudgingly left the building, something he had never been told to do before during his 3 week tenure.

Frank flat out denied Newt a chance to catch an hour of sleep in the packing room and instead practically pushed-forced Newt Lee out of the factory telling him to come back at either 6pm or 6:30pm and go out and have a good time. Newt Lee chose to leave for 2 more hours at his bosses request, even though he could have theoretically left for 2.5 hours. Newt Lee chose to come back at the much earlier end of the half-hour range given to him by Leo Frank encompassing 6PM to 6:30PM, the time span that Leo Frank gave him was an hour later than he normally was supposed to be there on Saturdays which was always locked in at 5pm.

What more did Leo Frank have to do during these 2 or 2.5 hours? After Police cracked Jim Conley, the question evolved into was he waiting for Jim Conley to come back and finish the job on the promise of $200 to dispose of the body in the cellar furnace?

Once the Night Watch Arrives He is Not to Leave the Premises of the Building

There was also a general non-negotiable rule for the factory nightwatchmen that once they entered the building, they were not allowed to leave the property of the building during their scheduled shift, except for smoking a cig in the doorway of the factory. No other exceptions were generally noted.

6PM April 26 1913

When Newt Lee arrived at minutes before 6pm after a two hour zombie hiatus to go out and “have a good time” after the parade was already over.

Twice as Long on Changing the Time Clock Slip

Frank, who had presumably spent the last 5 years (1908 to 1913) putting in and taking out time slips, for some reason at that exact time when Newt Lee returned from his 2 hours on the town, Frank bumbled and fumbled like a jitterbug with it the time card in front of Newt Lee, struggling to put the new time slip in and making lame excuses that it was difficult, something just didn’t fly with the police.

The police would later ask themselves why are Leo Frank’s hands quivering so intensely he can’t seem to put the time card in the punch clock in the standard normal time?

Cigarette Break

After taking twice as long to put in the new time slip, Newt Lee punched the time clock in Leo’s office and gingerly in his overalls pigeontoed downstairs to the first floor, then he went out to the main stone frame doorway to smoke an evening fag, inaugurating his long Saturday nightwatchman rounds, which also included the grave yard shift.

While the tall and slim red eye’d Newt Lee was sitting on a crate in the front doorway Bogarting away on a 1913 cigarette, an ex-factory employee known as Gantt arrived at the doorway in an unbeknownst manner, he too was a long legged man who just recently made long sweeping urgent steps from the saloon bar across the street. The arrival of Gantt had appeared before Newt and they started chatting away about one of the most important subjects in the universal cosmos, his shoes. Gantt had known Mary Phagan and her family for years, but Gantt wasn’t looking for her, he stopped by the factory to pick up something he would need to find a new job as he was recently made unemployed at the National Pencil Factory over “tudahllahs” to put it in Leo Frank’s Brooklynese.

Gantt came for Four Shoes in total, a black set and a tan set, he had forgotten and left them in the packing room 2 weeks before, the unemployed Gantt needed them to pound the pavement looking for a new job.

I WANT MY TWO DOLLARS!

The former accounting employee had been dismissed by Leo because there was a shortage of $2 and he had been responsible for balancing the books properly and did not make good on the missing funds which were attributed to either him taking them, misplacing them or simply the result of poor fund management. When the frazzled Frank rushed out the factory door at 6:15PM, and ran into the former book keeping employee, Frank fell back scared practically trying to crawl away backwards, but it was too late, he was spotted, and had to compose himself. The fear Leo Frank expressed was not because he was scared of Gantt, the Negro Newt Lee could easily have taken that tall skinny bean stalk, Frank had an engram of something else. Frank was in a nearly imperceptibly short moment of fear because Gantt had known Phagan and her family quite well, the immediate mind flash assumption of Frank was Gantt might have been looking for Phagan. It was probably another heart pounding stomach churning moment for Leo Frank after a half day of them.

Black Shoes and Tan Shoes

When Gantt revealed he was only there to get his shoes he left behind, Frank was relieved beyond words, but still, he dropped his head dejectedly, and told Gantt he saw a negro sweep the lost shoes out of the building, (notice that Leo Frank does not mention the Negro sweeper Jim Conley by name, but genericizes it as some negro swept them out) but Gantt changed the shoe color adding another black pair to the mix and out maneuvered the cautiously resistant Frank who was in a rush to get the hell out of dodge and go home, without raising any more suspicions than he might have already created in this 6:15PM, April 26, 1913, little skirmish he acquiesced.

Avoid Drama at Any Cost

Moreover, the last thing Leo Frank really wanted was to create a big drama over the shoes as it might draw suspicion later as to why he doesn’t want someone who knows Mary Phagan from going into an empty and locked up factory to get his shoes. Frank instead told Newt Lee to follow Gantt up and stay with him during the entry, retrieval and exit. From the front door based on factory diagrams and repeating the distance one needs to cover, It takes less than 2 minutes to walk up the stairs, into the packing room and then down the stairs and out of the factory.

It would become stomach twisting and eat away at Leo Frank as he walked away toward the electric-car on his way home, wondering if Gantt was really there for only his shoes. Leo Max Frank had to be sure and couldn’t wait one minute more until he got home.

But before getting home, Leo Frank had something else very important he had to do. Frank continued briskly on his way home, stopped at a store and bought a big box of chocolates for his wife, perhaps out of some kind of normal guilt or remorse, as it certainly wasn’t a “special occasion” or was it?

Frank came home with a big box of chocolates.

Observers are wondering what is Leo Frank doing buying his heavy set wife who weighs more than him a box of chocolates, especially when Skinny Leo Frank always complained behind Lucille’s back about her being his “big fat wife”? There is certainly nothing wrong with buying your wife chocolates, indeed it should be encouraged, but when all things are considered, it suggested Leo Frank was possibly trying to pay down some kind of an invisible guilt and remorse, more than it reflected love. Men who know Men, tended to interpret the chocolate for what it really was, a partly feeble attempt by a guilty man to pay down on his remorse and betrayal.

The Late Evening

For another perspective on what happened at the Frank-Selig house hold that evening on April 26, 1913, Check out Minola McKnight’s affidavit, State’s Exhibit J, that will put that delicious box of chocolates into real perspective. It was one nightmarish late evening at the Selig-Frank residence for Lucy aka Mrs. Leo Frank, an incensed wife who waited nearly 2 weeks to visit her husband after he got arrested on Tuesday, April 29, 1913. Did those actions by Lucy betray she knew the truth, as Magnolia Mcknights affidavit suggests?


Back to 6:30 PM and 7:00 PM on April 26, 1913

Frank did something he had never done before concerning Newt Lee, he called Newt Lee at the factory twice, one time he got no answer at 6:30PM, and a second time he got Newt on the phone at 7PM to find out if everything was OK.

Frank was trying to see if everything went OK (no irony intended) with Gantt and if Newt had discovered the body or not during his rounds, because it was Newt Lee’s job to walk every square inch of the factory in 30 minute cycles. Newt Lee might have done a “half-assed” job when no one was looking and didn’t discover the body right away.

That night Leo Frank would chain smoke his cigarettes and guzzle down the liquor cabinet until he was a glutinous mess, shot gunning and swilling whiskey like it was goin’ out of style. A drink in one hand and one cigarette after the other dangling from his pretty mouth.

A Sense of Urgency: Early Morning, April 27, 1913

However, later when it was so early in the morning the next day, April 27, 1913, Newt Lee needed to use the “negro” toilet in the basement and get into the thinking man’s position, when he stood up after finishing his “bidness” and not wiping himself, he suddenly spotted something in the gloom, it looked like a leg or something. Newt Lee thought the scary looking thing next to cellar’s furnace was a prank — though it certainly was not Halloween — he began to approach it with his smokey lantern in the pitch black basement.

3:15PM, April 27, 1913, Newt Lee Discovers the Body of Mary Phagan

Newt Lee tried to call Leo Frank for 8 full minutes on the phone with no answer, Leo Frank was stone cold drunk in his bed alone, tossing and turning, while his “big fat wife” as he affectionately called her in real life behind her back, slept on the rug next to the bed at the request of Leo Frank (and if you want to know the inside scoup of the erratic events on that evening on April 26, 1913 in the Selig-Frank residence, you can re-read the section on Minola (Magnolia) McKnight).

Suicidal Leo Frank Confessed to His Wife Lucille

Frank nearly poisoned himself to death with whiskey, half-confessed the murder of Phagan to his wife, saying, “He didn’t know why he would murder” and called for his pistol so he could adolf-hitler himself, but the dinky coward had no shame and chose instead to humiliate himself, his wife, family and the Jewish community in a 100+ year ordeal which is still raging today thanks to the Jewish Frankite Cult and its Leo Frank cult activist members who have turned Leo Frank into a cultural icon against Christians, European-Americans and Western Civilization.

It can’t be sad enough, and the Frankites rarely mention that the suspicion against Leo Frank had everything to do with him being the last person to admit seeing Mary Phagan alive and in a virtually empty factory on a Saturday State Holiday, excepting for Frank on the second floor and 2 labor employees hammering away on the 4th floor tearing down a partition, there was no one else in the building in the afternoon — except Jim Conley — the person Leo Frank never brought up and later denies knowing was even there on August 26, 1913. (Brief of Evidence, 1913)

Newsie George Epps

There were also allegations from George Epps, that Phagan had confided in him that her creepy touchy feely boss Leo Frank was inappropriately flirting with her, winking at her, scaring her, running up in front of her when she tried to leave, getting a little bit too close “if you know what I mean” and making subtle sexual innuendos. What we might normally call today, adulterous and aggressive sexual harassment with a pedophile twist.

Bottom Line: Elaine Marie Alphin, Smear Monger or Truth Sayer?

The book by Elaine Marie Alphin is a fantastic collection of lies, disgusting smears, bigoted slander and outlandish accusations against Southerners accusing them of everything from them openly letting a black rapist killer go free so an innocent Jew can be blamed, to antisemitism and railroading Leo Frank because of media frenzy pressure toward the weak minded police — a vast prejudiced conspiracy because Frank was a Brooklyn Hebrew. The list of atrocious utterings in Alphins book are so numerous they must be debunked.

Unscholarly: Weak on the Facts Another Major Issue

This book is NOT a reliable source and should not be cited in scholarly research or papers. The book is not only weak on the facts, but makes every kind of weird racial, Frankite and politically correct accusation against Southerners you could possibly imagine. It reads like titty twister racial guilt and it notions egalitarianisms hunger to regress toward some kind of lower mean. This propaganda book should be labeled a Jewishesque style culture war hate book and for the unsubstantiated slanderous remarks she makes against Southerners in her books, it means she should never be used as any kind of serious source in any place of higher learning, except when educating people on the kinds of lies being perpetuated about the Leo Frank case.


An Unspeakable Crime was written by Elaine Marie Alphin, for high school and college students, it’s a smooth read with good stoppage and flow by a seasoned writer. Even if the book is profoundly weak on the facts, whips up wildly disgusting, psychotic and outlandish defamation, enraging people to a boiling crescendo, and not worthy of high school, college students, teachers, professor, researchers or anyone for that matter, the book is ultimately primarily for the self-deceiving Leo Max Frank extremist group known as the Frankites – not the general public. This proselytizing book is dangerous for the naive as well.

Normal US Grading System: A, B, C, D, F

Alphin gets a B+ for her writing style as the book was mostly a smooth read, it wasn’t quite an A- so it gets an 87 out of 100 for her writing style, but a BIG FAT (what Leo Frank called his wife behind her back) F (eff) for the substance of the book.

Alphin gets an F (failure) for Intellectual Honesty and Intellectual Heroism (telling the truth despite the consequences).

Aphin gets an F (failure) for Facts and Research

As a student reading Alphins book for the first time, I kind of feel like she doesn’t give enough detail, Alphin gets a D for details

Alphin gets an A for Racial Propaganda Political Correctness

Before we get to the book review let’s meet her:

Meet Elaine Marie Alphin

Elaine Marie Alphin was born on 30 October 1955 in San Francisco, California, and attended Lafayette Elementary School in San Francisco. Then her family moved to New York City, where she attended William H. Carr Junior High School. After that she moved to Houston, and went to Westchester High School and on to Rice University.

As an adult:

As you read this book it exudes this feeling like it was written by Alphins deadringer doppelganger, Annie Wilkes the psycho fictional character played by Kathy Bates in the Steven King movie called “Misery” (just add eye glasses)

Total Regurgitation Into the Minds of Children and College Students

Though the book, ‘An Unspeakable Crime’ by Elaine Marie Alphin is well written and easy to read, as it is a huge disastrous disappointment in terms of providing any revelations of quality research and because the book is filled with so many half-truths, mistakes and outright lies, it’s an unspeakable crime such a book will be used to indoctrinate, proselytize and deceive high school and college students about one of the most notorious criminal trials in US history. The bottom line is the book is a Frankite and culture war propaganda tool.

The Specifics: Uncountable Errors

Beyond Left and Right politics and Beyond Prosecution and Defense: The book makes a zillion factual errors, that are easily verified, too numerous to list them all, but the review by Allen Koenigsberg summarizes some of them. In fact some of the factual errors can be classified as such simple mistakes, even novice students of the Leo Frank case could easily point them out. In truth, it is mind boggling that the book was even allowed to be published in the first place, reflecting the declining quality standards of the editorial review process. What makes things even worse is high schools and colleges would let this book be used by them for teaching students about the case, it shows how low the research and educational standards are in the US.

Dumfounding

The dumbing down of America is no longer debatable, it’s a fact – “Thank you”, Elaine Marie Alphin for being part of the downfall of Western Civilization, we the students and teachers of the United States “really” appreciate you and your book being part of school curriculum and your participation in destroying the educational standards of our country. Thank you for butchering the truth. Sarcasm Gratis.

High Expectations, Big Let Down

Many people have very high expectations when a new book comes out on the Leo Frank Case, hoping that some new, insightful and fresh analysis will be revealed about the case. Alas, ‘An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank’ by Elaine Marie Alphin is a total and major shake your head let down, and might even be accurately described as the worst overt propaganda book made in bad taste on the Leo Frank case yet published in the first decade of the 21st century or even in the last 100 years. Congratulations to Elaine Marie Alphin.

Leo Frank or Bust!

The book provides nothing more than a regurgitation of the Leo Frank defense side of the equation, it lacks in any originality, pretense of subtlety and nuance of depth. The book is absolute total dishonest garbage, but don’t take our word on it, see if you can get a free copy at the library and compare this book against the official record, and primary sources of the Leo Frank case to see for yourself.

Elaine Marie Alphin Please Fix the Book

It is the sincerest hope that Elaine Marie Alphin will, pretty please, produce future editions of the book that will correct the uncountable factual errors and hopefully provide some interesting analysis instead of just the same old forgery and re-write of other peoples works for gaining some fast and dirty greenbacks. The book in its current form offers absolutely nothing to the Leo Frank Case, it might as well be considered a badly plagiarized re-hash of other peoples works on the Leo Frank case.

Tell Kids What to Think? or Teach them How to Think for Themselves?

What is sorely missing today are books which don’t tell kids what to think, but instead give them the tools and frameworks to think for themselves. ‘An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank’ seems to push the Jewish, politically correct, racist and antisemitism victim mentality position in the Leo Frank Case, most children naturally trust adults and give them the benefit of the doubt, which is truly unfortunate in this situation, because this book, aside from making more factual mistakes than possible to mention here, it also makes the most ridiculous and outrageous racist race bending claims that defy logic and common sense. Is that good for high school students and college students? depends who you ask.

We told you earlier we would discuss this in more details…

Early on in the book Elaine Marie Alphin suggests the most shocking and outlandish claim that White racist and racial separatist Southerners of 1913 would essentially and intentionally overlook and let a “guilty murdering” Negro go free over the “miscegenation rape” and strangulation death of a White Girl, so that they could instead convict an an “absolutely innocent” White Jew (I know its too hard to believe, but you have to read this suggestion she puts forward in her book to believe it).

Alphin suggests the ultimate in infinite prejudiced antisemitism, that a “guilty” Negro was not worthy enough to be convicted for the rape, beating and murder of a White girl Mary Phagan because he was a lowly black janitor, so they instead went after a well educated, Northern and “innocent” White Jew to satisfy their antisemitic blood thirst. Sorry for being repetitive here, but the suggestion is so insolent and insulting to ones intelligence, one can not help but feel profound rage that such ideas are being pushed as the truth to high school and college students.

After reading that insanity, it is permanently impossible to ever take Elaine Marie Alphin serious again, she lost complete credibility and makes so many of these kinds of assertions and claims in her book you can’t help but feel indignant. This book is an outrage and because it is part of the culture war against Western civilization, it can not and will not be forgiven – EVER.

Back to the Educational Standards of Our Colleges

As a full time student, it is very frustrating, but speaks of the declining educational standards in the United States and moreover that books written and published for students are not more rigorously checked enough for factual errors and abject politically correct proselytizing. Hopefully the Internet will balance out the declining educational standards created by such authors as Elaine Marie Alphin. This is coming from a full time student.

For those students who become interested in the case, they will hopefully do independent research and come to their own independent conclusions after reading the original primary sources of the Leo Frank case which are now available to the public. What would be great is if there were a book published on the Leo Frank case which was written by a dispassionate researcher and helped students to understand both sides of the case equally well, not push one side or the other. It is unlikely such a book will ever be produced and therefore this web site will serve to present both sides of the case, even the most extreme to centrist positions from the defense and prosecution sides will be presented, so that people can make their own independent intelligent judgments.

Critical thinking requires that people be able to learn and understand many different perspectives and consider why people hold them, even the most outlandish, like the nonsense that comes from Elaine Marie Alphin. Moreover, the ultimate bottom line of critical thinking, requires more than just understanding different perspectives on things, but that people who are engaged in critical thinking should have or develop the evolving mental capacity to fully think for themselves without being gullible or easily influenced by the loudest position or voice. The loudest position on the Leo Frank case, is from the defense side, but how does it stack up against the official record and common sense? It’s a wobbly house of cards – antisemitism cards.

Dear Professors “An Unspeakable Crime”: Not Worthy of High School and College Students

Concerning ‘An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank’ by Elaine Marie Alphin, No respectable professor knowledgeable about the Leo Frank case and not a Frankite, would have allowed this book to have been published in its current form, yet now the book is sadly making its way into many high schools and colleges in the United States for the Jewish culture war moveent and political correctness movement geared at dumbing-down America. Absolutely no mercy, this author should be added to the list of authors waging a culture war against Western civilization and this book will be added to the list of works written for the purpose of defaming and destroy Western civilization.

The unspeakable crime is that the book was ever allowed to be published. In terms of the prolific production of books by the carpel tunnel laden Elaine Marie Alphin, what ever happened to the philosophy, quality, not quantity? Elaine Marie Alphin, please stick to writing fiction books, stay as far away from non-fiction as possible, please for the sake of the children, high schoolers and college students (and the general public). You have no excuse.

The Worlds Foremost Expert on the Leo Frank Case

If there is one person perfect for reviewing any book about Leo Frank, it is Allen Koenigsberg, who is the single most knowledgeable person alive today on the case, he has mindfully focused on the deepest levels of research, source comparison, fact checking and analysis from every lens of the Leo Frank saga. He is the perfect man for reviewing, “An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank” by Elaine Marie Alphin.

Koenigsberg is so knowledgeable about the Leo Frank Case he has discovered numerous factual errors made by recognized Leo Frank authors who are considered the preeminent Leo Frank scholars, including Steve Oney, Leonard Dinnerstein, and others. Allen Koenigsberg, has gone to the most extreme, unimaginable and fanatical lengths to obtain primary source materials on the Leo Frank Case and analyzed them from many perspectives. Despite the fact Koenigsberg has not written a single book on the subject, he is more knowledgeable about the Leo Frank case than Steve Oney, Leonard Dinnerstein, and all the other living and deceased writers on the Leo Frank subject combined. In proof and vindication for Koenigsberg, the numerous errors in the books of Oney and Dinnerstein will likely be “quietly” corrected in future editions and releases of their books and moreover the future error corrected versions of their books will likely be published without attribution to him.

Though Elaine Marie Alphin is a lightweight in terms of academic and scholarly research, probably not worthy of being written about or reviewed, because biased Wikipedia, high schools and colleges are using her book as a “scholarly source”, it makes sense to show how depraved and low our educational system and Wikipedia have sunk in terms of using reliable sources.

Provided further below is a very short and concise book review by Allen Koenigsberg about one of the newest “treatments” of the Leo Frank Case, a book called: ‘An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank’.

The Above Introduction was written by MC, below Allen Koenigsberg

Now, onto the Amazon.com book review by Allen Koenigsberg…

Allen Koenigsberg: Book Review of ‘An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank’ by Elaine Marie Alphin’.

In this latest book on the Leo Frank Case (152 pages), author Elaine Alphin takes for her title a post-lynching judgment by the Mayor of Atlanta (James Woodward): “a just penalty for an unspeakable crime.” But she has recast that harsh approval of Leo’s Midnight Ride, and added, “The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank.” This is clearly not a volume of subtleties and the reader is thus quickly informed of the writer’s sympathies. It is mostly about the trials and tribulations of the accused and there is little (correct) about Mary Phagan herself.

The book is aimed at young people, and Ms. Alphin notes that in all the literature on the case — despite the abundance of teenagers at so many stages of the events — there has not up to now been a retelling aimed for that audience. It is clearly written, with fine production values, with a large variety of vintage photographs, and rarely have they been reproduced so well. She is obviously entranced with this “miscarriage of justice” and has traveled widely and visited several of the major Archives – all are cited in the back along with the previous major books, and is so current that the recent PBS-TV Special (‘The People v. Leo Frank’) is mentioned.

Some of the original material was of a salacious nature, but all is handled here tastefully. The major problem is that even high-schoolers are entitled to an accurate accounting of this iconic case, and that is where this latest publication falls short. The basic narrative of the crime, and its ultimate resolution at the end of the lynchers’ rope, strikes our sensibilities to this day, and there are still many who would prefer that an innocent Leo Frank be the prime example of American justice gone wrong. But the Jury, in Georgia’s longest trial, heard all of the evidence, and the author seems unaware that the Atlanta newspapers were an excellent source for the day-to-day testimony. As she notes, the stenographic Court Transcript has been lost for some fifty years.

For reasons unknown, Ms. Alphin has Mary Anne Phagan born in Marietta, Georgia and her biological father also dying there. But Mary was born in Florence, Alabama, on June 1, 1899 and her father had died several months before she was born – she was a posthumous child. Fannie Phagan (Alphin wrongly calls her `Frannie’ throughout) raised her youngest daughter and siblings as a single parent and did not (re-)marry John Coleman until 1912 – she was essentially raised without a father. When Mary did not return home by 7pm, her step-father would indeed look for her on the evening of April 26, 1913, but the family never “called the police” as is claimed here. They would learn of their daughter’s death only after a night of waiting, 5:30 the next morning, from one of Mary’s chums.

We would not expect all material to be footnoted in a book like this, but the author (and her readers) would have benefitted from more explanatory Notes at the back. For example, on p. 11, it is claimed that Mary’s body showed bitemarks on her shoulder when found. This is rather a unique statement and was not reported at the time – actually, it derives from one book (‘To Number Our Days’ by Pierre van Paassen) published years later, in 1964, describing a visit by that author to Atlanta in 1922. Van Paassen said these marks had been “x-rayed” and were still preserved in a court folder. But who could (then or now) x-ray such indentations in human flesh? And surely Pierre van Paassen’s parallel claim (through lawyer Henry Alexander) that Leo Frank did not have a trial to overturn would make his report highly suspect. But Ms. Alphin does not question her sources, simply quoting what seems beneficial on each occasion – Oney’s book does the same with this incident (p. 617). Van Paassen would argue that Leo’s dental records (which he also says he saw in 1922) did not match the bites in Mary’s neck and hence he was innocent of the crime. But this is one man’s word at best and does not stand up to even minimal scrutiny.

Although this is (or should be) a case where the devil is in the details, they come thick and fast but are often unverified or wrong. Ms. Alphin states that Leo’s father had retired by 1907 due to a railway accident, and that the family had their basic estate of $20,000 as a result of a financial settlement. However, there is no evidence for this claim, and the 1910 Census shows Rudolph Frank still working (as a salesman). Ms. Alphin does not give a source for this “accident” but it was only mentioned once, in a publication in 1947 by Burton Rascoe, who also gave no supporting details. When Rachel Frank (Leo’s mother) testified at the trial, she explained her husband’s absence by saying that he was too “nervous” to come to Atlanta and was broken down from his work.

Several times, Ms. Alphin refers to Leo and his family as “relatively poor” (but he earned $150 per month as Superintendent of the National Pencil Co.); however, the record shows he had traveled to Europe twice (in 1905 and 1908). Leo’s wealthy uncle, Moses Frank, is cited as having fought for the Confederacy, and this factoid is often mentioned in other books on the case, but it is not true and was only introduced (again without details) by one of Leo’s lawyers (Reuben Arnold) in October of 1913. Leo would later deny it.

It is claimed that the Seligs were a “high society family” but Lucille’s father was at the time a traveling salesman for the West Disinfecting Co., having earlier dealt in various liquor products. On p. 25, Lucille “announced her pregnancy” in the Spring of 1913, but no evidence from that period is offered. This remark apparently derives from Steve Oney’s book (p. 85), where the event is instead dated months later to the early Winter of 1913, but leading to a miscarriage (cited Interviews of 1986 and 1998). Oddly, in all the voluminous correspondence between Leo and Lucille (and many other family members), there is not a single reference (oblique or otherwise) to this lost ‘offspring’ (a tragic result if true). Only 73 years later is this supposed ‘miscarriage’ mentioned.

When one is truly immersed in a murder case, even decades after the fact, one can look at original documents with a new eye. For example, Ms. Alphin seems to have used some of the unpublished Pinkerton Reports generated by the NPCo.’s hiring of that detective agency. But Oney did so as well, and both report that two men in the factory, Ely Burdett and James Gresham, knew more than they were telling. These two indeed worked at the factory, but never testified; however, their names were actually Earl Burdett and James Graham. In a remarkable coincidence, their fathers were in the Forsyth Street building just minutes before Mary was killed.

I could go on…. It is claimed that the ADL was founded as a result of Leo’s lynching in 1915, but the newspaper backing up this assertion (illustrating the caption) is dated two years before, October 1913. Even then, the ADL did not state that it was established because of the crime, the trial, OR the lynching. Standard dates, such as the original Murder Indictment of May 24th (1913) and the lynching of Aug 17 (1915), are mangled and mis-cited.

The Jury had to confront many other details, some of which are omitted here. For example, Newt Lee had been told the day before (by Leo himself) to report early for his watchman’s duties on Saturday, 4pm instead of the usual 5. But when Newt dutifully appeared, on time and after confronting a locked door, Leo sent him away, telling him not to remain in the factory, and only come back at 6pm (an hour later than usual).

Having said all of this, can we surmise more accurately than those who came before us, what really happened on Confederate Memorial Day in 1913? Solicitor Dorsey would argue that it was a crime of passion, that Mary stood up for her Southern honor, and that Leo violently reacted to her refusal. Was that scenario indeed the truth? And was Dorsey (and others) driven mainly by anti-Semitism? Even Steven Hertzberg, author of a well-regarded history of the Jews of Atlanta, exculpates him from this charge. Tom Watson’s diatribes are mentioned and rightly excoriated, but Watson did not publish anything at all on the case until a year after the crime. And Jim Conley? Alphin makes him out to be a Machiavellian character, intelligent and articulate when he wanted, and folksy and charming at other times. Anyone who has studied the case for a while will surely acknowledge that Conley lied about several of his actions that day, but what was really being concealed? Did Jim bear a greater responsibility than he admitted, or was he instead the sole killer, lurking so close to his boss’ office? Why did Leo not permit cross-examination after his own long-courtroom Statement – under Georgia Law, since 1868 (Title VI), it WAS allowed (unsworn), IF the defendant agreed.

It is likely that the case will continue to be debated for a long time, even by anonymous reviewers. But those who argue it and present their best efforts on either side are encouraged to get the details right. First the facts, then the interpretations, not the other way around.

Moreover

It has been suggested (on the Internet, right here!) that in matters of accuracy, a publisher’s Fact-Checking Dept is much more valid that any Reviewer’s comments. Here are the relevant words:

“…the type of fact-checking that a publisher requires before releasing a book such as this, so I’ve got a lot more faith in the book’s sources than his (the Reviewer’s).”

Alas, anyone who works in publishing knows that proper “fact checking” is a lost art, and physical books are as prone to errors as the world wide web. Let us look then at some “facts” that the publisher of ‘An Unspeakable Crime’ has (presumably) verified:

On p. 59, the remarks of Wm Mincey are, shall we say, “misrepresented.” Rosser had claimed he would implicate Conley with a confession from the day of the crime, but Mincey never testified, and the author’s claim of “several women” to confirm it evaporated. So who were these women? The author doesn’t tell us. Even Leo’s lawyers realized that Mincey made it up and refused to put him under oath.

On p. 76, it is argued that Mrs Selig (Lucille’s mother) was ill and hence did not discuss the girl’s murder (at home, over the weekend). But Mrs Selig played Bridge and Poker on those 3 successive nights (for hours) and the illness was never mentioned or specified at the time. So what’s the source – only a lawyer’s convenient claim? And Lucille’s supposed pregnancy? That was only mentioned by a family member in 1998, some 85 years later. Does that make it true?

On p. 131, the author claims that the modern musical ‘Parade’ was written in the year 2000. Yet it opened on Broadway (in NYC) in 1998. Ah, but the Publisher must have checked… and yet the information is still wrong (by two years).

The book claims (on pp. 48 & 138) that Leo Frank was formally indicted for murder on May 23, 1913. But he was indicted on May 24th. So who is right? Guess.

The author states that Alonzo Mann died on March 19, 1985 – only off by a day – he died on March 18th. Is the author or publisher aware that Mann lied about his age (by a full year) when he enlisted in the US Army? I don’t think they bothered to check.

On p. 111, the author quotes a letter from Leo’s niece Eleanore Stern without commenting on how remarkable it must have been for a 3-year-old child to write it. No one checks birthdates any more?

On p. 120, the author even gets wrong the date of the lynching, claiming it occurred on the morning of August 16, 1915. Who was asleep at the switch? The correct date of Aug 17 is then given on p. 139. Teenagers must like to have a choice…

Why the author repeatedly calls Leo Frank “relatively poor” remains a mystery. He was the head of a factory that employed 170 people and was the highest paid man there ($150 per month).

There are three pages of Source Notes (at the back), but no formal footnoting whatever. As a result, we have on p. 49 the unsourced claim that Jim Conley was on the chain gang twice, and once for attempted armed robbery. But Conley’s court records were introduced at the Trial, and this is not supported. It would have been helpful for the reader to know where the author got her “facts.”

There are many other examples of this basic problem in the book, and they may even seem petty to some. But if a work tries to be fair and accurate, it demands the highest standards, for both young and old.

Even teenagers should learn, by example, how to do history right. And that includes being careful with sources, citations, and the use of scholarly material. We don’t want people to think (on p. 10), because of some presumed ‘fact checking department,’ that Mary Phagan was really born in Marietta, Georgia. Census records (and Phagan family documents) show clearly that she was born in Florence, Alabama.

This case can indeed be discussed at the dinner table, and on the Internet as well. But first comes the hard part: genuine historical research. Then we can make up our minds as to the likely culprit. First the facts, then the interpretations. However, I must say that it is wonderful to see youngsters still interested in the past.

“I never truly understood why Alonzo Mann’s belated statements (post-1982) were considered significant by anyone.”

This is a fine point to be sure. But Conley had testified that he moved the body (at Frank’s behest) inside the factory elevator, directly from the second floor to the basement. Alonzo claimed that he came upon Conley carrying the body while on the first floor, and visible to him when supposedly returning to the building.

It does seem rather odd that Conley would leave the front door open if he were truly carrying the body of a white girl – an invitation to sure disaster in 1913 Atlanta.

Alonzo claimed at the Trial that he had called Herbert Schiff’s home twice that morning to remind the missing paymaster to report to work. But Herb never came in and we are left with another small mystery – why did Schiff (who prided himself on his perfect attendance record) not come to work that Sat morning? He would insist at the Trial that he “overslept.”

Mann had only been working at the factory for three weeks when all of this occurred. By 1982, Alonzo was somewhat alone (and lonely), having lost his wife (recently) and losing his only son years before. We can merely speculate why he suddenly came forth with such an odd story, nearly 70 years later. After all, back in April 1913, he reported back to work on Monday the 28th when Conley was still employed. If he truly told his parents what he saw, why would they allow him to return to the premises where he had been (supposedly) threatened with death?

The solution to this crime is one that no one will want.

References:

Amazon.com, Unspeakable Crime Review

An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank
By Elaine Marie Alphin http://www.lernerbooks.com/anunspeakablecrime/. Retrieved February 2011.

-end

Other Thoughts

Though Steve Oney and Elaine Marie Alphin, quote a woman 70 years later who suggested Lucille was pregnant and miscarried circa December 1913, none of the voluminous letters written between Lucille and Leo hint at any pregnancy or miscarriage. Nor are there any condolences, or subtle mentioning of the fetal-tragedy, not even couched appear in these voluminous letters (Koenigsberg, 2010).

The Origin of the Mary Phagan Bite Mark Hoax:

To Number Our Days, Published in 1964 By self-proclaimed Zionist Pierre van Paassen. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-13633. 404 Pages.

Short Stand in Dixieland, Page 237:

Line 27: “The Jewish community of Atlanta at that time seemed to live under a cloud. Several years previously one of its members, Leo Frank, had been lynched as he was being transferred from the Fulton Tower Prison in Atlanta to Milledgeville for trial on a charge of having raped and murdered a little girl in his warehouse which stood right opposite the Constitution building. Many Jewish citizens who recalled the lynching were unanimous in assuring me that Frank was innocent of the crime.

I took reading all the evidence pro and con in the record department at the courthouse. Before long I came upon an envelope containing a sheaf of papers and a number of X-ray photographs showing teeth indentures. The murdered girl had been bitten on the left shoulder and neck before being strangled. But the X-ray photos of the teeth marks on her

To Number Our Days Page 238

body did not correspond with Leo Frank’s set of teeth of which several photos were included. If those photos had been published at the time of the murder, as they should have been, the lynching would probably not have taken place.

Though, as I said, the man died several years before, it was too late, I thought, to rehabilitate his memory and perhaps restore the good name of his family. I showed Clark Howell the evidence establishing Frank’s innocence and asked permission to run a series of articles dealing with the case and especially with the evidence just uncovered. Mr. Howell immediately concurred, but the most prominent Jewish lawyer in the city, Mr. Harry Alexander, whom I consulted with a view to have him present the evidence to the grand jury, demurred. He said Frank had not even been tried. Hence no new trial could be requested. Moreover, the Jewish community in its entirety still felt nervous about the incident. If I wrote the articles old resentments might be stirred up and, who knows some of the unknown lynchers might recognize themselves as participants in my description of the lynching. It was better, Mr. Alexander thought, to leave sleeping lions alone. Some local rabbis were drawn into the discussion and they actually pleaded with Clark Howell to stop me from reviving interest in the Frank case as this was bound to have evil repercussions on the Jewish community.

That someone had blabbed out of school became quite evident when I received a printed warning saying: “Lay off the Frank case if you want to keep healthy.” The unsigned warning was reinforced one night, or rather, early one morning when I was driving home. A large automobile drove up alongside of me and forced me into the track of a fast-moving streetcar coming from the opposite direction. My car was demolished, but I escaped without a scratch…. ”

To Number Our Days, Published in 1964 By self-proclaimed Zionist Pierre van Paassen. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-13633. 404 Pages.

Closing questions:

The Questions to Ask About An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank by Elaine Marie Alphin:

What do you call a book which makes warped and racist blood-libel smears against Southern European-Americans which can not be substantiated by any genuine and reliable evidence? What do you call a book which perpetuates century-old lies, half-baked rumors and cheesy hoaxes as the truth? What do you call a book that cherry picks and re-writes history, giving a dishonest version of a well documented murder trial?

References:

Amazon.com:
Amazon.com: An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank (9780822589440): Elaine Marie Alphin: Books Amazon.com: An Unspeakable Crime: The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank (9780822589440): Elaine Marie Alphin: Books

Elaine Marie Alphin Blog: http://elainealphin.blogspot.com/

In her book on the Leo Frank case, Elaine Marie Alphin perpetuates the 1964 Pierre van Paassen Mary Phagan Bitemark Hoax found in ‘To Number Our Days’ p. 237, 238:

http://www.leofrank.org/library/pier...assen-1964.pdf

The coroner, police, undertakers, physicians or other professionals who examined Mary Phagan’s body never reported bitemarks on her neck and shoulder. Nothing about bitemarks on Mary Phagan is mentioned in any of the three local newspapers (Journal, Constitution, Georgian), the coroner’s inquest, trial, appeals, Governor’s commutation hearing or anywhere else for that matter until a crackpot tabloid journalist propounded this fraud.

Errors and Corrections:

Please politely snail mail errors and corrections about, “An Unspeakable Crime, The Prosecution and Persecution of Leo Frank” to:

Elaine Marie Alphin
P.O. Box 11423
Bozeman, MT 59719

Update 2014, Frankite Author, Elaine Marie Alphin, died August 19, 2014.

Award-Winning Author Elaine Marie Alphin Dies at 58
http://www.slj.com/2014/08/obituary/...in-dies-at-58/

Elaine Marie Alphin (1955 – 2014) Obituary
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/boz...?pid=172482186
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #85
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

The Fulton County, Georgia, Coroner, Paul Donehoo’s Inquest for the Mary Phagan Murder Investigation, Wednesday, April 30, 1913 to Thursday, May 8, 1913

Leo Frank taken from the Tower to the Coroner’s Inquest, Atlanta, Georgian, Monday, May 5, 1913, on the left is Chief of Detectives Lanford and on the right (image cut out) is Chief Beavers
The procedural machinations of the official Mary Phagan murder investigation wasted no time in efforts regarding uncovering the material circumstances of the crime.

The Coroner’s Inquest

Presided over by the Fulton County Coroner Paul V. Donehoo were a half-petite jury of prominent men from the community, who opened the coroner’s inquest investigation on Wednesday morning, April 30, 1913.

The coroner’s inquest began shortly after nine o’clock after the jury was sworn under oath. The empaneled tribunal in total consisted of seven men (1 + 6), the coroner and six inquest jurymen: (1.) H. Ashford, foreman, (2.) Glenn Dewberry, (3.) J. Hood, (4.) C. Langford, (5.) John Miller, (6.) C. Sheats, (7.) Judge of the Inquest Jury, The Fulton County Coroner, Paul Donehoo.

Within the two cross-examination sessions of Leo Frank, he was very specific that he did not use the second floor bathroom ALL DAY when he testified under oath at the coroner’s inquest — not that he didn’t remember — but that he DID NOT USE the bathroom on April 26, 1913. He appeared to be distancing himself (verbally and mentally) from the bathroom area of the second floor, which was located in the metal room. There were no other bathrooms on the second floor of the National Pencil Company, except in the metal room (Defendent’s Exhibit 61). This was thought of as a throw-away detail until it became a link in the case.

Caught in a Lie: The Perjury of Lemmie A. Quinn

Lemmie QuinnA controversial new development occurred concerning Leo M. Frank’s murder timeline alibi about him never leaving his office on April 26, 1913, between noon and 12:45 p.m. Leo Frank said he had forgotten for the first week of the murder investigation to bring forward Lemmie A. Quinn, foreman of the metal room, a key witness at the coroner’s inquest and later at the Frank trial. He was criminally impeached during the appeals after the revelation that he was offering bribes to witnesses to change their stories. At the coroner’s inquest, Lemmie Quinn came forward to provide testimony that sounded contrived and did not pass the common sense test.

Quinn told the coroner’s inquest jury, he had went back to the pencil factory and specifically into Leo M. Frank’s office at 12:20 to 12:25 to talk about a baseball bet with Mr. Herbert George Schiff, but Schiff was not supposed to be at the factory at all that day because it was a state holiday and everyone was given the day off.

Herbert G. Schiff later prided himself at the Leo Frank trial for never missing a day of work in five years (BOE, Herbert Schiff, 1913) except once unintentionally during a disastrous flood. Leo Frank gave the false impression that Schiff missed work that day to support the Quinn appearance.

Several employees close to Leo Frank would later provide a cacophony of contradictory information about Schiff.

Herbert G. SchiffThe young Herbert G. Schiff became the superintendent at the NPCo after Leo Frank.
If Lemmie Quinn was at the NPCo factory on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913, at 12:20 p.m., asking Leo Frank, “Where is Herbert G. Schiff?” and intimating he had not come to work yet, the average person in 1913 was sarcastically asking why Herbert Schiff was NOT at work on a state holiday in the shuttered factory?

The coroner’s inquest jury saw right through it, and ostensibly the falsified testimony of Quinn was meant to shrink the plausible time Leo M. Frank would have to bludgeon, rape, and strangle Mary Phagan by fifteen minutes from formerly 12:02 p.m. to 12:35 p.m., to 12:02 p.m. to 12:19 p.m. However, the importance of Lemmie A. Quinn’s manufactured testimony was it added eyewitness testimony strength to Leo Frank’s alibi that he never left his office from at least noon to 12:35 p.m.

Lemmie Quinn’s perjury shrunk Leo M. Frank’s unaccounted time on that fateful Saturday, but it still left the time frame Mary Phagan arrived at Frank’s office wide open and unaccounted for.

Three Separate and Distinct Mary Phagan Arrival Times Would Later Become Four

According to Leo Frank:

1. Mary Phagan arrived in his second-floor business office at 12:03 p.m. on April 26, 1913–this information was given to detectives on Sunday, April 27, 1913, in Leo Frank’s office.

2. Mary Phagan arrived in his second-floor business office at “12:05 pm and 12:10 p.m., maybe 12:07 p.m.” according to Leo Frank in State’s Exhibit B, given to the police on Monday, April 28, 1913.

3. Mary Phagan arrived in his second-floor business office at 12:10 p.m. on April 26, 1913–Frank gave this information at the coroner’s inquest.

At the time of the coroner’s inquest, Leo Frank had provided three different times that Mary Phagan had arrived in his office.

Conclusion of the Coroner’s Inquest and Jury

Coroner Paul Donehoo and his inquest jury of six men empaneled, questioned over one hundred factory employees and dozens of other various associated people.

The coroner’s inquest combed through the factory to examine the layout and permutations of the murder.

The weeklong inquest and testimony provided under oath left strong suspicion directed upon Leo M. Frank when Thursday, May 8, 1913, the Mary Phagan Inquest drew to a close.

At 6:30 p.m., the jury went into executive session to hear the testimony of Dr. J. W. Hurt, county physician, on the what had happened to Mary Phagan shortly before her death and what was the likely cause. The doctor addressed the jury for twenty minutes.

Donehoo convened to hear the jury findings:

“We, the coroner’s jury, empaneled and sworn by Paul Donehoo, coroner of Fulton County, to inquire into the death of Mary Phagan, whose dead body now lies before us, after having heard the evidence of sworn witnesses, and the statement of Dr. J. W. Hurt, County Physician, find that the deceased came to her death from strangulation. We recommend that Leo M. Frank and Newt Lee be
held under charges of murder for further investigation by the Fulton County grand jury.

(signed)

Homer C. Ashford, Foreman
Dr. J. W. Hurt, County Physician”

Coroner and Inquest Jury Verdict: The Coroner Approved the Unanimous Finding of the Inquest Jury

The coroner and his inquest jury of six men together voted unanimously 7 to 0 recommending Leo M. Frank be bound over for murder and investigated further by a grand jury of twenty-three men, which ironically included four Jews.

Coroner Paul Donehoo ordered that Leo Frank be bound over for murder and Newt Lee was to be held as a material witness.

Still yet to be uncovered was who wrote the murder notes that appeared to be written by a Negro in Ebonics.

Police Delivered the News to Leo Frank and Newt Lee

Deputy Plennie Minor delivered the unanimous verdict of the coroner’s inquest jury to Leo M. Frank, who was being held in the infamous Atlanta Police Tower. Frank was sitting perusing a local daily newspaper, Atlanta Constitution, May 8, 1913, at the time at the time of the message. When Deputy Plennie Minor approached Leo M. Frank and told him about the unanimous verdict of the inquest jury, which had ordered that Frank be held for murder and for a more thorough investigation by the grand jury.

Newt Lee slumped his head dejectedly when the bad news was delivered to him. However, Leo Frank insolently replied that it was no more than he had expected and continued crackling away and folding the big sheets of his newspaper.

In total, more than two hundred witnesses, factory workers, and affiliates had been subpoenaed providing sworn testimony at the Inquest.

What stood out the most from all the inquest testimony was that Leo Frank specified he never went to the bathroom that day, and he held onto that position for 3.5 months until he made a startling revelation during his trial on August 18, 1913.

Left Detective John R. Black, on the Right Pinkerton Detective Harry K. Scott, Center Bottom Newton “Newt” Lee
One can’t help but wonder if the grand jury transcript was also purged in an effort to expunge some interesting testimony that led to the unanimous indictment of Leo Frank by twenty-one jurors, including four Jews.

The ace up Dorsey’s sleeve for the grand jury investigation, Monteen Stover.

NEXT: Leo Frank Grand Jury Indictment on Saturday, May 24, 1913.

References:

Atlanta Georgian Newspaper Coverage of the Mary Phagan Murder Investigation, Coroner’s Inquest Testimony of Leo Frank, May, 5, 8, 1913: http://leofrank.org/library/atlanta-georgian/.

The Frank Case (1913). The Inside Story of Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery. Atlanta Publishing Company, Atlanta, GA. The first book ever published on the Leo Frank case. http://leofrank.org/library/frank-case.pdf.

May 1, 1913, Mary Phagan and Leo Frank Coroner’s Inquest, Atlanta Constitution: http://www.leofrank.org/library/atla...may-1-1913.pdf.

May 9, 1913, Atlanta Constitution.

Atlanta Constitution, The Second Coroner’s Inquest Session,
http://www.leofrank.org/library/atla...may-9-1913.pdf.

Last Updated: May 8, 2012
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #86
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Biography of Lucille Selig Frank (1888 – 1957)
lucille-frank-photograph

Lucille Selig Frank

WHEN WE FIRST meet Lucille Selig Frank (pictured), she is attending the opera on April 26th, 1913 with her well-to-do friends and mother, Josephine — while, a few miles away, a young teenage girl lays freshly murdered in the factory directed by her husband, the soon-to-be-infamous Leo Max Frank.

Below we see page 17 of the program for that Metropolitan Opera Company performance in Atlanta, Georgia, the very same as would have been held in Lucille’s hands that day. On the left side is an advertisement for Jacob’s Pharmacy, selling boxes of chocolates from France named Le Triomphe de Perfection.

Had there indeed been a perfect triumph that day? A coup de grace? A sex strangulation and plotted double murder in the making; one dead little Christian white girl, with one — or possibly two — African-Americans to be hanged for the crime? Or was the whole world about to turn upside down for Leo and Lucille?

Opera1__Page_17_crop

As Professor Allen Koenigsberg puts it:

On Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26th, 1913, inside the palatial auditorium where the fourth annual season of the visiting New York City Metropolitan Grand Opera Company was coming to a close (NYC Metropolitan Grand Opera Programme, Atlanta, Georgia, April, 21 to 26, 1913), it was then and there, that fateful afternoon, at the last matinée of Lucia Di Lammermoor, where Frieda Hempel’s soulful voice was climbing hauntingly skyward, and while tears were showering down the eyes of Lucille Selig Frank, another script was playing out at a dingy four-story shuttered factory in the heart of downtown Atlanta. It was an event that would forever become an indelible part of U.S. legal history and mainstream popular culture. (The Leo Frank Case – open or closed?, 2013)
Jacobs' Pharmacy, Atlanta, Georgia

Jacobs’ Pharmacy, Atlanta, Georgia

That evening, hours after the girl — Mary Phagan — was dead, Leo, in fact, stopped by that very same Jacob’s Pharmacy and so thoughtfully bought his wife a box of these “French” chocolates (see State’s Exhibit B, April 28th 1913). Was it a mere coincidence, and an act of loving affection? Did Leo Frank actually have a jealous quarrel with his wife on the morning of the murder, as later alleged by Albert McKnight? Was Leo Frank attempting to assuage his guilt for what might have happened at his National Pencil Company beginning at 12:02 PM?

April 26 and its Aftermath:

The affidavits by Minola McKnight, the Franks’ Negro servant, and Albert McKnight (Minola’s husband), leave us asking: What really happened at the Selig residence (the Franks lived with Lucille’s parents) on the morning, afternoon, and evening of Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913? (See Albert McKnight Affidavit, 1913 and State’s Exhibit J, June 3rd 1913.) Did Leo Frank buy those chocolates to help renew the favor of his wife in a troubled marriage — a wife whose support he would soon need? Did the Franks offer money and gifts to Minola in return for silence on certain matters? Did Leo Frank ask for a gun in order to shoot himself because he had just killed a girl? Did Lucille say to her husband that she “would never live with him again”?
What remains of the affidavit of Albert McKnight

What remains of the affidavit of Albert McKnight

Before answering these questions, let’s take a closer look at the dramatis personae of this case:

Meet the Parents of Lucille Selig (Mrs. Leo M. Frank): a “Match Made in Heaven”?

Emil Selig and Josephine Cohen: In a coincidence of fate, both of Lucille’s parents were born on the same day and month, June 10th, but 13 years apart. Emil and Josephine had three daughters, Sarah Selig Marcus (1883 – 1957), Rosalind Selig Ursenbach (1884 – 1938), and Lucille Selig Frank (1888 – 1957).

Lucille Selig, an Atlanta native, was born in February of 1888, the youngest of three daughters, and her eldest sister was the only member of her immediate family bearing children. Sarah Selig Marcus and her German-Jewish immigrant husband Alexander E. Marcus (1873 – 1926) had two children, Harold and Alan, who, interestingly enough, years later revealed that Lucille wanted to be cremated and have her ashes spread at a park in Atlanta. Rosalind, who was married to Charles Ursenbach, a Christian Gentile, had a date with Leo Frank to see the baseball game on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913, in the early afternoon — but Leo Frank canceled the get-together at about 1:30 PM, before the game started, while seated in the dining room of the Selig residence. Leo Frank would later give two different reasons, at two separate times, as to why he canceled the appointment: 1) because he had too much work to do; and 2) because he was afraid of catching a cold due to the inclement weather.

Lucille’s Father: Emil

Lucille’s father Emil Selig (June 10, 1849 – March 30, 1914) was the oldest of the four sons of Samsohn Selig and Sara Loeb. Emil worked as a salesman for the West Disinfecting Co., a maker of soaps and industrial cleaning supplies. Before that, he was a liquor salesman. The modest two-story-plus-basement Selig residence, at 68 East Georgia Avenue, was not owned by Emil and Josephine, but rented. Emil died on March 30, 1914 without leaving a will, according to the records office in Atlanta (Koenigsberg, 2013). His widow and three married daughters were thus his heirs in the normal course of events. Emil Selig’s final resting place is in the Jewish section of historic Oakland Cemetery in Atlanta, Block 279, Lot 58, Grave 3. From the perspective of the viewer, his grave is located at the right-hand side of Josephine Cohen Selig, his beloved wife.

Lucille’s Mother: Josephine Cohen

Lucille’s mother was Mrs. Josephine Cohen Selig (June 10, 1862 – January 27, 1933), daughter of Jonas Loeb Cohen (1823 – 1885) and Regina Abraham Cohen (1839 – 1918). Lucille’s maternal grandfather, Levi Cohen, was a religious pioneer who helped found the first synagogue in Georgia. Josephine was like most married women of privilege from good families in the South; she was a pampered housewife with an African-American servant to help with the duties of the home. The Selig family home benefited from the employment of 20-year-old Magnolia “Minola” McKnight, who served as their daytime cook and maid for two years, from 1911 to 1913. Minola took care of the laundry, housecleaning, and cooking for the Seligs during her work days that usually began at 6:30 AM and ended at 6:30 PM, allowing Josephine and Lucille more time for family matters, socializing, playing cards, attending cultural events, and enjoying Jewish society life. After her death in 1933, Josephine was buried next to her beloved husband Emil.

Marian J. Frank and Otto Stern Marry in Brooklyn

In New York City in January, 1910, Leo Frank’s little sister Marian J. Frank became Marian J. Stern, after marrying Otto Stern. Stern was a Jewish immigrant who had come from Germany in 1898 and became successful in the cigar business. Leo Frank, being older by a couple of years than his sister, naturally felt the underlying social pressures of the time — and knew he was long overdue to marry. But Leo already had his own marriage plans underway by 1910: He was fortunate enough to have been introduced to Miss Lucille Selig shortly after he had relocated to Atlanta in August of 1908; he began seriously courting Lucille in 1909 and by 1910 they were engaged to be married.

Marriage for Life: In 1910, the Cultural Norm

Marriage was a completely different concept in the early 20th century compared to what it is today. Life expectancy was shorter, and longstanding traditions from antiquity established deeply-ingrained social norms that ensured that most people remained married for life — even if the marriages were unhappy or simply failed. Marital problems were often either “worked through” or swept under the rug — but rarely did people officially end their marriages. The stigma of embarrassment and shame attached to divorce was all too real. There were divorces in the early 20th century, but they were very few and far between in comparison to recent years.
Happier Times: 25-year-old Leo Frank, courting the 21-year-old Lucille Selig at Grant Park, Atlanta, Ga, July 17th, 1909. Exactly six years later to the day, while sleeping soundly on a prison dormitory cot at the State Penitentiary in Milledgeville, Georgia, Leo Frank would be "shanked" (one knife-thrust to his jugular) just before midnight. The weapon was a seven-inch butcher knife wielded by a fellow inmate, William Creen. Leo Frank barely survived the assault. One month later he was dead at the hands of a lynching party.

Happier times: 25-year-old Leo Frank, courting the 21-year-old Lucille Selig at Grant Park, Atlanta, Ga., July 17th, 1909. Exactly six years later to the day, while sleeping soundly on a prison dormitory cot at the State Penitentiary in Milledgeville, Georgia, Leo Frank would be “shanked” (one knife-thrust to his jugular) just before midnight. The weapon was a seven-inch butcher knife wielded by a fellow inmate, William Creen. Leo Frank barely survived the assault. One month later he was dead at the hands of a lynching party.

“Opposites Attract”: Miss Lucille Selig and Mr. Leo M. Frank

The marriage between Leo and Lucille appears to be more political and arranged than anything else. The marriage enabled an ambitious Leo Frank to position himself for ascending up through the ranks of Jewish social status and power in the New South.

If even a few of the allegations involving Frank’s sexual impropriety (that would come out at his trial and again afterward during appeals) — about what Frank was doing at the factory behind Lucille’s back — were true, then their marriage could not be described as happy by any stretch of the imagination. There was a veneer of happiness and proper social appearances, but under that veneer things were likely very different. Lucille was living inside the facade of a “fairytale marriage” with a husband who took her — and their marital vows — for granted, if the allegations of philandering turned out to be even partly true. But there are some clear indications she might have come to terms with these facts by 1954 — and perhaps years earlier. At least three years before she passed away.

Meet the Bride: Miss Lucille Selig

Lucille Selig Frank (February, 1888 – April 23, 1957) was very much different from Leo Max Frank (1884 – 1915). Lucille “Lucy” Selig was part of the socially active and highly assimilated German-Jewish community of Georgia. Somewhat overweight, what she lacked in looks she made up for in personality. She was considered very much Southern and “sassy.” Despite being from a well-to-do and prominent Jewish family, she was very provincial compared to Leo Frank. In fact, as any New Yorker will tell you, and Leo Frank was a New Yorker, everyone from outside of “the city” is to some extent provincial and unsophisticated.
Lucille on her way to her husband's trial in the summer of 1913; from 'The Frank Case', Atlanta Publishing Company, 1913, p 59.

Lucille on her way to her husband’s trial in the summer of 1913

Leo Frank: an Atypical Man

On April 27th, 1913, at 29 years of age, Leo Frank was not the typical boring engineer or gruff, intellectual manager one might have expected of a man who worked long days and 60-hour weeks, tabulating accounting sheets and wearing the many hats required to successfully operate a factory.

Despite his spidery appearance, he was reasonably physically fit after years of tennis and basketball at Cornell (1902-1906). To assert that he needed help carrying a dead body, as Jim Conley stated, is reasonable. But to claim that he hadn’t the strength to strangle an unconscious thirteen-year-old girl with a rope, as some polemicists have argued, is absurd.

In September, 1912, Leo Frank became the president of the elite 500-member Gate City Lodge of the Jewish fraternal order B’nai B’rith. Leo Frank was not the “nebbish” or “Nervous Nelly” often conjured up in descriptions of him by his partisans and critics alike. He was an odd-looking man, but was not especially petite or weak.

Leo Frank was a confident leader and active socialite at college, afterwards serving in high-ranking positions in Southern Jewish society life. Moreover, Frank was quite the “man’s man”: one who drank, smoked, partied, and, if the allegations are true, enjoyed a bit of philandering on the side whenever he so desired — even on the Sabbath.

Leo Frank was cosmopolitan, well traveled, and, in addition to English, could speak basic German, Hebrew, and Yiddish. To top it all off, Frank was educated to be part of the elite of industrial leaders: the well educated Ivy-Leaguer of privilege who had more than just the opportunity to study at Cornell, one of the best schools in the United States — but who also, after college, took an educational “sabbatical” overseas, being trained in Germany for his future work as factory head and part-owner.

lucille-selig-frank-1950The Odd Couple: Leo and Lucille

After her marriage, Lucille appeared to gain significant weight, perhaps due in no small part to the traditional Southern cooking of her family’s personal cook, Minola. Lucille was what the Yiddish-speakers of New York would call zaftig and what young people today might call “extra thick.” But she was said to wear her weight well for the most part, though her adoption of a very short haircut created an androgynous look. Her contemporary photos show a rather unflattering evolution before and during the Leo Frank trial, though in her much later years, long after Leo Frank’s death, she shed much of that weight — while, understandably, acquiring a hard, worn expression.

Some contemporary observers allege that Leo Frank got bored with Lucille early in the marriage. Frank’s factory was flooded with an ever-changing lineup of svelte former farm girls, working-class teenage child laborers who were blossoming much faster than their upper-class counterparts. These working class girls often matured physically ahead of their time, unlike the daughters of middle class and wealthy families, whose patriarchs could ensure their daughters wouldn’t have to give up school to work long hours in dingy mills and factories for a number of pennies an hour. Child laborers generally earned less than ten cents an hour during the early decades of the 20th century, some as little as one penny an hour.

Is Power the Ultimate Aphrodisiac?

Leo Frank’s critics emphasize his wily behavior and his attempts to sexually lure the young girls in his employ. But the reality was probably less one-sided than that, as any man in a position of status and rank can tell you: The law of power and attraction applies at all times and in all places — thus there was likely no shortage of willing participants in whatever sexual endeavors Leo Max Frank was inclined to explore.

Child Prostitution

And it was more than just the endless stream of poverty-stricken and blossoming, hormonal teenage girls funneling into the factory each day that provided inspiration. A simple phone call to Leo’s favorite madam, Nina Formby, could bring any number of illicit delights. Formby was a mamasan running a child brothel in Atlanta’s Red Light District on Mechanic Street, which was conveniently located only a few blocks north of Frank’s National Pencil Company factory. It is a sad fact of life that Frank, seated at the helm of his company, could order the new “catch of the day” whenever he so desired and have young teen and even pre-teen prostitutes delivered by foot to his office for lunch, or after work, or on Saturdays, and no one would notice any difference, since the factory was always brimming with young girls coming to and fro. Many of the girls who ended up in the child brothels of Atlanta had been former child laborers ground down in the industrial factories and mills of which the National Pencil Company was one. Some of these girls — like Daisy Hopkins, who was a former National Pencil Company employee — might have made that lifestyle decision by choice alone, but we may be sure a large number were entirely victims, and at a tragically early age. Prostitution of all kinds, including the White slave trade was an unfortunate part of the growing pains of late 19th century and early 20th century Atlanta, with politicians on the take, often looking the other way. Cosmetic efforts were often made to stem the tide of this illicit trade and its decline would not come until severe criminal penalties were put in place by the government.

Pioneering Family

The Selig family was active in Atlanta’s Jewish society life, philanthropy, and the Reform Synagogue of the Rabbi Dr. David Marx who often held temple services for the Hebrew Benevolent Congregation on Sunday (Koenigsberg, 2013) for the highly assimilated German-Jewish Community of the South, who identified as whites and embraced the white racial separatist cultural norms of the time. Indeed there was much intermarriage between Jews and White Gentiles during the Southern progressive era, and though Jews often employed Negroes, they considered interracial relationships abominable.

The Seligs were a notable family that had historically helped to establish religious culture for Southern Jewry. A pioneering member of the family created a successful chemical company (see below).

the-temple-jewish-synagogue-atlanta-georgia

By 1913, the Selig clan were amongst the most prominent and respected Jewish families in Atlanta, Georgia, not only because two generations earlier, in the middle to late 19th century, Levi Cohen, had participated in creating the first permanent synagogue in Atlanta, but because the Selig family was very devoted to Jewish cultural life on a spiritual level.

Mr. Simon Selig was the nephew of Emil and founded the Selig Chemical Company that later became one of the premier businesses in Atlanta involved in the “manufacture and sale of home-cleaning products (soaps, dispensers, disinfectants, and other cleaning agents), insecticides, and other consumer goods” (Pioneer Neon Supply Co., Artery web site, accessed 2012).

A Southern Belle Named Lucille Selig

Lucille was educated in Atlanta’s public school system. Lucille did not attend college once her education ended with the completion of high school (c. 1906), which was quite normal for both men and women of the period, especially women. It was not until the latter half of the 20th century that female enrollment at the university level surged upward.

Lucille was known to be quite clever, had a sharp and witty tongue, and was thought to be well-read. However, the most striking feature of Lucille Selig was the undivided loyalty she gave her husband during his complex two-year legal odyssey that came to its conclusion at the end of a rope on August 17, 1915.

Leo Frank’s Defenders On the Image of Lucille Selig:

Leo Frank partisans sometimes paint a two-dimensional picture of Lucille, portraying her as a woman who believed in the innocence of her husband from the inception of his travails — and until the end of her life. Lucille did become vocally indignant — throwing a tantrum and bursting into tears — when the prosecutor, Hugh Dorsey, insinuated at trial that her husband was philandering at the factory. At least publicly she refused to believe it. But something very unusual happened later to suggest she may have known the uncomfortable truth and wasn’t the oblivious housewife after all. Lucille was, without dispute, a fiercely loyal wife when all is said and done; and she might have been provincial — but she was not a naive Stepford wife.

There may have been a time, early on, when Lucille entirely refused to believe the accusations concerning Leo Frank’s marital unfaithfulness, although even that is far from certain: Her loyalty may have been more tribally- and practically-based than it was founded on a personal conviction of the heart. Whatever her former beliefs, 21st-century research has uncovered indications of her true attitude in her will of 1954, indicating her wish to be cremated, and her subsequent verbal instructions for the dispersal of her ashes — which specified that her remains not be interred next to Leo Frank’s.

The Notarized Last Will and Testament of Lucille Selig Frank Acquired

In 1954, three years before Lucille passed away, something very profound and emotionally liberating occurred that would forever be remembered as a defining moment in the life of this martyred figure. An unofficial document in the hands of Lucille was made legal and official. It was signed ‘Lucille S. Frank’, witnessed, notarized, and registered with the local government of Atlanta, Georgia — and that document from 1954 has survived to the early 21st century.

Unmistakable Implications

In Lucille’s short ‘Last Will and Testament’ notarized, registered, and currently present (2013) within the local government registry office of Atlanta, Lucille disbursed a number of her personal items — a few of which seem conspicuously absent from the list — to friends and family, but more importantly she specifically requested cremation. (Mrs. Lucille S. Frank, Signatory, The Last Will and Testament of Lucille Selig Frank, 1954, accessed 2012). What happened to Lucille and Leo’s wedding album? What happened to Leo’s wedding ring that he bequeathed to her during the last moments of his life?

From the perspective of the Jewish community, Lucille’s quiet yet controversial 1957 cremation was rather unusual. For a faithful, proud, and practicing Jewish woman from a prominent and historically significant Jewish family to go against the traditional practice of burial next to one’s deceased spouse — or at the very least requesting to have her ashes buried or spread near her husband — was distinctly odd.

Were her wishes, thus expressed, an honest and candid verdict against the innocence of Leo Frank? The very clear living request she gave to her family before she died (see statement of A. Marcus, Features, Oney, 2004), specifically asking them to spread her ashes in a local Atlanta park, meant clearly that Lucille did not want her ashes spread at the Mount Carmel Cemetery near her husband, hundreds of miles away, or buried there next to him. Did Lucille’s wishes speak volumes? Is Lucille even today speaking to us as the only jurywoman worthy enough to pass judgment, in a not-so-silent ballot?

The End of the Dog and Pony Show:

Widowed in 1915, Lucille Selig Frank was no ordinary “jurist peer” called to pass impartial judgment. She was much more intimate than that: She was the truly loyal wife of Leo Frank, a woman who stood by her husband unshakably and without absence through the whole humiliating ordeal, beginning two weeks after his arrest, including all his court appearances, and through every twist and turn of the defense’s strategy from 1913 to 1915 and beyond. That she could wish her remains to be placed far, far away from those of her late husband is a powerfully moving act. (It took Lucille two weeks to begin her stalwart defense of Leo, during which time she refused to even visit him in jail. Could this be a sign of the deep emotional turmoil his acts of infidelity and violence had caused?)

Lucille might not have known all the details about what happened at the National Pencil Company after twelve noon on April 26, 1913, but — if the June 3, 1913 affidavit of Magnolia McKnight, known as State’s Exhibit J, and the corroborating affidavit of Minola’s husband Albert, can be believed — she probably knew that Leo Frank had tried to seduce young Mary Phagan and had then killed her to protect his status and reputation. Imagine the magnitude of suppressed pain, grief, and suffering Lucille endured after learning from Leo’s own lips what really happened that fateful noon hour while she was at the Opera House. Imagine what it was like for the rest of her life having to publicly pretend otherwise. It’s certainly not a burden most people could fathom, much less endure.

Lucille was also very much involved in Leo Frank’s appeals. After his trial ended with a guilty verdict, another little girl came forward who claimed that Leo Frank had raped her, causing her to became pregnant; this little girl reported that after Leo Frank seduced her, he descended between her legs and sadistically plunged his teeth into the tenderest tissues adjacent to her vagina (Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records, 1913, 1914). The child was permanently scarified, not just physically, but mentally. She and Leo’s alleged child were whisked way to a Christian home in Ohio for unwed teen mothers, which was the normal course of events in those times and circumstances. There can be no denying that such revelations were impossible for Lucille to miss or ignore: She acted as stenographer and secretary for her husband, managing and organizing his appeals petitions between 1913 and 1915.

One Theory: Leo Frank’s Guilt Does Not Require Mary Phagan’s Innocence

Recently, some researchers have entertained the hitherto unthinkable possibility that Mary Phagan was willingly engaging in a tryst or series of trysts with Leo Frank before she was killed. Could this idea have occurred to Lucille and her circle of friends, and could it have figured in her attitude toward her husband and his defense?

If we accept Leo Frank’s guilt, as an increasing number of 21st century scholars do, Frank either coaxed Mary Phagan into the factory’s metal room — or together Leo and Mary had established a pre-planned meeting in the metal room at noon. Was there an affair between them? In 1913, both the prosecution and defense closed off that possible permutation. Such a controversial theory was culturally unthinkable for most people in 1913 Atlanta: a church-going 13-year-old girl in a Christian conservative society having an affair with a married Jewish man; even though, back in those days, girls were permitted to marry at 15, and such was not uncommon — as census records reveal (see: www.ancestry.com).

Though not proven, we can now finally entertain the theory that Mary Phagan had planned to meet for a tryst with Leo Frank — one that took a turn for the worse in the metal room. But why? It seems unlikely that Leo Frank had a prearranged meeting with a completely different girl that day (Jim Conley says Leo asked him to be a lookout) and would then assault Mary Phagan, when Frank was expected to go to lunch and then a ball game that day in the afternoon with his brother-in-law Charles Ursenbach.

In the prosecution’s 1913 theory of the case, it is obvious why Leo Frank had to kill Mary Phagan — to silence her and prevent her from telling the authorities and her family members what happened in the metal room. But why would Leo Frank kill Mary Phagan if they had a prearranged assignation? According to researcher Gail Gleason’s sub-variation of the prearranged assignation permutation, Mary Phagan might have backed out or changed her mind — causing Leo Frank, a man who could not take no for an answer, to possibly lash out violently (Gail Gleason, Leo Frank Case Yahoo Discussion Group, 2012). Or, I might ask, did Leo Frank insist on sex, when Mary’s interests had not gone so far? In Frank case scholar Allen Koenigsberg’s variation of the prearranged meeting theory there is a wide array of speculation: Was Mary pregnant? Did she want out of the relationship? Did she extort money or favors from Leo Frank? Had she threatened to tell his wife Lucille? (Koenigsberg, 2013). As we travel back down the time web of the imagination to 1913 Atlanta, we must be fearless. We must not quail at the idea that Frank is guilty, as do some Jewish interest groups — nor at the idea that Mary Phagan may have had an interest in her boss, as many Christian conservatives and Southerners consider unthinkable. What seems certain to me is that Lucille Frank considered all these possibilities.

leo-frank-interment-nycLucille Buries Leo Frank

After his death, Leo Frank was embalmed and returned in a pine box by train to Manhattan’s Penn Station and then by hearse to his family home at 152 Underhill Avenue, Brooklyn, NY, for a final open black casket service. His grave may be found at Mount Carmel Cemetery, Section 1, 83-45 Cypress Hills Street, Glendale NY 11385.

Lucille returned to Atlanta after her painful and cathartic sojourn to Brooklyn. In Georgia she was for a time part-owner of a dress shop and became sporadically active in the work of the Temple and other Jewish philanthropic institutions. Lucille Frank, perhaps in part due to her harrowing involvement in this grisly case, never remarried. She died at the age of 69 of heart disease, which one observer called “a metaphor for a broken heart, the heart of a woman who once genuinely loved her husband and may have still felt love for him when she died.” In the later years of her life, her weight management issues seemed to disappear, as one photo clearly shows. Perhaps her weight problems were related to a painfully dysfunctional marriage and, under the surface, Lucille had always been a beautiful woman in spirit.
Lucille Selig in mourning, Brooklyn, August 20, 1915

Lucille Selig in mourning, Brooklyn, August 20, 1915

Difficult Choices

Minola’s incredulous retraction of State’s Exhibit J at the Leo Frank trial suggests that Lucille knew the hardest imaginable truths about her husband. What could Lucille really do? The course she eventually took — after two weeks’ painful consideration — was likely the only option she really had, given the public loss of face, the destruction of her honor and the honor of her family and the Jewish community, that she confronted. Lucille did what any committed, loyal wife would do in this situation: stand by her husband, right or wrong, guilty or innocent — even if it meant a lifetime of cognitive dissonance and double-think.

Wives and Mothers

We can not hold a “black or white,” right or wrong, lens up to loyal mothers and wives who stand by their sons and husbands; we cannot judge them as though in a court of law. We must see what Lucille S. Frank did in the context of familial and Jewish group loyalty — and that is a context of subtle shades and variations of gray. The Leo Frank Case is very much about reading between the lines. Even if, deep down, such women know of their loved one’s guilt, their acts cannot be condemned. Lucille did what she had to do.

Even though cosmetically she had to put on the mask of pretense and appearance — pretending publicly her husband Leo Frank was not guilty of the murder, or of any infidelities — on some level it was probably difficult for Lucille to trick herself into not believing the nineteen employees who came forward and suggested Frank was a sexual predator and pedophile who engaged in numerous illicit assignations and who tacitly facilitated the assignations of others. Some witnesses stated Leo Frank was regularly whoring on the Sabbath and trying to “turnout” many young girls at the factory. If Lucille and Leo had an unsatisfying or almost nonexistent sex life, she knew of it, even if no one else did — and, if so, she probably suspected what happened on those days when her husband was “working late” at his factory or “working late on the weekends”.

Leo and Lucille Frank never had children and, except for one unsubstantiated rumor, there was no hint of any pregnancy. As 21st century dispassionate explorers we might speculate: Was she naturally sterile, or was Leo no longer interested, or both? If the rumors were true about Leo Frank seeking out daliances with Atlanta’s prostitutes, in an age where there were no antibiotics, could he have given his once-virgin wife one of the many commonly known STDs or the silent sterilizer Chlamydia? And surely what was most shaming is that there was evidence discovered in 1914, during Frank’s appeals, that he inseminated one of his former factory child laborers, a naive young teen who became pregnant and was shipped off to a home for unwed mothers in Ohio, something that — no matter how much she repressed it — would have mortified Lucille.
The Bijou Theater, Atlanta, Georgia -- ironically, adjacent to where Leo Frank Trial was held

The Bijou Theater, Atlanta, Georgia — ironically, adjacent to where Leo Frank Trial was held

Atmosphere of Permissiveness?

When a distraught Mr. Coleman went to the Bijou Theater on the fateful evening of April 26, 1913, desperately looking for his missing 13-year-old stepdaughter Mary Phagan, he stumbled upon National Pencil Company foreman Mr. N.V. Darley with Opie Dickerson, a teenage girl who worked at the factory. Their presence suggests an important question: What was an older married man with children, a high official at the factory and Leo Frank’s friend and associate, doing entertaining a young girl at the movies on a Saturday night? It added to the sense that there was a culture of social and sexual permissiveness at the National Pencil Company that by 1913 standards — and even by our own — was highly unacceptable.

An Unbearably Heavy Burden

What made Lucille a truly amazing wife is that she still stood by her husband during the whole ordeal, despite the embarrassing scandal and collateral damage to the National Pencil Company, the Selig Family, her friends, the B’nai B’rith, the Hebrew Benevolent Congregation, and the Jewish community as a whole. An intense focal point of shame caused by the notoriety of such a heinous murder was put indirectly upon Lucille. The accusation that a pattern of sexual harassment, and finally rape, preceded the strangulation of thirteen-year-old Mary Phagan must have affected Lucille deeply, whatever she believed in her heart about it, as did the evidence presented at the trial portraying Frank as a sexually aggressive rake “testing the waters” to see which girls in his employ might potentially be willing to engage in “extracurricular activities.” Also no doubt hurtful were the reports from the factory’s roustabout, Jim Conley, that Leo Frank was regularly cheating on his wife at the factory with Atlantan prostitutes on various Saturdays — and Conley’s recounting of two incidents in which he accidentally walked in on Leo Frank engaging in oral sex with two different Atlanta prostitutes at two different times.

All of this was a great deal to bear for Lucille — it would have been impossible for a lesser woman — despite the support she received from her family, friends, and associates.

The 1913 Pregnancy and Miscarriage of Lucille Selig Frank

Both Steve Oney (October 7, 2003) and Elaine Marie Alpin (March, 2010) suggest Lucille Frank was pregnant in 1913 and later miscarried. Oney (2003), in an oblique reference, claims:

“Seven decades later, Katie Butler, a former factory employee in her 80s, would tell her physician that she and Lucille were both pregnant during the early winter of 1913, but that Lucille had suffered a miscarriage.” (p. 85).

Presuming conjugal visits were not permitted, Oney’s inclusion suggests Lucille miscarried about seven to eight months into her pregnancy, since we must presume Leo inseminated Lucy before he was arrested at 11:30 AM on Tuesday, April 29, 1913.

Presuming conjugal visits were permitted — a vanishingly unlikely presumption for those times — and regardless of how far Lucille was along, there is no real evidence to suggest the pregnancy claim is true. It cannot be independently verified by any reliable sources and none of the voluminous surviving correspondence between Lucille and Leo, or their associates, makes even the slightest hints or subtle suggestions of a pregnancy, or condolences over a miscarriage. The surviving correspondence between Leo Frank and others during his imprisonment until Monday, August 16, 1915, is a massive series of letters that spans more than two years, the bulk of which is archived and preserved at several different university and public Jewish historical collections from Ohio (the American Jewish Archives), Massachusetts (Brandeis University), to Georgia (several institutions).
Mrs. Frank

Mrs. Frank

The Two Week Gap

After Leo Frank’s arrest on Tuesday morning, April 29, 1913, at 11:30 AM — his last day of freedom — his wife Lucille delayed an inordinate amount of time before visiting him. Lucille Selig Frank did not visit him in jail until Monday, May 12, 1913 (The Frank Case, Atlanta Publishing Company, 1913). Leo Frank’s detractors cited this 13-day visitation lapse as proof that his wife knew he was less than totally innocent. After the controversial June 3rd, 1913, Minola McKnight affair unfolded, in which the Selig’s cook and maid, dropped an insider’s bombshell at the Atlanta police station — saying Frank confessed to Lucille and asked her for a gun with which to commit suicide — that suspicion approached higher certainty. (see: Brief of Evidence, Minola McKnight’s, State’s Exhibit J, June 3 1913 and Albert McKnight’s Affidavit in the Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court records, 1913, 1914).

On August 18, 1913, between 2:15 PM and 6:00 PM, during Leo Frank’s statement to the Fulton County Superior Court, he would respond to this “dastardly” charge about why his wife did not visit him in the early weeks after the Mary Phagan murder investigation began. To paraphrase Frank, Lucille had to be physically restrained because she wanted so eagerly to be locked up with him in jail — but was ultimately deterred by Frank because he didn’t want her to be subjected to professional newspaper paparazzi. (Leo Frank’s Unsworn Trial Statement, Brief of Evidence, 1913). Leo Frank’s questionable response was borderline melodramatic and unconvincing, to his detractors, incredulous. For neutral observers Frank’s explanation was doubtful and cause for skepticism, it likely chipped away at Frank’s already waning credibility — because then or now, no determined couple in such circumstances, would be deterred by any phalanx of media photographers, no matter how galling, especially considering that Lucille showed no evidence of being camera-shy at any other time before or after his arrest.
Lucille's remains are buried here between

Lucille’s remains are buried here in an unmarked spot between her parents’ headstones.

The Stoic Wife was Human After All

In 2004, for a University of Georgia feature, author Steve Oney recollects an astonishing meeting he had in St. Petersburg on the west coast of Florida during the early 1990s, when he had the intriguing opportunity of meeting with the nephew of Lucille Selig Frank. Alan Marcus recalls being bounced on Lucille’s knee when he was a young boy. The importance of the meeting was that it finally revealed the unknown events in the aftermath of Lucille Selig Frank’s death in 1957.

Steve Oney Interviews Alan Marcus, Nephew of Lucille Selig

“I spent several hours up the road in St. Petersburg with Alan [Marcus] and Fanny Marcus, two Atlantans who’d retired to Florida. Alan was Lucille Frank’s nephew. He’d grown up at her knee and borne witness to the devastation that the lynching had wrought on her life and in the life of Atlanta’s Jewish community.

“Following Lucille’s death in 1957, her body was cremated. She wanted her ashes scattered in a public park, but an Atlanta ordinance forbade it. For the next six years, the ashes sat in a box at Patterson’s Funeral Home. One day, Alan received what for him was an upsetting call. The ashes needed to be disposed of. Alan didn’t know what to do.

“In the years since Lucille passed away, the Temple, the city’s reform synagogue, had been bombed [(October 12, 1958)]. This event had set Atlanta’s Jews on edge. It was no wonder that Alan [Marcus] didn’t want to attract scrutiny by conducting a public burial. For months, he carried Lucille’s remains around Atlanta in the trunk of his red Corvair. Early one morning in 1964, he and his brother drove downtown to Oakland Cemetery. There, under the cover of the gray dawn light, the two men buried this martyred figure in an unmarked plot between the headstones of her parents.” [emphasis added]

(Source: University of Georgia Features, Georgia Magazine, Steve Oney, March, 2004, http://www.uga.edu/gm/304/FeatOney.html)
The Frank-Stern family plot where Leo Frank is buried in Mount Carmel Cemetery in New York City. The grave set aside for Lucille Frank is empty.

The Frank-Stern family plot where Leo Frank is buried in Mount Carmel Cemetery in New York City. The grave set aside there for Lucille Frank is empty.

In New York City, there is an empty grave site — number one in the Frank-Stern family plot, next to Leo Frank’s grave — that was set aside for Lucille Frank (confirmed by Mount Carmel Cemetery records, 2013), but she chose not to be buried there. This has been a subject quietly avoided by most Leo Frank partisans. The empty grave site reserved for Lucille speaks to us in lonely whispers — and the silence from most writers on this subject is deafening. To account for the empty grave, there was a ghoulishly undocumented rumor proposed that the reason Lucille’s ashes were not buried or spread next to Leo Frank’s remains is because the stillborn baby of Marian Frank was buried there circa 1911 — but the state law of New York and the rules of Mount Carmel Cemetery require documentation of all burials of any kind with no exceptions. It is doubtful these rules were waived. Furthermore, there is no known reference to this alleged burial in all the prolific correspondence and records of Leo or Lucille.

In 2013, when this author asked the staff of the Mount Carmel Cemetery if there was any documentation, proof, or knowledge of a child — or anyone at all — buried in grave site number one, located to the left of Leo Frank’s grave site (number two), they reported that there is no one buried there, not even a stillborn baby (Live interview, Mount Carmel Cemetery staff and review of cemetery records, 2013).

Is empty grave site number one a time-traveling echo of truth about Leo Frank from the unfortunate woman, who, by a tragic twist of destiny’s many paths, submitted to matrimony with a book-smart and intelligent man, but lacking in common sense, one possessed with a penchant for sexual immorality and pedophilia? Are we to presume that Lucille Selig, who helped Leo Frank prepare his appeals petitions, overlooked the document from a former teenage factory employee who, the girl said, Leo Frank seduced one year before he murdered Mary Phagan — a document which also stated that Leo Frank traumatized the girl after he plunged his teeth deep into the innermost flesh adjacent to her vagina? Did she overlook the testimony that Leo Frank was caught with another little girl in the woods by a police officer Mr. House? Did she believe the bribed retractions of numerous witnesses to his profligacy? If the retractions were in fact procured with money as these witnesses deposed, did she know of it? (see: Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Documents, 1913, 1914)

Did Lucille Selig Die of a Broken Heart?

Lucille Selig Frank died in 1957, just three short days before the 44th anniversary of the April 26, 1913 Mary Phagan bludgeoning, rape and strangulation — and Leo Frank’s likely murder confession to her on that night so long ago. There were certainly other dates equally significant, if not more so, for Lucille. One can imagine her wedding anniversary (November 30) likely elicited happy memories — and deep-seated emotional distress. Given the public notoriety and traumatic depths of the whole 120-week ordeal between the date of the arrest of her husband days after the murder and Friday, August 20, 1915 — the burial of Leo in Queens, NY — it was likely numerous anniversary dates every year were constant and painful reminders during the more than four decades of quiet suffering this unfortunate woman experienced. Let us hope that, when she made the decision not to be buried beside her husband, the spirit of Lucille Frank finally became free — free of the lies and legal wrangling, free of the deception and tricks, and free of the torment she so stoically endured for decades.



* * *

APPENDIX

References and further reading:



Information and background on the Leo Frank case:

The Leo Frank Case – open or closed? Professor Koenigsberg’s Leo Frank Discussion Group.

Thomas Watson’s historical analysis of the case

The American Mercury‘s Bradford Huie analyzes the Leo Frank case

100 Reasons Leo Frank Is Guilty

The Aborted Apotheosis of Leo Frank, part 1

The Aborted Apotheosis of Leo Frank, part 2

References:

Atlanta Journal Wedding Announcement of Leo Frank and Lucille Selig, December 1, 1910. Atlanta Journal, Thursday, December 1, 1910, Wedding Announcements Society Pages: http://leofrank.org/library/wedding-...ber-1-1910.pdf

Professor Allen Koenigsberg, PhD, Brooklyn College, The Leo Frank Case Discussion Group, 2008+ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LeoFrankCase/ (sign up required).

The Temple, Atlanta, Georgia. http://www.the-temple.org/

National Park Service of Atlanta, http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/atlanta/text.htm. Accessed March 3, 2012.

Mount Carmel Cemetery (MCC), Grave Spot #1 (Official Real Estate location ID: 1-E-41-1035-01), Reserved for Lucille Selig Frank is empty, it is left of Leo M. Frank’s occupied Grave Spot #2 (Official Real Estate location ID: 1-E-41-1035-02). Staff office and records of the Mount Carmel Cemetery. Rachel Frank purchased the plot in 1911. No record of Marians still born child buried in the Frank-Stern plot, but the bench located at plot 7 is thought to be in remembrance for the deceased child. According to the administrator at MCC: Section 1, Block E, Path 41, Lot #1035, Grave #1 is empty based on official legal cemetery interment records, documented in writing on Cemetery letterhead.

The Notarized Last Will and Testament of Lucille Selig Frank (Signed Lucille S. Frank), Atlanta, GA, 1954, Records Archive.

And the Dead Shall Rise, by Steve Oney (recommended by the Leo Frank Research Library and Archive despite its errors, purchase on www.Amazon.com)

Georgia Upfront Features, ‘And the Dead Shall Rise’ by Steven Oney, (March 2004: Vol. 83, No. 2): http://www.uga.edu/gm/304/FeatOney.html

Emil Selig Memorial at “Find a Grave”: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg...&GRid=32045801

Leo Frank Research Library and Archive Memorial for Lucille Selig Every Year:

Three days before Mary Phagan's death every anniversary on April 26 is April 23, remember Lucille Selig, this martyred figure, as Steven Oney described her. She got mixed up with the wrong man who became her husband.

Lucille was very much like the little angel statue between her parents’ tombstones (above) at the Oakland Cemetery in Atlanta — the one resting over her buried ashes.

Sleep dear Lucille Selig, sleep well, you will never be forgotten. Rest in Peace, dear soul…

Further Reading:

Pioneer Neon Company: http://www.artery.org/Selig-PioneerNeon.htm

The Selig Company Building – Pioneer Neon Company

National Register listed: 1996

Location: 330-346 Marietta Street, Atlanta, Fulton County, GA 30303

Georgia Magazine, Upfront, March 2004: Vol. 83, No. 2, Feat Oney (2004), Features, WWW.UGA.EDU

Source: http://www.uga.edu/gm/304/FeatOney.html
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #87
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Magnolia “Minola” McKnight, State’s Exhibit J, June, 3rd 1913, Leo Frank Admission Amounting to an alleged Murder Confession

Meet the Selig Household Servant: Chapter Entitled “The Black Magnolia”

Another shocking crescendo occurred within five weeks of the three-month long Mary Phagan murder investigation and pretrial discovery.

After the police were tipped off with what amounted to second, third, and fourth hand reports about the Negro Albert McKnight concerning alleged conversations revealed to him by his common-law wife, the Negress Magnolia “Minola” McKnight. So the Atlanta police honed in on Minola, arrested her, and received some earth-shattering insights about what was said in the privacy of the Selig household on Saturday, April 26, 1913, and afterward. It would prove to be another major blow for the Leo Frank defense and bring shame upon the Selig family and Jewish community.

Apparently, Minola McKnight had told her common-law husband, Albert McKnight, about dialogue that occurred before in private at the Selig’s place. The conversation occurred between Minola McKnight and her employer’s daughter Lucille Selig Frank, the wife of Leo Frank, and second, McKnight overheard what sounded like concerned discussions between various extended Selig family members and friends about Leo Frank and the murder of Mary Phagan.

Minola’s allegations amounted to the claim that essentially the whole Selig family knew approximately “what really had happened” after-the-fact on that infamous Saturday, April 26, 1913, and they talked about it amongst themselves and around the dinner table while feasting on Minola’s superb down-home Southern Negro cooking.

The Ultimate Source

It revealed that Frank might have made the murder revelation to his wife Lucille Selig Frank, on the late Saturday evening, April 26, 1913, at about 10:30 p.m. It became the second of Leo’s three total known alleged “murder confessions” inside the official record of the brief of evidence (BOE, July 28 to August 26, 1913). The fourth alleged murder confession is located outside the official record, when one considers the Atlanta Constitution, March 9, 1914 (http://www.leofrank.org/library/atla...mar-9-1914.pdf) sustains the third Leo Frank murder confession, and as a result, all four of them would become real.

Four alleged Murder Confessions Should Determine the Outcome for the Guilt or Innocence Equation of Leo Frank and Provide the Solution to the Mary Phagan Cold Case Murder Mystery

On June 2, detectives requested Minola McKnight come down to the Atlanta police station to determine the veracity of Albert McKnight’s statements he alleged while at work. Albert McKnight would make a number of affidavits concerning these specific events, but they are rarely ever discussed with any depth in the literature concerning the Leo Frank affair, which is a trifle odd considering they resulted in one of the biggest controversies during the investigation into the Mary Phagan murder mystery.

The Albert and Minola McKnight affidavits are in the Leo M. Frank Georgia Supreme Court Case File (1913 to 1915). Albert McKnight would later be caught up in a forged affidavit scandal during the appeals when the Leo Frank defense tricked him into signing something he didn’t agree with (Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records, 1914).

On arrival at police headquarters, Minola was immediately brought into the interrogation room. Unbeknownst to her, she was in for a long round of questioning and given the good old-fashioned “third degree,” also known as the art of “good cop and bad (asshole) cop.” It’s a crude method, but one brutally effective method of information extraction and wearing people down physically, mentally, and spiritually.

The third degree is a tactic perfected over the centuries and generations and still in use today. Outside the United States, waterboarding has been determined to be the most efficient information extraction technique, but there is a controversy over the veracity of tortured evidence. Had they used waterboarding on Leo M. Frank and Jim Conley, perhaps the web of lies would have been ripped away and the truth of the events in the metal room on Confederate Memorial Day would finally be revealed.

Though the Atlanta police were not as sophisticated as they are today, back in the days of the early 20th century, especially in the South, police had greater freedom and were not restricted by the rules, regulations, and bureaucracies within bureaucracies about what they could and could not do behind closed doors during interrogation. And though it is not politically correct to say this, most police will secretly admit (after looking left and right to see who is watching), of all the races, African-Americans are the easiest to mentally break down, but Conley lasted three weeks!

Though it was early on, the Negress Minola McKnight was a tough nut to crack, but the house always wins (usually). At the time of her arrest, she exploded into hysterics, shouting out flamboyantly about her own innocence regarding the murder of Mary Phagan, but she was never a murder suspect.

When police couldn’t “break her” right away, they had another technique within the “plethora of tools” within their historical arsenal. The technique of caged discomfort usually works wonders at getting people to “sing,” so at the behest of investigators and the Solicitor General, they detained Minola on “suspicion,” locking her up in solitary confinement against the righteous tenets of our Constitutional habeas corpus rights.

Marinate the Black Magnolia

The marinating of Magnolia “Minola” McKnight overnight in the dungeon-like “cooler” of solitary confinement, thus making the poor Negress sleep overnight in jail, worked wonders, and when the morning sun peaked just above the horizon, she was ready to sing like a bird, sing it loud, like at a charismatic Baptist church, telling all the morbid details of direct conversations and hearsay that secretly occurred in the Selig home at 68 East Georgia Ave., Atlanta, GA.

The police stenographer, Mr. February, and Minola McKnight’s lawyer, Mr. Gordon, were fully present and conscious to witness her signature, but Mr. Gordon had to wait just outside the room while she was being interrogated. There have been long held claims that the testimony was coerced from Minola McKnight, but what stood out of the affidavit were several sustaining factors.

1. Leo Frank was drunk on the evening of the murder.
2. Leo Frank confessed the murder to his wife.
3. Whom was Leo Frank saving his kisses for?
4. Why did Leo Frank so thoughtfully buy his wife a box of chocolates at Jacob’s Pharmacy at 6:30 p.m.?
5. Leo Frank was suicidal on the night of the murder, asking for his pistol to kill himself.
6. Leo Frank may have shown remorse to his wife about the murder.

June 3, 1913: When Another Breakthrough in the Mary Phagan Murder Investigation Unraveled

Magnolia McKnight was the high-yellow African-American personal cook and light household cleaner at the rented Selig residence of Leo Max Frank, Lucille Selig Frank, Emil Selig, and Josephine Cohen Selig.

While police were taking Minola’s deposition, she verbalized and signed an irrevocably damaging statement on June 3, 1913, one she would later deny.

The McKnight affair would amount to revealing the second known Leo Frank alleged "murder confession" out of the three alleged "confessions" that are known of historically from the surviving legal documents within the Brief of Evidence, 1913 (BOE, 1913), but what about the fourth alleged Leo Frank murder confession?

The fourth Leo Frank murder confession would sustain Minola McKnight’s affidavit.

The Four Leo Frank Alleged Murder Confessions: Two Private on April 26, 1913, and One Public at the Trial on August 18, 1913, and One in the Newspaper March 9, 1914

1.Leo Frank alleged murder confession number one was made privately to James Conley at the National Pencil Company on the afternoon of April 26, 1913 (Affidavits of James “Jim” Conley, May 1913 and Jim Conley, trial testimony, Fulton County Superior Court, August 1913).

2. Leo Frank made his second alleged murder confession in private to Lucille Selig Frank in the second-floor bedroom of the Selig home on the evening of Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday April 26, 1913 (Minola McKnight, June 3, 1913, States Exhibit J). This alleged confession was corroborated by Lucille’s 1954 cremation request and hence the reason why when she passed away April 23, 1957, the unoccupied grave plot #1 reserved for Lucy S. Frank remained empty in the Mount Carmel Cemetery. Mount Carmel Cemetery, plot #1 is immediately adjacent to Leo Frank’s (April 17, 1884, to August 17, 1915) occupied grave plot #2 as of his burial date August 20, 1913).

3. The most shocking Leo Frank alleged murder confession was his third one -- really incriminating statements -- made publicly at the Leo Frank Trial in the Fulton County Superior Court after he mounted the witness chair on August 18, 1913. Leo Frank told the jury he had unconsciously gone to the only bathroom existing on the second floor, within the metal room in the rear of that floor. This shocking revelation by Leo Frank was to account for the time Monteen Stover had indisputably said his office was empty between the entire time of 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m. on April 26, 1913. The defense disputed Monteen Stover’s testimony, and thus Leo Frank’s Monday, April 28, 1913, State’s Exhibit B became inescapably incriminating when juxtaposed against his Monday, August 18, 1913, trial statement to counter Stover. Leo Frank made the most incriminating statements during the Phagan murder investigation and at his own trial.

Tuesday, June 3, 1913: State’s Exhibit J, an Earth-Shattering Bombshell

There were several major revelations incriminating Leo Frank during the murder investigation of Mary Phagan, but of them all State’s Exhibit J was mind-blowing. The bombshells were not directly from Leo Frank per say, but from other eyewitnesses close to him, and these second, third, and fourth hand reports should not to be confused with Frank’s numerous foot-in-mouth blunders he made during the course of the Mary Phagan murder investigation and trial.

For this purpose, we have separated bombshells and blunders, despite the fact they are virtually equal.

The Bombshells

Monteen Stover came back to the pencil factory with her stepmother to get her paycheck after a failed attempt on April 26, 1913.

1. The first major bombshell was the revelation of Monteen Stover: she had failed in her attempt to get her pay envelope in Leo Frank’s second-floor business office, waiting from 12:05 p.m. through 12:10 p.m. on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913.

Armed with this knowledge from Monteen Stover, police officer Black and Pinkerton Detective Harry Scott approached the cell of Leo Frank and asked him if he had been in his office every minute from noon to 12:35, and Frank said yes. Then and there, the statement of Monteen Stover had become a nuclear bombshell, because Leo Frank had just blundered by opening his mouth (he should have requested his lawyer present first). Frank had just created a point of contention and contradiction that was potentially inescapable. It also meant that Leo Frank possibly had lied about his own whereabouts and that of Mary Phagan that infamous afternoon between 12:05 and 12:10 p.m. Was there a sign of cooperation? And if so what went wrong? Was Mary Phagan coaxed back there or did they have prearranged meeting? Travel down all the possible permutations of the time web.

2. The second major bombshell dropped was when Jim Conley, after three affidavits, decided to cut all the pretenses and most of the bullshit and finally spill the beans about approximately what happened on that afternoon. Three days of thunderous cross-examination from two of the best lawyers money could buy in Georgia, Luther Zeigler Rosser and Reuben Rose Arnold, failed to shake or break the account of Jim Conley.

Not exactly — Jim Conley got the hiding in the wardrobe testimony crossed up, when it was an hour earlier. What was Jim Conley trying to block out that might have occurred during the real time segment between noon and 1:00 p.m.? One can only shudder at what Jim Conley fell asleep to after he heard Mary Phagan’s scream and Monteen Stover leave. Was there connivance?

3. The third major bombshell was Minola McKnight’s account of what was said in the Frank-Selig household…

The Dirty Devil Is in the Delicious Details

State’s Exhibit J was captured by a sworn and official stenographer in the police station house and witnessed by detectives, Hugh Dorsey, and Magnolia “Minola” McKnight’s lawyer named Mr. Gordon. It was a bombshell for the defense, and Steve Oney would make the vivid suggestion that in a Godzilla-like fashion Minola ripped the roof from the Selig-Frank household and provided a secondhand fill in the gaps, approximate loose snap shot of what went on behind closed doors after the twilight hours of Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913, and the days that followed thereafter – without the juiciest details.

There in the Leo-Frank-Lucille-Selig marital bedchamber unmistakable and harrowing intimations were made sometime between the time Frank arrived at home at just before 6:30 p.m. until his “bedtime” at 10:30 p.m. There in the privacy of their bedroom, Leo Frank revealed he was not a total sociopath, because through his words and demeanor, he expressed remorse and guilt over something he wished he had not done, but was now in a “world of shit” to borrow the words of private “Gomer Pyle” from the movie Full Metal Jacket (1987).



Leo tossed and turned all night long and did not sleep well, despite being drunk and perhaps coming off drugs. Aside from being hung over the next morning, he probably barely slept four to six hours when the police woke him up the following morning at 7:00 a.m. It also helped to explain why a stone cold drunk Leo Frank said he dreamed of the phone ringing downstairs in the dining room at 3:30 a.m. It was no dream; it was Newt Lee at 37-41 Forsyth Street, Atlanta, GA, spending a full eight minutes ringing the phone off the hook of his boss, trying hard to reach him, and Newt Lee was not the only person who rang Leo Frank’s phone. It was also the police, but the superintendent of the National Pencil Co. was drunk as a skunk and could have possibly asked people not to answer the obnoxious phone or simply put it off the hook.

A Little Red Flag

After failing to reach Frank, the police, in reflection upon that event, would raise a little red flag against Leo Frank because everyone else they tried to reach on the phone answered. Another interesting point is the phone at the Selig residence was in the dining room downstairs. While Leo could barely sleep upstairs in his second-floor bedroom over the dining room with his wife sleeping on the rug, snuggling in fetal position with a quilt, they both surely could hear the phone ring, especially Lucille, whose head rested almost next to the floor. Even with her head on a pillow, she likely could have heard it ringing if it were not put off the hook.

Lucille was the first to wake up on the morning of April 27, 1913, and when the doorbell rang at the Frank-Selig home, she answered. Though Leo Frank had finally answered the phone before the police arrived, when he came downstairs half-naked and put on his dress shirt, he fumbled and butterfingered with his collar and tie, and began asking rapid-fire questions before the police could even get a chance to answer. And then Leo Frank denied knowing Mary Phagan from that day forward.

Magnolia Released from the Police, Tuesday, June 3, 1913

Within twenty-four hours of making her irreversibly damaging testimony, Minola McKnight would throw that incensed attitude in that uniquely colorful African-American style, with her lips puckered, the left hand made into a prone fist buried deep in her hip; her right hand’s fingers were popping and snapping in giant Z patterns, all whilst her head began sliding horizontally side to side across the lateral width of her shoulders, without her head ever changing its plumb angle. You could balance a glass of water on the top of her head without it tipping over, despite it sliding side to side.

I Aen’t No Snitch, Niga Step Off!

After being released from the police station, Magnolia changed her tune faster than Leo Frank could wink his left eye. She began back peddling at a furious pace and attempted afterward to recant the affidavit she just made. As a free woman again, Minola knew she was in a grave situation after betraying the family that loved her as one of their own. She began, in the presence of a newspaper reporter, within barely a day of her release, saying that the statement wasn’t true. It was a little too late, and no one was buying her denials. Nine days after that whole debacle, an “unknown” knife-wielding assailant would slash Minola’s face wide open. Though the shanker was never caught, Minola knew the score and couldn’t do a damn thing or even peep a word about it.

Black-Jewish Relations

In terms of Black-Jewish relations, Minola would learn a powerful lesson as a black woman, working for a prominent white Jewish household of wealth and privilege. Very simply put, you don’t betray your loyalty by opening your mouth in a harmful way about private family matters, especially against the well-connected, successful, and respected Selig-Frank clan, a family amongst the highest echelons of Atlanta’s Jewish aristocracy, philanthropy, and society.

Life was really cheap in 1913 Atlanta, and Minola was lucky she got off easy with her face cut up and that she didn’t disappear into the bottom of a boggy swamp with the catfish at the far outskirts of greater Atlanta. Back in those days they wouldn’t have wasted a single drop of sweat from a bloodhound dogs brow looking for a lost black woman, especially a cook a decade and thirty pounds away from becoming the stereotypical uniform-clad black mammy busy body engaging in jibber jabber and gup. In fact, if Minola had gone missing, no one would have batted an eyelash for her because the value of a Negress, as they called African-American women at the time, was a dime a dozen. Nonetheless, despite her perceived value as a Negress in a White Separatist South, the police and prosecution gave her full credibility to the letter of her affidavit, because something about her words rang true, and her husband Albert McKnight was willing to corroborate the statements.

Unbeknownst to Magnolia at the time, police and detectives would feel she was telling the truth, because Minola’s statement tended to corroborate some of the peripheral facts and observations connected with the two police officers who went to Leo Frank’s house on the morning of Sunday, April 27, 1913. One of them being, Leo Frank was drunk.

April 27, 1913, 7:00 a.m.

On April 27, 1913, when Atlanta police arrived at the Selig-Frank household at 68 East Georgia Avenue, they noticed Leo Frank looked like he was badly hungover and made some sarcastic, condescending comments to Leo’s wife, Mrs. Lucille Selig Frank, asking her if she had any whiskey for them. Lucy Frank was sharp enough on her feet to understand the substance of the suggestion, so she responded by deflecting the truthful insinuation against her husband. Lucille played it off by saying that her father Papa Emil Selig drank it all, but in truth, Leo Max Frank had guzzled the liquor closet down until it was bone dry the night before. He also chain-smoked his throat hoarse.

The police recalled that on Sunday morning, April 27, 1913, Leo Frank was ghostly Pale, shaking, fumbling with his collar, asking questions much faster than they could answer, and his voice was very hoarse. There was something weird about him that morning, and the richness of the details about what went on secretly in the household according to Minola McKnight’s damaging statement took on a life of its own, creating added circumstantial evidence against Leo Frank. And to compound the controversy further, Minola later denied her deposition.

Meet Albert McKnight

From the Jewish perspective, the original instigator of this irreparable episode of betrayal was Magnolia’s husband Albert McKnight, who should have kept his mouth shut about what his gossipy wife told him. He would later get a righteous Southern ass whooping, an unfortunate byproduct of informing on the prominent Selig-Frank household to the police. The beating Albert received was collateral damage in a Jewish-Black conflict and a result of a family-employee affair involving his wife.

It was unwritten, but Albert McKnight was beaten within inches of his life by an “unknown party” for tipping off the police about what his wife Minola had told him, breaking confidence. Albert spoke to detectives about the specifics of direct private conversations his wife participated in with Lucy Selig Frank and others she had overheard within the privacy of the Selig-Frank household.

Your Services Are No Longer Needed, Magnolia

Minola’s daily cooking, light cleaning, and in-house laundry services would no longer be required as the end of the summer of 1913 rolled around. At the time of her dismissal, she had served her usefulness at the trial, repudiating her sworn statement to the police, but the debacle she created could not be undone.

Just Before the Fast-Approaching Leo Frank Trial, Which Was Just Around the Corner–Stomachs Were in Knots

Before the murder trial, Minola McKnight would have been “dressed down”; she was most certainly spoken with and knew the score after her slashing by an unknown assailant. She would hold fast for the Selig-Frank family, testifying for the defense during the trial, denying the affidavit she had made to the police in the presence of her lawyer Mr. Gordon. However, no one was really buying her repudiation because it fit too well with the rest of the circumstantial evidence. There were too many other extenuating circumstances, like the heavy drinking that tended to link Leo Frank to the crime and corroborate Minola’s “State’s Exhibit J.” Sometimes in life, there are things you simply cannot undo or unsay, no matter how much indignant barking, back peddling, and denying you do.

Words You Can’t Eat

When all things were considered, because the affidavit of Minola McKnight (State’s Exhibit J) amounted to a secondhand Leo Frank alleged murder confession and an acknowledgment of his guilt by the Selig family, it created strong circumstances against Frank. Two more alleged Leo Frank murder confessions would surface at the trial: one revealed to the jury by Jim Conley on August 4, 1913 under examination and the other, a most shocking alleged murder confession given by Leo Frank himself on August 18, 1913. With careful consideration, looking back, it was impossible for most neutral observers to take the repudiation of Minola’s State’s Exhibit J seriously.

Insincerity

Another reason no one really believed Minola’s recanting at the trial was because the recanting came off as weak, contrived, loping, and half-insincere–her stated reason for giving the statement came off more like regrets than it was “tortured” out of her:

MINOLA McKNIGHT (c[olored]), sworn for the Defendant.

I work for Mrs. Selig. I cook for her. Mr. and Mrs. Frank live with Mr. and Mrs. Selig. His wife is Mrs. Selig’s daughter. I cooked breakfast for the family on April 26th. Mr. Frank finished breakfast a little after seven o’clock. Mr. Frank came to dinner about 20 minutes after one that day. That was not the dinner hour, but Mrs. Frank and Mrs. Selig were going off on the two o’clock car. They were already eating when Mr. Frank came in. My husband, Albert McKnight, wasn’t in the kitchen that day between one and two o’clock at all. Standing in the kitchen door you can not see the mirror in the dining room. If you move up to the north end of the kitchen where you can see the mirror, you can’t see the dining room table. My husband wasn’t there all that day.

Mr. Frank left that day sometime after two o’clock. I next saw him at half past six at supper. I left about eight o’clock. Mr. Frank was still at home when I left. He took supper with the rest of the family. After this happened the detectives came out and arrested me and took me to Mr. Dorsey’s office, where Mr. Dorsey, my husband and another man were there. I was working at the Selig’s when they come and got me. They tried to get me to say that Mr. Frank would not allow his wife to sleep that night and that he told her to get up and get his gun and let him kill himself, and that he made her get out of bed. They had my husband there to bulldoze me, claiming that I had told him that. I had never told him anything of the kind. I told them right there in Mr. Dorsey’s office that it was a lie. Then they carried me down to the station house in the patrol wagon. They came to me for another statement about half past eleven or twelve o’clock that night and made me sign something before they turned me loose, but it wasn’t true. I signed it to get out of jail, because they said they would not let me out. It was all written out for me before they made me sign it.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I signed that statement (State’s Exhibit ” J “), but I didn’t tell you some of the things you got in there. I didn’t say he left home about three o’clock. I said somewhere about two. I did not say he was not there at one o’clock. Mr. Graves and Mr. Pickett, of Beck & Gregg Hardware Co., came down to see me. A detective took me to your (Mr. Dorsey’s) office. My husband was there and told me that I had told him certain things. Yes, I denied it. Yes, I wept and cried and stuck to it. When they first brought me out of jail, they said they did not want anything else but the truth, then they said I had to tell a lot of lies and I told them I would not do it. That man sitting right there (pointing to Mr. Campbell) and a whole lot of men wanted me to tell lies. They wanted me to witness to what my husband was saying. My husband tried to get me to tell lies. They made me sign that statement, but it was a lie. If Mr. Frank didn’t eat any dinner that day I ain’t sitting in this chair. Mrs. Selig never gave me no money. The statement that I signed is not the truth. They told me if I didn’t sign it they were going to keep me locked up. That man there (indicating) and that man made me sign it. Mr. Graves and Mr. Pickett made me sign it. They did not give me any more money after this thing happened. One week I was paid two weeks’ wages.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

None of the things in that statement is true. It’s all a lie. My wages never have been raised since this thing happened. They did not tell me to keep quiet. They always told me to tell the truth and it couldn’t hurt (Brief of Evidence).

Minola had her unwanted fifteen minutes of fame, and she would disappear from the limelight into the silent gray of history, behind the stage curtain of the “Leo Frank Greek tragedy.” And she would not make another debut, neither to be seen or heard of again in the three major local newspapers, but her life with husband Albert McKnight went on just the same…

Chocolate Surprise

Rarely ever discussed or adequately answered is who was the girl Leo Frank was saving his kisses for?

Perhaps Mary Phagan some contend, or had Leo Frank planned on a little light whoring in the later afternoon of the Sabbath? And the thoughtful box of chocolates Leo Frank offered Lucy Selig Frank to assuage his guilt was not missed. Some have suggested that if indeed Leo was saving his kisses for Mary Phagan, perhaps there was more than meets the eye to this case. Was there signs of cooperation? Why was she alone in a shuttered factory with Leo Frank in the metal room at the back of the second floor? What caused Leo Frank’s right fist to drop like a bucket of bricks on Mary Phagan’s left eye? Was Phagan the paragon of Southern womanhood defending her honor, or was a meeting intended for the metal room at noon? The narrowness of the timeline suggests there certainly could have been other intrigues and permutations at play in the background of this case.

STATE OF GEORGIA, County of Fulton

Personally appeared before me, a notary public. In and for the above state and county. Minola McKnight who lives in the rear of 354 Pulliam Street, Atlanta Georgia, who being duly sworn deposes and says:

Saturday morning, April 26, 1913, Mr. Frank left home about 8:00 o’clock, and Albert, my husband was there too. Albert got there, I guess, about a quarter after 1:00 and was there when Mr. Frank come for dinner, which was about half past one, but Mr. Frank did not eat any dinner and he left in about ten minutes after he got there.

Mr. Frank come back to the house about 7:00 that night, and Albert was there when he got there. Albert had gone home that evening but he come back, but I don’t know what time he got there. But he got home some time before Mr. Frank did, and Mr. Frank eat supper about 7 o’clock, and when I left about 8 o’clock I left Mr. Frank there.

Sunday morning I got there about 8 o’clock and there was an automobile standing in front of the house, but I didn’t pay any attention to it. But I saw a man get a bucket of water and pour into it. Miss Lucille (Mr. Frank’s wife) was downstairs, and Mr. and Mrs. Selig were upstairs. Albert was there Sunday morning but I don’t remember what time he got there. When I called them down to breakfast at half past eight I found Mr. Frank was gone. Mr. and Mrs. Selig ate breakfast and Mrs. Lucille didn’t eat until Mr. Frank come back, and they ate breakfast together. I didn’t hear them say anything at the breakfast table, but after dinner I understood them to say that a girl and Mr. Frank were caught at the office Saturday.

I don’t know who said it, but Miss Lucille and Mr. and Mrs. Selig and Mr. Frank were standing there talking after dinner. I didn’t know the girl until Monday evening. I understand them to say it was a Jew girl, and I asked Miss Lucille, and she said it was a gentile.

On Tuesday Mr. Frank says to me “It looks mighty bad Mineola, I might have to go to jail about this girl, and I don’t know anything about it.”

I heard Mrs. Rauzin, Mrs. Frank’s sister, tell Miss Lucille it was mighty bad and Miss Lucille said, Yes, it is, I am going to get after her about it.” I don’t know what they were talking about.

Sunday, Miss Lucille said to Mrs. Selig that Mr. Frank didn’t sleep so good Saturday night. She said he was so drunk and wouldn’t let her sleep with him, and she slept on the floor, on the rug, by the bed, because he was drinking. Miss Lucille said Sunday that Mr. Frank told her Saturday night he was in trouble. That he didn’t know the reason why he would murder, and he told his wife to get his pistol, and let him kill himself. I heard Miss Lucille say that to Mrs. Selig. It got away with Mrs. Selig mighty bad, she didn’t know what to think.

I haven’t heard Miss Lucille say whether she believed it or not. I don’t know why Mrs. Frank didn’t come to see her husband, but it was a pretty good while before she comes to see him, maybe two weeks. She would tell me, ” Wasn’t it mighty bad that he got locked up” and she said “Minoela, I don’t know what I am going to do.”

When I left home to go to the solicitor general’s office, they told me to mind what I said. They paid me $3.50 a week, but last week she paid me $4.00, and one week she paid me $6.50. But at the time of this murder I was getting $3.50 a week and the week after the murder I don’t know how much they paid me. The next week $4.00 and the next week $4.00. One week Mrs. Selig gave me $5.00, but it was not for my work, and they didn’t tell me what it was for. They said ‘Here is $5 Minola’, but of course I understood what they meant, but they didn’t tell me anything at the time. I understood it was a tip for me to keep quiet. They would tell me to mind how I talked and Miss Lucille would give me a hat.

QUESTION: “Was that the reason you didn’t tell the solicitor general yesterday all about this, that Miss Lucille and the others had told you not to say anything about what happened out there?”

“Yes, Sir.”

QUESTION: “And that is the reason why you would have rather been locked up last night than tell this?”

“Yes, Sir.”

QUESTION: Has Mr. Pickett, or Mr. Cravens, or Mr. Campbell or myself [Detective Starnes evidently], influenced you in any way, or threatened you in any way to make this statement?”

“No, Sir.”

QUESTION: “You make it of your own free will and accord, in their presence and the presence of Mr. Gordon, your attorney?”

“Yes, Sir.”

(Signed) “Minola McKnight”

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this third day of June, 1913.

(Signed ) G.C. Febuary

—————————————————————-


Source:

See: State’s Exhibit J

Available for review and download, please visit: Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence 1913. (Located within the 1,800 page Georgia Supreme Court Case File, Volume 1 and 2).

Minola McKnight Affidavit, Part 1: http://www.leofrank.org/georgia-arch...-B057-0063.JPG right mouse click and save as).


Minola McKnight Affidavit, Part 2: http://www.leofrank.org/georgia-arch...-B057-0064.JPG (right mouse click and save as).


Minola McKnight Affidavit, Part 3: http://www.leofrank.org/georgia-arch...-B057-0065.JPG (right mouse click and save as).


Minola McKnight Affidavit, Part 4: http://www.leofrank.org/georgia-arch...-B057-0066.JPG (right mouse click and save as).

See: Internet Archive copy of Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence 1913. Text copy available here on this library archive.

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #1 made to Jim Conley: The Leo Frank NPCo murder confession, http://www.leofrank.org/jim-conley-august-4-5-6/.

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #2 made to Lucille Selig Frank: The Leo Frank bedroom murder confession, Minola McKnight and Lucille Selig Frank, http://www.leofrank.org/states-exhibit-j/.

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #3 made to the Judge and Jury: The Leo Frank murder trial confession, http://www.leofrank.org/confession.

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #4 made to the whole world through the newspaper: The Leo Frank jailhouse murder confession, Leo Frank Answers List of Questions Bearing on Points Made Against Him, Atlanta Constitution, March 9th, 1914.

Albert McKnight Affidavit that Sparked the Minola McKnight Affair:
Image of Albert McKnight’s Affidavit

Before Reading State’s Exhibit J, Learn about the woman who gave it, Minola McKnight.

Source of State’s Exhibit J: Internet Archive copy of Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence 1913

STATE’S EXHIBIT J, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913.

Affidavit executed by Minola McKnight for Solicitor Dorsey, as follows:

State of Georgia, County of Fulton.

Personally appeared before me, a notary public in and for the above
State and county, Minola McKnight, who lives in the rear of 351 Pulliam St.,
Atlanta, Ga., who being duly sworn deposes and says:

On Saturday morning, April 26, 1913, Mr. [Leo] Frank left home about
eight o’clock, and Albert [McKnight], my husband, was there Saturday, too.
Albert [McKnight] got there I guess about a quarter after one [1:15 PM] and
he [Albert McKnight] was there when Mr. [Leo] Frank come for dinner (Dinner
is what they called Lunch back then), which was about half-past one [1:30 PM],
but Mr. Frank did not eat any dinner (Lunch), and he left in about ten minutes
[1:40 PM] after he [Mr. Leo Frank] got there.

Mr. [Leo] Frank come back to the house at seven o’clock that night, and Albert
[McKnight] was there when he [Leo Frank] got there. Albert [McKnight] had gone
home that [early] evening but he come back. I don’t know what time he [Albert McKnight]
got there, but he come sometime before Mr. [Leo] Frank did, and Mr. [Leo] Frank eat supper
about seven o’clock, and when I left there that night about eight o’clock, I left Mr. [Leo]
Frank there.

Sunday morning I got there about eight o’clock, and there was an
automobile standing in front of the house and I didn’t pay any attention
to it. I saw a man in the automobile get a bucket of water and pour into
it. Mr. [Leo] Frank’s wife [Lucille Selig Frank] was downstairs and Mr. [Emil Selig]
and Mrs. [Josephine] Selig were upstairs. Albert [McKnight] was there Sunday morning,
but I don’t remember what time he got there. I called them down to breakfast about half
past eight [8:30 AM] and I found out that Mr. [Leo] Frank was gone.

Mr. [Emil] Selig and Mrs. [Josephine] Selig eat breakfast, but Mrs. [Lucille] Frank didn’t eat
until Mr. Frank come back and then they eat breakfast together. I didn’t hear them say anything
at the breakfast table. After dinner I understood them to say that a girl and Mr. [Leo] Frank
were caught at the office Saturday. I don’t know who said it, Miss Lucile (Mrs. Frank) and
Mr. [Emil Selig] and Mrs. [Josephine] Selig and Mr. [Leo] Frank were standing there talking,
after dinner when they said it; I understood them to say it was a Jew girl.

On Tuesday, Mr. [Leo] Frank says to me, ‘It is mighty bad Minola, I might
have to go to jail about this girl, and I don’t know anything about it.’

Sunday, Miss Lucile said to Mrs. Selig that Mr. Frank didn’t rest so good
Saturday night; she said he was drunk and wouldn’t let her sleep with him,
and she said she slept on the floor on the rug by the bed because Mr. [Leo] Frank was drinking.

Miss Lucile [Selig Frank] said Sunday that Mr. [Leo] Frank told her Saturday night that
he was in trouble, and that he didn’t know the reason why he would murder, and he told his wife
to get his pistol and let him kill himself. I heard Miss Lucile [Selig Frank] say that to
Mrs. [Josephine] Selig, and it got away with Mrs. [Josephine] Selig mighty bad; she didn’t know
what to think. I haven’t heard Miss Lucile say whether she believed it or not. I don’t know why
Mrs. Frank didn’t come to see her husband, but it was a pretty good while before she would come
to see him, maybe two weeks. She would tell me, ‘Wasn’t it mighty bad that he was locked up,’ she
would say, ‘Minola, I don’t know what I am going to do.’

When I left home to go to the solicitor general’s office, they told me to mind how I talked. They pay me
$3.50 a week, but last week they paid me $4.00, and one week she paid me $6.50. Up to the time of the
murder I was getting $3.50 a week and the week right after the murder I don’t remember how much she paid
me, and the next week they paid me $3.50, and the next week they paid me $6.50, and the next week they
paid me $4.00 and the next week they paid me $4.00. One week, I don’t remember which one, Mrs. Selig gave
me $5, but it wasn’t for my work, and they didn’t tell me what it was for, she just said, ‘ Here is $5, Minola.’
I understood that it was a tip for me to keep quiet. They would tell me to mind how I talked and Miss Lucile
gave me a hat.”

Question: “Is that the reason you didn’t tell the solicitor yesterday all about this, that Miss Lucile and the others had told you not to say anything about what happened at home there’?”

Answer: “Yes, sir.”

Question: “Is that true?”

Answer: “Yes, sir.”

Question:. “And that’s the reason you would rather have been locked up last night than tell?'”

Answer: “Yes, sir.”

Question: “Has Mr. Pickett or Mr. Cravens or Mr. Campbell or myself influenced you in any way or threatened you in any way to make this statement? ”

Answer: “No, sir.”

Question: “You make it of your own free will and accord in their presence and in the presence of Mr. Gordon, your attorney?”

Answer: “Yes, sir.”

(Signed) MINOLA McKNIGHT.

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 3d day of June, 1913.

(Signed) G. C. FEBRUARY, Notary public, Fulton County, Ga.

Torture and Coercion

Leo Frank’s defenders, then and now, have long claim Minola was tortured or coerced to produce State’s Exhibit J. But Concerning the veracity of State’s Exhibit J, one should consider State’s Exhibit B, and why Leo Frank so thoughtfully bought Lucille Selig Frank a box of Chocolates at Jacobs Pharmacy on Saturday, April 26, 1913, at 6:15 pm, just minutes before catching the 6:20pm trolly home, to his in-laws residence at 68 East Georgia Avenue, Atlanta. Leo Frank claimed he arrived at home at 6:30pm.

See: Minola McKnight

See: Leo M. Frank Georgia Supreme Court Case File (1,800 Images Volumes 1 & 2). Available for review and download, please visit: Leo M. Frank Georgia Supreme Court Case File, Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence 1913 (318 Images within Volumes 1 & 2, amongst 1,800 images)

References:

Albert McKnight Affidavit: http://www.leofrank.org/images/mckni...-affidavit.jpg

Images: State’s Exhibit A, The 3D map of the factory

Image: Defendants Exhibit 61, Ground Floor and Second Floor 2D Birds Eye View Maps of the National Pencil Company: http://www.leofrank.org/images/georg...les/2/0125.jpg. Plat of the First and Second Floor of the National Pencil Company. Defendants Exhibit 61.

Tom Watson’s articulation of the Leo Frank alleged murder confessions in the Jeffersonian Newspaper on Leo M. Frank 1914, 1915, 1916, & 1917: http://leofrank.org/images/jeffersonian/

State’s Exhibit B: http://www.leofrank.org/states-exhibit-b/

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #1 and the Testimony of Jim Conley: http://www.leofrank.org/jim-conley-august-4-5-6/

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #2, see Lucille Selig Frank and Minola McKnight (State’s Exhibit J, June 3rd, 1913).

Leo Frank alleged Murder Confession #3: http://www.leofrank.org/confession/

and Leo Frank Answers List of Questions Bearing on Points Made Against Him, Atlanta Constitution, March 9th, 1914

If you want to ask one of the worlds foremost Leo M. Frank scholar questions about the Leo Max Frank case, contact Allen Koenigsberg. Post your public questions: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LeoFrankCase/. The Leo Frank Case Library and Archive (www.LeoFrank.org) is not affiliated with Allen Koenigsberg and the Leo Frank Yahoo Discussion Group.

Albert’s Affidavit:

Last Updated: June 3, 2013, the centennial of State’s Exhibit J.
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #88
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Jewish Supremacists, ADL, AJC, Atlanta Jewish Federation and Individual Jewish Activists Present: The Alonzo Mann Hoax.


The Alonzo Mann Affair
Alonzo Mann in 1982, left, and 1913

Alonzo Mann in 1982, left, and 1913

In 1982, Alonzo Mann dropped what appeared to be the biggest bombshell imaginable into the Leo Frank case — though it was sixty-nine years after the fact. Mann, who’d been Leo Frank’s fourteen-year-old office boy in 1913, stated that he had kept a secret all these years: He had returned–he claimed–to the National Pencil Company office around noon on the day Mary Phagan was murdered and saw the black janitor Jim Conley carrying Mary Phagan’s limp body. According to Mann, Conley had threatened to kill him if he told anyone what he saw, and his own parents advised him to tell no one. So Mann did keep quiet, and his silence resulted in the conviction and death of Leo Frank for the murder — a crime Mann he believed Jim Conley committed.

But can Mann’s story be believed? And if it can, does what he saw prove Leo Frank’s innocence? Let’s investigate:

Mann’s signed 1982 affidavit was a media sensation and convinced many readers that Leo Frank was an innocent victim. It was also the basis for two attempts by Jewish groups to obtain a posthumous pardon for Leo Frank, the second of which was successful.

According to Leonard Dinnerstein (“The Fate of Leo Frank,” American Heritage, October 1996, vol. 47, issue 6):

There is no reason to doubt that Alonzo Mann’s affidavit is accurate. Had he ignored his mother’s advice and gone to the police with his information right away, Conley would surely have been arrested, the police and district attorney would not have concentrated their efforts on finding Frank guilty, and the crime would most likely have been quickly solved. But by the time the trial began, in July 1913, Mann’s testimony might hardly have even seemed important.

What really happened in 1913? First, let’s look at Mann’s testimony at trial in 1913, from the Official Brief of Evidence:

Alonzo Mann: I am office boy at the National Pencil Company. I began working there [Tuesday] April 1, 1913. I sit sometimes in the outer office and stand around in the outer hall. I left the factory at half past eleven on April 26th. When I left there, Miss Hall, the stenographer from Montag’s, was in the office with Mr. Frank. Mr. Frank told me to phone to Mr. Schiff and tell him to come down. I telephoned him, but the girl answered the phone and said he hadn’t got up yet. I telephoned once. I worked there two Saturday afternoons of the weeks previous to the murder and stayed there until half past three or four. Frank was always working during that time. I never saw him bring any women into the factory and drink with them. I have never seen Dalton there. On April 26th, I saw Holloway, Irby, McCrary and Darley at the factory. I didn’t see Quinn. I don’t remember seeing Corinthia Hall, Mrs. Freeman, Mrs. White, Graham, Tillander, or Wade Campbell, I left there 11:30 [AM].

CROSS EXAMINATION:

When Mr. Frank came that morning, he went right on into the office, and was at work there and stayed there. He went out once. Don’t know how long he stayed out.

Now, fast forward to the 1980s. Alonzo Mann, one of the last surviving Leo Frank defense witnesses, came forward some sixty-nine years later, in 1982, and provided some sensational testimony.

According to a typical media account of the affidavit, this one from Georgia Public Radio, “Alonzo Mann, Frank’s former office boy, claimed he saw Jim Conley carrying the body of Mary Phagan into the lobby of the National Pencil Company. Mann, who was only fourteen at the time, said Conley threatened to kill him if he revealed what he saw. Terrified, Mann kept the secret for sixty-nine years.” That’s quite a terror, to last sixty-nine years — to continue while Conley was imprisoned as an accessory after the fact to the murder — and even to endure for some twenty years after Conley’s death. Quite a terror indeed. Georgia Public Broadcasting continues: “This new evidence encouraged members of Atlanta’s Jewish community to petition for a posthumous pardon for Frank. Attorneys at the Anti-Defamation League initiated the process which finally ended in a diluted victory in 1986. The Board of Pardons and Paroles did not address the question of guilt or innocence, but rather a pardon was issued based on the State’s failure to protect Frank from the hands of his assailants.”

The ADL and the Highly Political Posthumous Pardon
Charles Wittenstein

Charles Wittenstein

Alonzo Mann’s affidavit became the basis of an attempt to obtain a “posthumous pardon with exoneration” for Leo Frank from the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles. The effort was led by Charles Wittenstein, southern counsel for the Anti-Defamation League, and Dale Schwartz, an Atlanta lawyer.

What do reason and common sense tell us?

The further away in time a memory is from the original event, the more likely it becomes distorted and easily manipulated. How would a 21st century State Supreme Court or United States Supreme Court weigh testimony that comes sixty-nine years after the fact? An even more salient question is: Could such a revelation as Alonzo Mann’s in 1982, even if true, be sufficient to exonerate Leo Frank? You decide.

Background: On April 1, 1913, thirteen-year-old Alonzo Mann was given a highly coveted job as Leo Frank’s personal office boy at the National Pencil Company. Given Mann only worked at the company for a total of three and a half weeks before the murder was committed, one is not inclined to believe he had known Leo Frank long enough to make an accurate character assessment. Moreover, one may suspect that the young office boy was a bit star struck and naive back then. A tenure of a little over three weeks is hardly enough to give him the right to pontificate on the “extracurricular activities” — or lack thereof — going on in the factory under Leo M. Frank for the previous five years.

Fast forward 69 years from 1913 to 1982, when the story broke.

In 1982 Alonzo Mann was in the twilight of his life, frail, and in terrible physical condition. Mann was perched on a cane and had a pacemaker, was on a cocktail of pharmaceuticals — and truly lonely. The WWI veteran had, sadly, outlived his wife and only son. His virtual “death-bed” revelation in the years before he died had all the flair of a fictionalized Hollywood or Broadway drama — and the markings of another backroom bribery deal, which has been the central strategy of Leo Frank’s defenders for a century. The Georgia Supreme Court records containing Leo Frank’s appeals reveal the birth of this ugly strategy.
dale-schwartz

Dale Schwartz

In 1982, Alonzo Mann changed his story and alleged that he really left the National Pencil Company factory at noon, instead of 11:30 am (as he had testified in 1913). He then went on to say that at 12:05 — five minutes after he left the factory — he came back and saw the 27-year old African-American janitor, Jim Conley, carrying the limp body of Mary Phagan on his shoulder, positioned as if getting ready to dump her down the two-foot-by-two-foot scuttle hole next to the elevator. Jim Conley then allegedly reached out for Alonzo Mann and said to the young boy, “if you tell anyone I will kill you.” Alonzo Mann claimed that he ran home and told his family, and alleges that his parents then told him not to tell anyone or get involved.

Does that seem logical? — or does that set off your highly refined nonsense detector?

Alonzo Mann’s 1982 statement does not pass multiple common sense tests, especially for those who know the history and culture of the South.

First: Why would white parents in the white racial separatist Atlanta, Georgia of 1913, tell their son not to tell the police about a murdering and guilty black janitor — especially when the result of not telling the police would ultimately result in an innocent, clean cut, and white boss, Leo Frank — a man who gave their son a highly prized job — going to the gallows? In the Old South, African-Americans were seen as prone to violent outbursts and were regarded as third class citizens with child-like mental and emotional maturity; and they were often not afforded the same legal protections as whites when accused of crime — and were usually easily convicted.

Second: Why would these white parents, in a white separatist South, allow their son to report back to work on Monday morning, April 28, 1913 — two days after that son was threatened with death by a black man carrying a dead white girl on his shoulder, knowing that that same black man would be there too? Jim Conley reported back to work that Monday, April 28, 1913, as did the 170 other employees, who were naturally expected to be back at work after the holiday weekend. Jim Conley was not arrested until Thursday, May 1st, 1913.

Third: If Alonzo Mann admitted to lying under oath at the Leo Frank trial in 1913 — “withholding information” and saying he left at 11:30 am instead of noon as he contended 69 years later — who’s not to say he wasn’t lying again in 1982 and beyond?

Fourth: If Alonzo Mann walked in on Jim Conley at 12:05 PM while Conley was getting ready to throw Mary Phagan’s body down the scuttle hole, why did Monteen Stover — who testified she came down the stairs near the front entrance and scuttle hole at exactly that time — not witness this scene also? Why didn’t Leo Frank — who was just 40 feet away — not hear Mary Phagan scream or any sounds of a struggle at all?

Fifth: If Alonzo Mann or his parents kept quiet because they were afraid of retribution from Jim Conley, why did they not tell the authorities what Alonzo had seen once Jim Conley was arrested? Conley was arrested on May 1, 1913, convicted of being an accessory after the fact in the murder of Mary Phagan, and remained imprisoned throughout the entire year of 1914.

Sixth: If Alonzo Mann was “terrified” into silence by Jim Conley, why did that terror not end in 1962, when Conley is reported to have died?
Jim Conley

Jim Conley

Let’s take a closer look

If we are to believe Alonzo Mann that he saw Jim Conley carrying the unconscious body of Mary Phagan, isn’t it rather odd that in the white racial separatist South of 1913 — given the likelihood of unrelenting and possibly prejudiced law enforcement, if not an extremely violent lynching — a Southern black man would assault, rob, and then possibly murder a teenage white girl in the highest traffic area in the factory, almost next to the unlocked glass-paneled front door? — and then, in the aftermath of the crime, carry her body across the same area without even bothering to lock the door?

During the trial, Leo Frank’s defense team changed its theory of how the attack against Mary Phagan transpired. According to one theory, Mary Phagan was crowded back into the empty Clarke Woodenware Company space on the first floor, assaulted, and thrown down a back chute at the rear of the building. But that theory encountered a problem: It was determined well before the trial that the owner of the building had locked the door to that area four months earlier, and the door was still locked when the police came to the premises on Sunday, April 27 — the day after Mary Phagan was killed. Later during the trial, the Leo Frank defense team said that Mary Phagan’s body was thrown 14 feet down into the basement via the two-foot wide scuttle hole near the elevator at the front of the building, which had a ladder diagonally going downward. In other theories, Jim Conley murdered Mary Phagan in the basement. The defense theories kept — and keep — changing.

Wouldn’t there have been forensic evidence on the body of a 4’11” 107-pound girl if she had fallen 14 feet? Mary Phagan had numerous autopsies performed on her by doctors in late April and early May of 1913, and none of the reports mention any broken bones or indications on her body that she had fallen 14 feet to a hard dirt floor. In fact the forensic evidence shows that the scratches on her face caused by her being dragged 150 feet across the basement floor — from the elevator to the rear of the cellar — had no blood coming from them, indicating she was already quite dead when she reached the basement.
Mary Phagan: autopsy photograph

Mary Phagan: autopsy photograph

The autopsy reports revealed Mary had died of strangulation and the black eye suggested a left-handed man had punched her in the face. What percentage of people are left-handed? According to Wikipedia.org, “A variety of studies suggest that 70–90% of the world population is right-handed.” (Wikipedia, “Lefthandedness, “2013). Since Leo Frank was left-handed and Jim Conley right-handed, who was more likely to have punched her in the right eye with a left fist?

And none of the defense theories give us any explanation at all of the hair which, along with dried blood, was found on the lathe in the metal room upstairs, nor for the blood stains found nearby on the metal room floor.

Another throwaway detail?

The most interesting piece of evidence Alonzo Mann provided to the public in 1982 was that concerning the location of the “loafing sweeper” Jim Conley. Mann said Conley was idly squatting on a box in the first floor lobby of the National Pencil Company for the entire morning of Saturday, April 26, 1913. That’s a very interesting piece of evidence because, in 1913, Alonzo Mann and several of Leo Frank’s other defense witnesses claimed they didn’t see Jim Conley that day. It would mean that Hattie Hall, Leo Frank’s stenographer, had committed perjury and lied under oath — as well as N.V. Darley, Alonzo Mann himself, and everyone else who was a defense witness for Leo Frank that had claimed to be in the factory that morning.

This “new” evidence provided by Alonzo Mann was not actually new, and did not actually help Leo Frank, but tended to corroborate all the other eyewitness testimony from others who were there at the factory that morning, who said that a black man (some specified him as Conley, some didn’t) was idly loafing about in the lobby. The eyewitness testimony tended to suggest that Jim Conley had indeed spent the morning and afternoon in the factory lobby and Leo Frank not only knew about it, but had indeed requested his African-American assistant to come to work on that infamous day — but it was a very curious kind of work, as we shall see.
Three views of Mary Phagan during her brief life; far right, her aunt Mattie Phagan

Three views of Mary Phagan during her brief life; far right, her aunt Mattie Phagan

Did Jim Conley’s testimony sustain itself?

Jim Conley alleged he was waiting in the lobby all morning long because Leo Frank had asked him to wait there as a watchdog for him during an anticipated afternoon tryst. Is there an unwritten subtext here? Jim Conley claimed to have served as Leo’s watchdog on numerous other Saturdays while Frank “entertained” other girls. Did Leo Frank have a pre-planned tryst arranged with Mary Phagan? If so, it adds a new dimension to the case never before explored. For the purposes of history, if we consider the Konigsberg variation of the murder — that Mary Phagan had a pre-arranged tryst with Leo Frank — then it opens up the possibility that this case is even more bizarre than we might have ever thought. And if the Konigsberg variation is true, why then did Leo Frank murder Mary?

Did Leo Frank lie about not knowing Jim Conley was at the factory that day?

If Alonzo Mann was indeed telling the truth about Jim Conley sitting near the factory entrance all morning long doing nothing on the morning of the murder, it definitely suggests that Leo Frank might have lied to the court when he gave his unsworn statement to the jury: Frank said he did not even know Jim Conley was in the factory at all on the day of the murder. (Leo Frank Trial Statement, Brief of Evidence, August 18, 1913)

How could Leo Frank not know Jim Conley was there, when Leo Frank admitted at the trial that during the morning he left the building and came back after running morning errands, including a brief trip to Sigmund Montag’s office down the block to get the mail? (Leo Frank, Brief of Evidence, August 18, 1913). How could Leo Frank miss seeing someone sitting next to the staircase he would have traversed at least twice, coming and going?

The common sense test

If Leo Frank did not know Jim Conley was there, a logical question follows: What was an employee of the factory, Jim Conley, who was not required to work on this Saturday — a state holiday — doing, sitting on a crate next to the staircase on the first floor lobby all morning long, wasting time watching people come and go? Why would a sweeper like Jim Conley go to work on a Saturday, a state holiday and day off — unless he was required to do so by his boss? This an especially pertinent question in light of the fact Jim Conley had been paid his weekly salary — $6.05 — the evening before, on Friday, April 25, 1913 by Leo M. Frank. At five cents a beer and three cents a whiskey, it’s hard to imagine Jim Conley would have spent all of his salary on liquor the night before and still come to work bright and early the next day. And it certainly doesn’t seem realistic that Jim Conley could have drunk 120 beers the night before and would therefore need to rob, rape, and strangle a White girl for her $1.20 pay — especially at the highest traffic point of the National Pencil Company factory, right next to an unlocked, half-glass, entrance door. Wouldn’t he rather have spent his time drinking five cent pints at any agreeable saloon?

Jim Conley coming to work on his day off just doesn’t fit or make sense, unless he was asked to come to work by his boss, Leo Frank. And, if he was asked to come to work, why wasn’t he working, at least in any visible way? Could it be that by just sitting and watching the comings and goings at the factory entrance, he was doing exactly what Leo Frank had asked him to do?

Concerning Jim Conley’s unheard-of salary

When it was revealed, Jim Conley’s unusually high salary for his menial position left many people asking why this African-American floor sweeper — who’d been demoted from elevator operator — was making 50% more ($6.05 vs $4.05) than the white children day laborers. Perhaps Jim Conley was more than just a floor sweeper. Perhaps this fact sustains all the testimony which confirmed Jim Conley was Leo Frank’s “watchdog,” keeping a careful eye on the entrance when Leo would order call-in prostitutes from Nina Formby on Saturdays or arrange trysts with his quite-possibly-willing girl-child laborers who were living on the edge of poverty. Furthermore, given that one female employee reported at the Frank trial that she told assistant superintendent Herbert George Schiff (Trial Testimony of Herbert George Schiff, Brief of Evidence, August, 1913) that Jim Conley was “sprinkling” (urinating) on the pencils, why was he never fired? Could it be that Jim Conley served a very important purpose for Leo Frank? Could it also be that he knew too much to be fired?

Schiff would claim at the trial that the reason why Jim Conley wasn’t fired was because “he knows the business too well” — a very strange statement indeed to make of a sweeper! (Brief of Evidence, 1913).

According to another Black employee, “Snow Ball” (Gordon Bailey, Brief of Evidence, August, 1913), Jim Conley was — unlike every other worker except executives — not always required to punch the time clock. Why would a sweeper like Jim Conley — who’d been “busted” down to the lowest job in the factory — be extended such unique liberties by Leo M. Frank? Why was Jim Conley the only person out of the 170 hourly factory employees — most of whom were white and some eight of whom were African-Americans — not to have to punch the time clock?

A scream in broad daylight

The defense and Leo Frank partisans contend that Jim Conley was waiting in the lobby all morning until a little after noon in order to rob a fellow employee, Mary Phagan. But they forgot about the scream.

Where Jim Conley sat on the first floor was no more than 30 to 40 feet from where Leo Frank sat in his inner office on the second floor. And the first floor lobby of the National Pencil Company was the highest traffic point in the entire building: It was where people would come and go all day long during the work week, and all morning long on Saturdays.

On Saturday, April 26, 1913, people were coming to collect their pay envelopes and several employees were present in the morning for a half-day’s work. Leo Frank was on the second floor, in his office, on April 26, 1913, as he was on most Saturdays. He surely could have heard a scream from 30 to 40 feet away, had there been one. Jim Conley, in fact, claimed he heard a scream after Leo and Mary went to the metal room, a considerably greater distance than Frank’s office. Leo Frank did not mention a scream at all.

If Jim Conley had attacked Mary Phagan in the lobby, Leo Frank would almost certainly have heard a scream directly below him. He could then have easily called the police, as the telephone was inside Frank’s office on the wall. (See Defense diagrams of the second floor).

The theory of Jim Conley beating, robbing, and “possibly raping” a white girl in the place where Monteen Stover would likely have walked in on him doing it, would almost surely guarantee Monteen’s backing up into a street filled with white men — and then, for Jim Conley, a castration without anesthesia, or worse, would ensue. This is how men of color accused of raping white girls were generally treated in 1913 Atlanta — that is, just before they were lynched from a tree or riddled with bullets. Imagine how it would have fared for one such not merely accused — but caught in the act!

Was Jim Conley telling the truth when he said Leo Frank asked him on the previous evening — Friday, April 25, 1913 — to come to work on the morning of April 26 to act as a watchdog as he had in the past? This was something Leo M. Frank had done many times before on Saturdays, according to Jim. Naturally, given the obvious implications, Leo Frank denied it. What man, guilty or innocent, would not deny callously arranging sexual trysts with women (sometimes even little girls) other than his wife? Which brings us back full circle to the question: Why was Jim Conley sitting on that crate all morning long in the factory lobby on his day off?

Jim Conley’s sitting on that crate next to the stairs was corroborated by Mrs. White at the trial in 1913, and later by Alonzo Mann in 1982 — though not in 1913.

Common sense tells us that usually no one goes to work on a state holiday or day off unless asked to do so, or for some other really compelling reason. So the question is: Who asked Jim Conley to spend the day waiting and sitting on a box on the first floor lobby area of the National Pencil Company? If someone didn’t ask him, what was he doing there all day? Waiting to rob someone at high noon, right by the glass-windowed front door and while the streets were filled with people? Jim Conley says Leo Frank did ask him, as he had many times before, to act as a lookout while he “chatted” with girls in his office — and numerous witnesses other than Alonzo Mann sustained the fact Jim Conley was actually sitting there all morning long.

Alonzo Mann never mentioned seeing Tillander, Corrie, or Emma — thus sustaining his original statement he left the Factory at 11:30 AM on April 26, 1913 — not the supposed noon he claimed 69 years later. Another interesting statement at trial was that of Hattie Hall, Frank’s stenographer: She did not mention seeing Alonzo Mann when she left at noon, supporting therefore the idea that Alonzo Mann did leave the factory at 11:30 and not at noon.

Alonzo Mann claimed he came back to the factory at 12:05 pm — almost immediately after supposedly leaving at noon — because he wanted to speak to Herbert George Schiff. But evidence suggests that Schiff was never expected to be at work on this holiday and, in fact, he never showed up — a fact which no one disputes. This casts further doubt on Alonzo Mann’s story about coming back and seeing Conley in the act of carrying Mary Phagan’s body.

Isn’t it rather odd that Herbert G. Schiff — who prided himself at the trial concerning the fact he never missed a day of work for five years — would have said he supposedly “missed work” on Saturday, April 26, 1913, a state holiday — when he was almost certainly not expected to come to work at all? (see: Trial testimony of Herbert G. Schiff, Brief of Evidence, August, 1913). Alonzo Mann claimed he called Herbert Schiff one time that morning, but the Schiff’s maid alleged Alonzo Mann had called twice. Did he even call at all? What caused the mix-up? The cacophony was even bigger than described here: Others claimed to have called Herbert George Schiff at different times that morning, but there’s no real reason to believe Schiff was expected to come in that day by anyone.

It turns out that Schiff was indeed called during the morning of April 26, 1913 — but not to report to work: He was called to inform him his suit had come from the dry cleaners.
Lemmie Quinn

Lemmie Quinn

Lemmie Quinn: The metal room foreman’s story

The other problem Leo Frank had to contend with was the issue of Lemmie Quinn, who allegedly came to the factory at 12:20 PM on April 26, 1913, supposedly for two minutes, looking for Herbert George Schiff in order to talk about a baseball bet with him. Why was Lemmie Quinn looking for an employee at 12:20 PM on Saturday, April 26, 1913, who was never supposed to come to work on a holiday?

Leo Frank said he had forgotten for a full week to mention Lemmie Quinn’s afternoon arrival at the factory at 12:20 PM and Coroner Paul Donehoo, at the Coroner’s Inquest, asked why he didn’t mention this important information to the police once he remembered it a week later. Leo Frank responded by saying he wanted to ask for permission from his lawyers first before revealing it to police. Donehoo was incredulous, as might be expected.

Donehoo and others doubtlessly reasoned that someone accused of murdering a little girl would make every effort to bring forward exonerating evidence and alibi witnesses as soon as humanly possible — and not withhold such evidence for more than a week. The result of Leo Frank waiting more than a week to tell anyone made the new evidence appear as if it was manufactured, especially in light of the fact that an affidavit was made by Lemmie Quinn a week before the Coroner’s inquest, stating he had left the factory at 11:45 AM to go home and then head to a billiards hall on the other side of town.

Lemmie Quinn’s “reappearance” at the factory at 12:20 PM on April 26, 1913, was seen as a physical impossibility given that Lemmie admitted leaving the National Pencil Company at 11:45 AM, going home and then making a 25 minute trip to the billiards hall. This would not have given Lemmie Quinn enough time to get back to the factory at 12:20 PM, even if Lemmie Quinn only played one quick game and then made the 25 minute trip back to the factory.

Lemmie Quinn backfired

Lemmie Quinn got caught in a lie and it was likely that none of the 12 jury members nor Judge Leonard Strickland Roan believed him. Quinn gave testimony that came off as fabricated after the murder for the purpose of shrinking the amount of time available for Leo Frank to kill Mary Phagan — from noon to 12:35, down to the range of noon to 12:19.

Quinn’s claims boxed in Leo Frank

The notable thing about Lemmie Quinn’s supposed appearance at the factory at 12:20 PM is not only that our highly refined fraud detectors tell us that his story might have been a fabrication to help Leo Frank, but more importantly that it makes the defense’s “first floor attack” on Mary Phagan even more difficult to believe. If Alonzo Mann really saw Jim Conley carrying the unconscious body of Mary Phagan in the lobby at 12:05, where was Monteen Stover? And since Leo Frank changed the time he claimed Mary came to his office to 12:12 to 12:17, and further claimed he spoke to her for two or three minutes, why didn’t she bump into Lemmie Quinn upon exiting? Both Stover and Quinn claimed to be at the factory sandwiching the time Leo Frank said Mary Phagan arrived, so wouldn’t have Quinn bumped into at least Mary Phagan or Jim Conley at 12:20?
Leo Frank

Leo Frank

Leo Frank’s ever-changing times of Mary Phagan’s arrival

Frank gave several different times for Mary Phagan’s arrival at his office: 1) “12:02 to 12:03″ (The time he gave police orally on Sunday, April 27, 1913); “12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07″ (The time he gave in a deposition to police on Monday, April 28, 1913 known as State’s Exhibit B, 1913); then it became “12:10 to 12:15″ (The time he gave at the Coroner’s Inquest, May 5 and 8th, 1913); and finally “12:12 PM to 12:17 PM.” (Leo Frank Trial, August 18, 1913).

These ever-latening time claims damaged Frank’s credibility beyond repair, and, to make matters worse, all of these times were during a time period he could not account for, even with Lemmie Quinn’s “boxing him in” at 12:20. One thing is obvious: If Frank’s later time claims are regarded as true, then Alonzo Mann’s 1982 affidavit is false. They are mutually exclusive.

Nothing significant; nothing new

A most salient point is this — as even pro-Frank researcher Steve Oney admits: Alonzo Mann brought absolutely nothing new to the Leo Frank Case with his 1982 affidavit. Jim Conley had already admitted to being an accomplice and admitted that he participated in bringing the dead body of Mary Phagan to the basement — at Leo Frank’s request. If he was seen carrying Mary Phagan in the lobby, it only invalidates Conley’s claim that he exclusively used the elevator to do so, and the rest of Conley’s testimony remains unchallenged.

A dead man’s affidavit

However, the ADL of B’nai B’rith, the American Jewish Committee, the Atlanta Jewish Federation, and numerous other Jewish organizations used the affidavit of Alonzo Mann, even after his death, to push for a posthumous pardon with exoneration for Leo M. Frank.

First attempt: failure

Attorneys for these three Jewish organizations petitioned the (Georgia) State Board of Pardons and Paroles to pardon Leo Frank, but the petition was denied on December 22, 1983.

Pardon without exoneration: achieved

A Pyrrhic victory for the Jewish Community resulted, after successful pressure from the ADL and other Jewish organizations, on March 11, 1986. The State Board of Pardons and Paroles pardoned Leo M. Frank due to the failure of the state to protect him from lynching — but they would not exonerate him of the crime of murder. It was an odd appeasement.

In a way, this decision was ultimately another victory for the prosecution team: Leo Frank’s murder conviction is still standing today as “black letter” and settled law, with permanent and binding legal precedent. Even after decades of relentless propaganda and behind the scenes wheeling and dealing by Jewish groups, the ultimate result was that the jury had the last word.

The Jewish community — and the media — present the pardon at face value as a vindication of Leo Frank. But consider another view: In order to pardon someone of a crime, that person has to be guilty — you can’t pardon someone unless you first acknowledge his guilt. Therefore, the guilt of the individual has to be affirmed — and in Leo Frank’s case it was affirmed again and again, at every level of the appellate system. All, including the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, preserved his verdict of guilt.

Further appeals?

The pardon was granted, the Board said, because the state failed to protect Leo Frank and because his lynching prevented him from launching further appeals. But there is one little problem with that.

The Board members were patently in error when they alleged that the lynchingprevented Frank from making any further appeals within the appellate court system, because Leo M. Frank had fully and totally exhausted all of his court appeal options at every level of the State, District, and Federal Appellate Courts, with the Supreme Court unanimously overruling any further review of the case, thus closing the door forever at all levels of the appellate court system. When there were no more options left in the court system, the State Board of 100 years ago refused a recommendation of clemency — and even the likely-bribed Governor John M. Slaton, refused to pardon Leo Frank and actually stated in his commutation letter he was not disturbing the guilty verdict. Not a single legal body in the last century has overturned the guilty verdict of Leo Frank, but attempts to spin the truth have endlessly been made.

Conclusion

Far from being the “bombshell” that “broke the Leo Frank case” and “proved Leo Frank to be innocent,” Alonzo Mann’s 1982 affidavit is a very doubtful document that, even if true, provides essentially nothing new to the objective student of the case. What it has provided, though, is an emotion-laden propaganda weapon for those who have been deceiving the public about this case for a century now.

* * *

APPENDIX: Articles and Images

_______

from the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald, March 8, 1982:

Man breaks 69-year silence on sensational murder case
Alonzo Mann, 83, stands outside an Atlanta department store at the site where 14-year-old Mary Phagan was murdered in 1913. After nearly 70 years, Mann now says he is convinced a Jewish factory superintendent, who was imprisoned and later lynched in a wave of anti-Semitism, was innocent of the crime. (UPI photo)

Alonzo Mann, 83, stands outside an Atlanta department store at the site where 14-year-old Mary Phagan was murdered in 1913. After nearly 70 years, Mann now says he is convinced a Jewish factory superintendent, who was imprisoned and later lynched in a wave of anti-Semitism, was innocent of the crime. (UPI photo)

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (UPI) — For almost 70 years Alonzo Mann kept secret his information that could have saved a Jewish factory superintendent from being lynched for killing a 14-year-old girl in Georgia.

As a 13-year-old boy he was afraid to testify at the trial of Leo Frank because the prosecution’s star witness — who Mann says was the real murderer — threatened to kill him. Mann said he later kept quiet because his mother told him not to get involved.

After he was convicted Frank was taken from prison and lynched in the sensational case that sparked waves of anti-Semitism and led to the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan and the creation of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith.
“At last I am able to get this off my heart,” Mann, 83, said in a copyrighted interview in Sunday’s Tennessean newspaper.

There will be some people who will be angry at me because I kept all this silent until it was too late to save Leo Frank’s life,” said Mann, who passed both a lie detector test and a psychological stress evaluation test on the truth of his statement.

“When my time comes, I hope that God understands me better for having told it. That is what matters most.”
Frank was tried and convicted for the murder of Mary Phagan who worked at the pencil factory where he was the superintendent.

Mann’s account, contained in a sworn affidavit, claimed he saw the state’s star witness, Jim Conley, carrying the limp body of the victim on the day of the murder. Conley died in 1962.

Mann, who now lives in Bristol, Va., said he remained silent at first because Conley threatened to kill him and later because his parents told him not get involved.

“I believe in the sight of God that Jim Conley killed Mary Phagan to get her money to buy beer,” said Mann. “Leo Frank was innocent.”

Mann, who has a heart condition and fears his life is drawing to its end, was Frank’s office boy in April 1913 at the National Pencil Co. factory in Atlanta. Mary Phagan was killed at the factory when she went to collect the $1.20 she was owed for 10 hours work.

After the slaying, authorities arrested Frank. Conley, a janitor at the factory, became the star witness.

Mann said when he saw Conley carrying the girl’s body, she was apparently still alive. He told the Tennessean he believes that if he had cried out, he might have saved the girl’s life.

But he did not, and Conley told him, “If you ever mention this, I’ll kill you,” Mann said.

Frightened, Mann ran away and later told his mother what happened, he said. She told him to remain silent.

Georgia Gov. John Slaton commuted Frank’s sentence in 1915 from death to life in prison, an act that touched off a wave of outrage and mob violence. Armed mobs roamed Atlanta streets for days, forcing Jewish businessmen to close their doors.

Later, a group of 75 men calling themselves “Knights of Mary Phagan,” met at the girl’s grave and vowed to avenge her death. A couple of weeks later, they stormed the prison where Frank was being held, held guards at bay with rifles and took Frank away in handcuffs.

He was hanged from an oak tree near the house where Phagan was born. No one was ever charged with lynching Frank.

Two months after the lynching, the Knights of Mary Phagan reorganized and burned a cross on top of Stone Mountain in Georgia — an event that marked the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan.

“I wish I had told what I knew,” said Mann “But I never thought Mr. Frank would be convicted. And once he was convicted, I was sure he would eventually get out of it.”



_______



from the Nashville Tennessean, March 7, 1982 (front page):

AN INNOCENT MAN WAS LYNCHED
"The players" from the front page of the Nashville Tennessean

“The players” from the front page of the Nashville Tennessean

by Frank Ritter, Jerry Thompson and Robert Sherborne

Leo Frank, convicted in 1913 and lynched in 1915 in one of the most notorious murder cases in American history, was innocent, according to a sworn statement given by a witness in the case.

The testimony used to convict Frank was perjured, and the real killer of 14-year-old Mary Phagan was the man who gave that false testimony, the witness has disclosed to The Tennessean.

ALONZO MANN OF Bristol, Va., is the witness. Now 83 and ailing with a heart condition, he was Frank’s office boy in 1913 at the National Pencil Co. factory in Atlanta. It was there on Confederate Memorial Day in April that little Mary Phagan was slain when she went to collect the $1.20 she was owed for 10 hours of work the previous Monday.
“Leo Frank did not kill Mary Phagan,” Mann said, “She was murdered instead by Jim Conley.”

Mann’s memory is not perfect when he is recalling people, places and events of nearly 70 years ago. But he remembers vividly the confrontation with Jim Conley, who had the limp form of Mary Phagan in his arms.
Mary’s battered body was found face down on a pile of sawdust shavings in the factory basement. A cord was knotted around her neck and there was massive bleeding from a deep wound to her head. Cinders were found under her fingernails, showing she had clawed the ground in her struggles. Her underclothing was ripped but there was no evidence indicating she had been raped.

THE SLAYING shocked Atlanta and, after an investigation, police arrested Frank, the Jewish superintendent of the factory. The prosecution’s star witness was Jim Conley, who worked at the factory as a sweeper. He said Frank committed the murder.

But Mann has told The Tennessean that he saw Conley on the day of the murder with the limp body of Mary Phagan in his arms. He believes he saw this only moments after Mary had been knocked unconscious, but apparently before she was murdered. And he believes that if he had yelled out, he might have saved Mary’s life.

But Mann says he did not yell out, and that Conley told him:

“IF YOU EVER MENTION this, I’ll kill you.”

He was frightened and ran out, Mann says. After riding a trolley home, he told his mother what had happened. She directed him to remain silent and told him not to get involved. He obeyed her.

Mann’s statement puts him in direct conflict with the testimony to which Conley swore during the trial. Conley testified he was ordered by Frank to dispose of Mary Phagan’s body by burning it in the basement’s furnace. He said he and Frank were together the whole time they took the body from the second floor of the factory directly to the basement, using the elevator. He said he was not on the first floor with the body.

MANN, HOWEVER, says he saw Conley alone with Mary Phagan on the first floor of the building, standing near the trapdoor that led to the basement. It later became apparent — after the trial — that the elevator did not go to the basement that day. This fact was cited as crucial by Georgia Gov. John Slaton when he commuted Frank’s sentence in 1915 to life imprisonment.

There is no way that what Mann says today can be reconciled with the version of events which Conley related in court in 1913. Either Conley lied then, or Mann is lying now.

Because of the historical significance of what Mann is saying, The Tennessean asked him to submit to both a lie detector test and a psychological stress evaluation examination — procedures designed to determine if someone is lying. The tests were given by the Ball Investigation Agency here, and investigator Jeffery S. Ball provided the newspaper with a formal statement saying Mann responded truthfully to every question he was asked.

THE TENNESSEAN, after an extensive investigation which included the examination of files and records in several states and interviews with people knowledgeable about the case, concluded that Mann’s story needed to be made public.

This is the first time that Mann has spoken publicly about what he knows of the brutal murder which led to the most blatant display of anti-Semitism in the nation’s history and to a revival of the Ku Klux Klan — an irony because Conley, the chief witness, was a black man.

Mann says he told relatives and friends about what he knew. Once, while in the Army, he got into a fight with another soldier who disputed his statement that it was Conley and not Frank who killed Mary Phagan. And he tried once to tell his story to an Atlanta reporter.

FOR NEARLY 70 years his story has been a secret, and it has preyed on his mind. Now that he perhaps does not have long to live, it is vitally important that the truth come out, he told The Tennessean.

“I want the world to know the truth,” Mann explained in a series of interviews with the newspaper, “The testimony which Conley gave at the trial to convict Frank was a lie from beginning to end.”

That trial, surrounded by mob hysteria and violent anti-Jewish sentiment, was the most sensational in Atlanta’s history. No other trial even comes close, except perhaps that of Wayne Williams, convicted a week ago in the deaths of two young Atlanta blacks and suspected of being the mass murderer who terrorized Atlanta for months.

ALTHOUGH MARY PHAGAN was not raped, Frank was denounced as a sexual pervert; however, Conley was the only witness to suggest that.

The star prosecution witness made four separate statements to police in connection with the case, the first one saying nothing to implicate Frank. However, each of the three statements that followed increasingly involved Frank.

During the trial, it was the fourth and last statement that formed the basis for Conley’s court testimony. On cross-examination he repeatedly acknowledged that he had made numerous mistakes in his earlier statements to police, but efforts by the defense to break down his tale were largely unsuccessful.

FRANK WAS FOUND guilty and sentenced to hang, but appeals delayed the execution. Two years later his sentence was commuted to life in prison after the case had created a furor across the nation.

At that point — August 1915 — a group of vigilantes stormed the prison where Frank was being held, abducted him at gunpoint and lynched him.

Four blacks had been lynched in Georgia the month before.

Although he possessed information in 1913 which he believes would have cleared Frank, Alonzo Mann did not tell authorities what he knew. He says he did not speak out because Conley threatened to kill him if he did and because his mother and father convinced him he should keep silent.

NOW, FINALLY, HE has come forward with his story.

“I wish I had done it differently,” he says, “I wish I had told what I knew. But I never thought Mr. Frank would be convicted. And once he was convicted, I was sure he would eventually get out of it. I knew he was not guilty.
“I never fully realized until I was older that if I had told what I knew Leo Frank would have been acquitted and gone free. Instead he was imprisoned. After he was convicted, my mother told me there was nothing we could do to change the jury’s verdict. My father agreed with her. [front page ends here; no further transcription available at this time — Ed.]
Second Alonzo Mann Pic - Drawing

An artist’s interpretation of the confrontation between Alonzo Mann, then 14, and Jim Conley, holding the limp form of Mary Phagan on the first floor of National Pencil Co.



_______



from the Tuscaloosa News, March 8, 1982:

Was innocent man lynched?

Third Alonzo Mann Pic - PolygraphNASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — An 83-year-old man who says he wants to clear the record before he dies claims the wrong person took the blame for the 1913 death of 14-year-old Mary Phagan in a sensational Atlanta murder case, The Nashville Tennessean reported in a copyright story Sunday.

Alonzo Mann of Bristol, Va., told the morning newspaper that he is certain Leo Frank, a Jewish pencil manufacturer, was innocent of Miss Phagan’s murder.

Mann, who worked as an office boy at the National Pencil Co., in Atlanta in 1913, said he believed Jim Conley, a black sweeper at the company and the key prosecution witness in the case, killed the young white girl April 26, 1913, for her $1.20 pay to buy beer.

Conley, who died in 1962, maintained throughout the trial that he and Frank were together the whole time when the body of Mary Phagan was disposed of.

Frank was convicted and was sentenced to death, but his sentence was commuted by Georgia Gov. John Marshall Slaton, the newspaper said. In August 1915, a group of vigilantes who called themselves the Knights of Mary Phagan stormed the Milledgeville, Ga., jail where Frank was held and dragged him out at gunpoint. Frank was lynched about 175 miles away in an oak grove near Marietta, Ga.

The trial was flamed by anti-Semitism and spurred a resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan and the birth of the B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation League, which opposes anti-Semitism.

Mann told the newspaper that he has thought often in the ensuing decades that he might have saved Mary Phagan’s life or that of Leo Frank.

Mann said he worked April 26, 1913, and left briefly to attend the Confederate Memorial Day parade with his mother. When he was unable to find her, he returned to the job and came across Conley, alone, apparently moments after the murder had been committed.

“I had no idea that I was about to witness an important moment in a famous murder case — a moment that has not been made public until now; that I was about to become a witness to tragic history,” Mann told The Tennessean.

Mann said he saw Conley holding the limp girl near a trap door leading to the factory’s cellar.

The Virginia man said if Miss Phagan was only unconscious when he saw her with Conley and if he had yelled for help, she might have been spared.

“On the other hand, I might have lost my own life,” he said, “If I had told what I saw that day I might have saved Leo Frank’s life. I didn’t realize it at the time. I was too young to understand.”

Mann said Conley had threatened him.

“He wheeled on me and in a voice that was low but threatening and frightening to me, he said:

“If you ever mention this I’ll kill you.”

“I was young and I was frightened, “ he told the newspaper. “I had no doubt Conley would have tried to kill me if I had told that I had seen him with Mary Phagan that day.”

Mann, who told The Tennessean he refused to give Conley a dime for two beers the morning of the murder, said Mary Phagan went to Frank a short time later to get her pay.

“I am convinced that she left the pay window and was coming down the stairs or had reached the first floor when she met Conley … I am confident that I came in just seconds after Conley had taken the girl’s money and grabbed her. I do not think sex was his motive. I believe it was money. Her pay was never found in the building after she died.”

Mann, who told the newspaper that by telling his tory he could at last “get this off my heart,” said he told his late wife about the crime, fought a soldier over the story and tried to tell an Atlanta newspaper reporter about it in the 1950s.
“I believe it will help people to understand that courts and juries can make mistakes. They made a mistake in the Leo Frank case. I think it is good for it all to come out at this date,” Mann said.

“I am making this statement because, finally, I want the record clear. I want the public to understand that Leo Frank did not kill Mary Phagan,” Mann, told The Tennessean in a story written by Frank Ritter, Jerry Thompson and Robert Sherborne, “Jim Conley, the chief witness against Leo Frank, lied under oath … I am convinced that he, not Leo Frank, killed Mary Phagan.”

John Seigenthaler, president and publisher of The Tennessean, said Mann passed two lie detector tests administered by Ball Investigative Agency. He said he insisted Mann be given a psychological voice stress test because he has a pacemaker which Seigenthaler was concerned would interfere with the lie detector tests. He said the agency told him the pacemaker would have no effect on the tests and Mann passed the voice analysis.

Mann said that fateful April day he told his mother what he had seen at the factory, but she told him to forget it in hopes of protecting the family and her son from publicity.

“After he was convicted my mother told me there was nothing we could do to change the jury’s verdict,” Mann said “My father agreed with her. I continued to remain silent.”

Mann, who testified at the trial, told The Tennessean he was nervous and frightened the day the trial started.

“There were crowds in the street who were angry and who were saying that Leo Frank should die,” he said, “ Some were yelling things like, ‘Kill the Jew!’”

“I never fully realized until I was older that if I had told what I knew Leo Frank would have been acquitted and gone free,” Mann told the newspaper. “Instead, he was imprisoned.”

Mann said neither he nor his father believed Frank would be convicted. Frank, who took the witness stand in his own defense, denied he killed the girl.

“Leo Frank was convicted by lies, heaped on lies,” he told the newspaper. “It wasn’t just Conley who lied. Others said that Leo Frank had women in the office for immoral purposes and that he had liquor there. There was a story that he took women in the basement … That was all false.”

Mann told the newspaper he believes people will have different reactions to his story.

“There will be some people who will be angry at me because I kept all this silent until it was too late to save Leo Frank’s life,” he said. “They will say that being young is not an excuse. They will blame my mother. The only thing I can say is that she did what she thought was best for me and the family.

“Other people may hate me for telling it. I hope not, but I am prepared for that, too. I know that I haven’t a long time to live. All that I have said is the truth.

“When my time comes, I hope that God understands me better for having told it. That is what matters most,” Mann said.

_______

The 1986 pardon of Leo Frank Image.
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 12th, 2015 #89
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default The Alonzo Mann Hoax

Photo Alonzo “Lonnie” Mann in 1913, office boy of Leo M. Frank for three weeks. Alonzo Mann was born August 8, 1898 in Memphis Tennessee and died March 19, 1985 in Bristol, Virginia, United States of America.

According to Jewish tribal activist Leonard Dinnerstein's weird and twisted logic: First comes the fabricated conclusion, then comes the make-believe to sustain it.

There is no reason to doubt that Alonzo Mann’s affidavit is accurate. Had he ignored his mother’s advice and gone to the police with his information right away, Conley would surely have been arrested, the police and district attorney would not have concentrated their efforts on finding Frank guilty, and the crime would most likely have been quickly solved. But by the time the trial began, in July 1913, Mann’s testimony might hardly have even seemed important.

Source: The Fate of Leo Frank, American Heritage, October 1996 | Volume 47, Issue 6

What Really Happened in 1913?

August 1913, Alonzo Mann, sworn for the Defendant. Official Brief of Evidence, 1913:

Alonzo Mann:

I am office boy at the National Pencil Company. I began working there [Tuesday] April 1, 1913. I sit sometimes in the outer office and stand around in the outer hall. I left the factory at half past eleven [11:30 a.m.] on [Saturday] April 26th [1913]. When I left there, Miss Hall, the stenographer from Montag’s, was in the office with Mr. Frank. Mr. Frank told me to phone to Mr. Schiff and tell him to come down [to the office at the National Pencil Company]. I telephoned him, but the girl [(Shiff's Negro Maid)] answered the phone and said he hadn’t got up yet. I telephoned once. I worked there two Saturday afternoons of the weeks previous to the murder and stayed there until half past three or four [p.m.]. Frank was always working during that time. I never saw him bring any women into the factory and drink with them. I have never seen Dalton there. On April 26th, I saw Holloway, Irby, McCrary and [Foreman N.V.] Darley at the factory. I didn’t see [Lemmie] Quinn. I don’t remember seeing Corinthia Hall, Mrs. Freeman, Mrs. White, Graham, Tillander, or Wade Campbell, I left there 11:30 [AM].

CROSS EXAMINATION.

When Mr. Frank came that morning, he went right on into the office, and was at work there and stayed there. He went out once. Don’t know how long he stayed out.

Flash Forward to the 1980′s.

From 1982 to 1985, and 1986 Onward...

Alonzo Mann, one of the last surviving Leo Frank defense witnesses, came forward some 69 years later in 1982, and provided some very questionable testimony...

Jewish Activist Machinations: The ADL and the Highly Political Posthumous Pardon

Alonzo Mann’s affidavit became the basis of an attempt to obtain a ‘posthumous pardon with exoneration’ for Leo Frank from the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles. The effort was led by Charles Wittenstein, southern counsel for the Anti-Defamation League, and Dale Schwartz, an Atlanta lawyer.

[Photo of Charles Wittenstein and Dale M. Schwartz]

Before asking this question, read what Alonzo Mann told the public between 1982-1985: What does common sense tell us about Alonzo Mann's Story 70 years after the fact?

Common sense tells us most of what Alonzo Mann had to say is likely to be untrue, moreover the further away in time the memory is from the original event, the more likely it becomes distorted and easily manipulated. How would a 21st century State Supreme Court or United States Supreme Court weigh testimony that comes 69 years after the fact? An even more salient question is: Could such a revelation as Alonzo Mann’s in 1982, even if true, be worthy to exonerate Leo Frank? You decide.

Background: On April 1st, 1913, Alonzo Mann, a thirteen year old boy, had scored his highly coveted job as Leo Frank’s personal office boy at the National Pencil Company. Given Mann was not at the factory long enough (3.5 weeks) to really provide an accurate assessment concerning Leo Frank’s character, one is not inclined to believe he had known Leo Frank long enough to make an accurate character assessment of him. Can anyone claim to know someone after working for them for only 3 work weeks? Moreover one is inclined to believe the young teenage officeboy was a bit starstruck and naive back then, which tended to cause him to be unaware of the “extracurricular activities” going on in the factory under the tutelage of Leo M. Frank as general superintendent for 5 years.

Flash Forward from 1913 Some 69 Years Later to 1982 when the Story Broke.

In 1982 Alonzo Mann was in the gloaming autumn of his life, frail and in terrible physical condition. Alonzo Mann was perched on a cane, had a pacemaker, and was on a cocktail of pharmaceuticals. Mann was truly lonely, the WWI veteran had sadly outlived his wife and only son. His virtual “death-bed” revelation in the years before he died, had all the flare of a fictionalized Hollywood, Jewish Carnival sideshow and Broadway drama, and the markings of another backroom bribery deal, which has always been the central strategy of Leo Frank’s defenders for more than a century. The Georgia Supreme Court Records containing Leo Frank’s appeals reveal the machinations of this ugly criminal Soap Opera that has now become a hoax of centenary proportions. The Jewish strategy is to use academic dishonesty, fabricate and plagiarize each other's sloppy research. Jewish academic activists know no bounds when it comes to using anything they can possibly come up with to falsify history in the favor of their tribe "in-group" at the expense of the "out group" goyim.

Nearly 70 Years Later After the Murder of Mary Phagan: I lied 70 years ago, but I'm not lying now *wink* *wink*

In 1982, Alonzo Mann changed his entire story and alleged that he really left the NPCo factory at noon, instead of 11:30 a.m. as he had testified in 1913. Alonzo having changed his story from the one he propounded 7 decades early, went on to say five minutes after he left the NPCo factory (noon this time), he came back at 12:05p.m. and saw the 27-year-old Negro Janitor James "Jim" Conley, carrying the limp body of Mary Phagan on his shoulder (not knowing if she was dead or alive), positioned as if getting ready to dump Phagan down the 2foot-by-2foot scuttle hole — the hinged trapdoor next to the elevator. Jim Conley then allegedly reached out for Alonzo Mann and said to the young boy, “If you tell anyone, I will kill you”. And Alonzo Mann, claimed he ran home and told his family and his parents told their young son, not to tell anyone or get involved - more specifically his mother told him not to get involved.

Does that seem logical? or does that set off your highly refined bullshit detector?

In 1982, Alonzo Mann’s statement did not pass multiple commonsense tests and came off as desperate concoctions of coached lies according to every neutral person who heard his belated revelation and knows the history of Southern culture.

First, why would White parents in the White racial separatist Atlanta, Georgia, of 1913, tell their White son not to tell the police about a “murdering” and “guilty” Negro janitor Jim Conley, when the result of not telling the police would ultimately result in an “innocent”, clean cut, and White boss, Leo Frank, who gave their son a highly prized job, going to gallows for a crime he didn’t commit instead of a “guilty” Negro janitor? Given that in the Old South, African-Americans were regarded as third class citizens with child-like mental and emotional maturity, once Conley was locked up, he would no longer be a threat. Conley remained in in jail from the time he was arrested on Thursday, May 1st, 1913, until late 1914 when he was released after serving a sentence for being an accessory after the fact. Why didn’t Alonzo Mann come forward while Conley was serving his sentence? Why didn't Alonzo Mann come forward when Jim Conley died in the early 1950s (according to a 1955 memorandum by John Slaton). It was known to every one in Atlanta through the three daily newspapers that Conley was sentenced to one year in jail. Do these circumstances and behaviors pass the commonsense test?

Second, why would White parents, in a white separatist south, allow their son to report back to work on Monday Morning, April 28, 1913, only two days after their son was “threatened with death by a Negro carrying a dead or unconscious white girl on his shoulder Saturday April 26, 1913, at five minutes past noon”. Jim Conley reported back to work on Monday morning, April 28, 1913, as did the 170 employees who were naturally expected to be back at work after the holiday weekend. Jim Conley was not arrested until Thursday, May 1st, 1913 and Alonzo Mann reported to work everyday as expected. Why would White parents allow their son to go back to work in the cavernous factory where their son could easily be assaulted or killed by Conley? Does that pass the commonsense test? If you had kids and your own child reported that they saw a Negro carrying a slumped teenage girl -- who was later found mutilated in a basement of the same business -- would you let your child report back to work at that same place of business? What does your common sense tell you?

Third, if Alonzo Mann admitted to lying under oath at the Leo Frank trial in 1913, “withholding information” and “leaving at 11:30 a.m. instead of Noon” as he contended 69 years later, what’s not to say he wasn’t lying again between all the years he made his new revelations from 1982 until his death on March 1985? Relying on our commonsense can we trust him when there are so many holes in his story? Not only that, but records show that Alonzo Mann lied about his age when he joined the military at age 15, claiming he was 16. If he is so willing to lie on official forms long ago, what would stop him from lying again?

Fourth, If Alonzo Mann walked in on Jim Conley at 12:05 p.m., getting ready to throw Mary Phagan down the scuttlehole, why did Monteen Stover not bump into this scene? Why didn’t Leo Frank who was 40 feet away not hear Phagan scream? Where was Leo Frank when Monteen Stover waited in his vacant office between 12:05 p.m. and 12:10 p.m.?

Fifth, why didnt Mann, just retrace his steps in the lobby, run outside and announce to the streets filled with White men that a Negro is carrying a dead or unconscious White girl?

Let’s take a closer look at the circumstances, Southern Culture and Ask Common Sense Questions.

If we are to believe Alonzo Mann that he saw Jim Conley carrying the unconscious body of Mary Phagan, isn’t it rather odd that in a White racial separatist south, given the invitation of an extremely violent lynching, a Southern Negro would assault, rob and carrying the body of a White girl across the highest traffic place in the factory with the front door unlocked?

Leo Frank said more than a dozen people entered and left the office during the morning period from 8:30 a.m. till noon. Many of these visitors testified to seeing Jim Conley sitting idly on a crate that morning. Conley also described seeing people come and go when he was seated there, would he have assaulted White female employee without locking the front door? There were literally hundreds of people outside the factory walking in both directions on the sidewalk. The front door to the factory was a large Glass paned door that people could see into very easily or hear a piercing scream.

In 1906 four white women were gang raped by Negroes, and a White Mob went berserk killing dozens of Blacks, thus would a Negro be so brazen given what they know about White men castrating without anesthesia black men who assault their daughters and wives? Finally, putting it all together: On a day like Georgia Confederate Memorial Day, when the emotions of White people were particularly saddened, outraged and inflamed at the reminder of their great war for independence lost, does that make sense that a Negro would attack a White girl in broad day light with so many people right outside the front glass window door, where people could see in so clearly, or easily hear a girl’s scream, or where employees where constantly coming into the factory and with the front door unlocked for their easy access? Does this pass the common sense test when we consider all these factors?

During the Leo Frank trial, the defense team changed its theory of how the attack against Mary Phagan transpired. In one theory, Mary Phagan was crowded back to the empty area of the former Clarke woodenware company on the first floor (see State’s Exhibit A and Defendant’s Exhibit 61, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence), assaulted, thrown down a trapdoor at the rear of the building, but there was only one problem, it was determined well before the trial that the owner of the National Pencil Company building that rented only the basement, 2nd, 3rd and fourth floor to Sigmund Montag, had NOT rented the first floor to the National Pencil Company and had locked the door to that ground floor area 4 months earlier before the murder occurred. In Jan 1913, when the Clarke Woodenware company departed, the door to that empty space was still locked when the police came to the premises on Sunday, April 27, 1913. Someone broke that door open 4 days after the murder. At another time during the trial the Leo Frank defense said Mary Phagan’s body was thrown 14 feet down to the basement below via the 2foot wide scuttle hole near the elevator at the front of the building, which had a ladder diagonally going downward. The defenses theories, centered around Jim Conley murdering an unconscious Mary Phagan in the basement. The defense theories in 1913 to 1915, and every year since then, up until now in the year 2013, keep changing and slowly mutating.

Wouldn’t there have been forensic evidence on the body of a 4’11″ and 107lbs girl, if she were alive and had fallen 14 feet? Mary Phagan had numerous autopsies performed on her by doctors in late April and early May of 1913, none of the reports mention any broken bones or indications on her body that she had fallen 14 feet to a hard dirt floor. 14 feet is a significant height that anyone thrown down would without a doubt have forensic evidence of the fall if they were still alive and unconscious. In fact the forensic evidence shows that the scratches on her face caused by her being dragged 140 feet across the basement floor from the elevator to the rear of the cellar, had no blood coming from them, indicating she was already quite dead when she reached the basement. Physicians knew for centuries that when a person is dead, the bleeding and healing process ceases.

The autopsy reports revealed she had died of strangulation and before death the black eye suggested a left handed man punched her in the face. What percentage of people are left handed? According to Wikipedia.org, “A variety of studies suggest that 70–90% of the world population is right-handed.” (wiki Lefthandedness, 2013). Since Leo Frank was left handed and Jim Conley right handed who was more likely to have punched her in the right eye with a left fist?

What about the hair with dried blood on the lathe in the metalroom and the blood stains on its floor? Censored by academic Jewish Supremacists for more than 100 years!!

Another Throw Away Detail?! Check out the Atlanta Journal's sketch of Phagan's hair found on the handle of a bench lathe in the machine department (where she was assaulted at the back of the second floor).

The most interesting NEW piece of sworn evidence Alonzo Mann provided to the public in 1982 is concerning the location of the loafing sweeper Jim Conley, Mann said Conley was idly squatting on a box in the first floor lobby of the National Pencil Company for the entire morning of Saturday, April 26, 1913. Very interesting piece of NEW evidence, because in 1913, Alonzo Mann and several of Leo Frank’s defense witnesses claimed they didn’t see Jim Conley that day. It would mean that Hattie Hall, Leo Frank’s stenographer had committed perjury and lied under oath as well as N.V. Darley, Alonzo Mann and everyone else who was a defense witness for Leo Frank that claimed to be in the factory that morning.

This “new” evidence provided by Alonzo Mann was not actually “new” and did not actually help Leo Frank, but tended to corroborate all the other eye witness testimony from other witnesses who were there at the factory that morning on April 26, 1913, saying a Negro was idly loafing about in the lobby. The eye witness testimony tended to suggest Jim Conley had indeed spent the morning and afternoon in the factory lobby and Leo Frank not only knew about it, but did indeed request his Negro pet to come to work on that infamous day.

Did Jim Conley’s Testimony Sustain Itself?

Jim Conley alleged he was waiting in the lobby all morning long, because Leo M. Frank had asked him to wait there as a watchdog for him regarding a planned afternoon tryst. Is there an unwritten subtext here? Jim Conley claimed to have had served as Leo’s watchdog on numerous other Saturdays when he entertained other women. Did Leo Frank have a preplanned tryst arranged with Mary? If so it adds a new dimension to the case never before explored. For the purposes of history, if we consider the Koenigsberg variation of the murder, that Mary Phagan had a pre-arranged tryst with Leo Frank, then it reveals that perhaps this case is even more bizarre than we might have ever thought. And then the question that arises is, why then did Leo Frank murder Mary?

Did Leo Frank lie about not knowing Jim Conley was at the factory that day?

If Alonzo Mann was indeed telling the truth about Jim Conley sitting there all morning long doing nothing, it opens up a permutation in the Game theory of the Leo Frank Case, suggesting Leo Frank might have definitely fibbed to the court when he gave his unsworn statement to the Jury on August 18, 1913: Frank said he did not even know Jim Conley was in the factory at all that day on April 26, 1913 (Leo Frank Trial Statement, Brief of Evidence, August 18, 1913).

How could Leo Frank not know Jim Conley was there, when Leo Frank admitted at the trial that during the morning, he left the building and came back after running morning errands during a brief trip to Sigmund Montag’s office down the block to get the mail (Leo Frank, Brief of Evidence, August 18, 1913). How could Leo Frank miss seeing a Negro sitting next to the staircase?

The common sense test is now called:

If Leo Frank did not know Jim Conley was there all morning long at the factory on Saturday, April 26, 1913, The logical question follows, what was an employee of the factory, Jim Conley, who was “not” required to work on a Saturday and State Holiday, doing, sitting on a crate next to the staircase on the first floor lobby all morning long, wasting time watching people come and go? Most African Americans would argue that never in the history of the universe would a Blackman go to work on a Saturday, State Holiday and day off, unless he was required to by his boss - Conley had been paid his salary the evening before.. Especially in light of the fact Jim Conley had been paid his weekly salary the evening before on Friday, April 25, 1913 at 6:30 PM by Leo M. Frank. At 5 cents a beer and 3 cents a whiskey, its hard to imagine Jim Conley would have spent all of his salary on booze the night before and still come to work bright and early the next day. It just doesn’t seem realistic that Jim Conley could have drank 120 beers the night before and would need to rob, rape, and strangle a White girl in the highest traffic point of the National Pencil Company factory. Wouldn’t the drunken African-American stumble bum rather bide his time drinking five cent pints at any Russian-Jewish owned Saloon (Russian Jews generally served Negroes Beer, when it was generally an unwritten rule to never sell drinks to Negroes in White owned Saloons).

African-American Christian observers are wondering when in the “11,000 year history” of the Universe has a black man gone to work on his day off and a State holiday, when he was not required. Especially in light of the fact he was just paid off his salary which was oddly much higher ($6.05 vs. $4.05) than the wages of the average laborer at the factory. Jim Conley coming to work on his day off, on his own, just didn’t fit or make sense, unless he was asked to come to work by his boss Leo Frank. Surely an employee like Jim Conley who had two years tenure (1911 to 1913) at the factory, and was known for being an alcoholic, would much rather spend his free time on a Saturday and State Holiday carousing in a local beer saloon burning off his $6 pay envelope at a nickel a pint, rather than sitting on a crate all day long twiddling his thumbs and staring at spider webs on the ceiling or watching employees come and go through the front door — after all — Leo Frank paid Jim Conley his unheard of janitorial salary the evening before on Friday, April 25, 1913 at 6:30 PM.

Concerning Jim Conley’s unheard of Salary: It left many people asking, why is the lazy negro floor sweeper named Jim Conley who was demoted from Elevator Operator, making 50% more ($6.05 vs $4.05) than the white day laborers. Perhaps the floor sweeper Jim Conley was more than meets the eyes for Leo Frank, sustaining all the testimony which confirmed Jim Conley was Leo Frank’s watchdog afterall, when Leo would order call-in prostitutes from Nina Formby on Saturdays or arrange trysts with his potentially willing child laborers who were living on the edge of poverty. Given that one female employee reported at the Leo M. Frank trial that she told Assistant Superintendent Herbert George Schiff (Trial Testimony of Herbert George Schiff, Brief of Evidence, August, 1913) that Jim Conley was “sprinkling” (peeing) on the pencils. Why was Jim Conley never fired? Unless that is Jim Conley served a more important purpose for Leo M. Frank.

Schiff would claim at the leo frank trial that the reason why Jim Conley wasn’t fired was because he knows the business too well (BOE, 1913).

According to, “Snow Ball” (Gordon Bailey, Brief of Evidence, August, 1913), Jim Conley, was an employee not always required to punch the time clock. Why would a Negro sweeper like Jim Conley who got busted down from elevator operator and inventory checker to the absolute lowest job in the factory, be extended such unique liberties and high salary by Leo M. Frank. Especially in the wider context, why was Jim Conley the only person out of the 170 factory employees — most of whom were White and 8 of which were African-Americans — not have to punch the time clock? Unless Jim Conley was more than meets the eye for Leo M. Frank. Was Jim Conley indeed Leo Frank’s “pet”?

Broad Daylight: The defense and Leo Frank partisans contend, Jim Conley was waiting in the lobby, there to rob a fellow employee, namely Mary Phagan between Noon and 12:15pm on April 26, 1913, But they forgot about the Scream!

The Scream

Where Jim Conley sat on the first floor, it was no more than 30 to 40 feet away from Leo Frank in his inner office on the second floor. As we already know the first floor lobby of the National Pencil Company was the highest traffic point in the entire building, it was where people would come and go, all day long during the work week, and all morning long on Saturdays to retrieve pay-envelops.

On Saturday, April 26, 1913, people were coming to collect their pay envelopes and several employees were present in the morning for a half-days work wrapping things up and tying up lose ends. Leo Frank was on the second floor in his office on April 26, 1913, as he was on most Saturdays, he surely could have heard a potential scream from 30 to 40 feet away, which was how far Leo’s second floor office was from the first floor lobby area, that is if Mary Phagan was actually assaulted on the first floor. Jim Conley claimed he heard a scream after Leo and Mary went to the metal room. Leo Frank did not mention a scream coming from under his office where Jim Conley Sat, because Leo Frank claimed to have unconsciously gone to the metal room at the exact same time he told police he was alone with Mary Phagan in his office. Were scream experiments conducted, likely.

If Jim Conley had attacked Mary Phagan in the lobby, then Leo Frank would have heard a scream downstairs below him, and he could easily call the police, the phone was inside Leo Frank’s office on the wall (See Defense Exhibit Diagrams of Second Floor).

The theory of Negro Jim Conley beating, robbing and “possibly raping” a White girl in the place where Monteen Stover would have walked in on him doing it, would almost surely guarantee her backing up into the street filled with Whitemen, a castration without anesthesia would ensue, which is how Negro rapists were generally dealt with in 1913 Atlanta, that is, just before they were lynched from tree and then riddled with bullets, with a bonfire to finish.

Monteen Stover, and Lemmie Quinn indicated they never heard or saw Mary Phagan coming or going on April 26, 1913, when they both claimed they came to the factory at around the same time she arrived. Moreover, Lemmie Quinn’s claim that he came to the factory and visited Leo Frank’s office at 12:20 to 12:25 was determined to be a lie by Coroner Paul Donehoo at the coroner’s inquest in May 1913 (Lemmie Quinn also signed an affidavit for Hugh Dorsey before the Coroner's inquest claiming he was on the other side of town at a billiard hall).

A Little Lite Whoring on the Sabbath

Was Jim Conley telling the truth when he said Leo Frank asked him on the evening of Friday, April 25, 1913, to come to work on the morning of April 26, 1913, to act as a watchdog as he had in the past, because it was something Leo M. Frank had done many times before on Saturdays according to Jim, and naturally given its implications, Leo Frank denied it. What other man would not deny he was arranging booty calls at work with women other than his wife. Which brings us back full circle to the question, why was Jim Conley sitting on a crate all morning long in the factory lobby on his day off?

Jim Conley sitting on a crate next to the stairs was corroborated by Mrs. White at the trial in 1913, and later by Alonzo Mann in 1982, but not 1913, thus it tends to potentially corroborate the notion that Leo Frank requested Jim Conley to come to work on Saturday, April 26, 1913, to act as a lookout while Leo Frank “chatted” with girls upstairs in the afternoon.

Commonsense tells us that usually no one goes to work on a State Holiday or day off – BLACK OR WHITE – unless they were asked to do so or if there is a really good reason. Since Conley was paid and the bars where waiting for him, the question is, who asked Jim Conley to spend the day waiting and sitting on a box on the first floor lobby area of the National Pencil Company? If someone didn’t ask him, what was he doing there all day? Waiting to rob someone at high noon? While the streets are filled with people on the other side of a glass paned door? Jim Conley says Leo Frank did ask him to come to work, and numerous witnesses other than Alonzo Mann sustained the fact Jim Conley was actually sitting there all morning long.

Alonzo Mann corroborated that fact in 1982 saying he saw Jim Conley sitting there all morning long in the factory lobby
.

Alonzo Mann, never mentioned seeing Tillander, Corrie or Emma, thus sustaining the fact he left the Factory at 11:30 am on April 26, 1913, not his supposed noon he claimed 69 years later. Another interesting element at the trial is Hattie Hall, Leo’s Stenographer, she did not mention seeing Alonzo Mann when she left at Noon, also sustaining that Alonzo Mann did actually likely leave the factory at 11:30 a.m. on Saturday, April 26, 1913, not at noon.

So if Alonzo Mann left the NPCo factory on Saturday, April 26, 1913, at 11:30 AM, as he claimed in 1913, Mann was probably lying in 1982, when he said he left the factory at Noon and came back 5 minutes later at 12:05 pm and saw Jim Conley carrying an unconscious Mary Phagan, but not Monteen Stover.

To further muddy the waters, isn’t it rather odd, the employee Herbert G. Schiff who prided himself at the trial concerning the fact he never missed a day of work for 5 years, would have supposedly missed work on Saturday, April 26, 1913, a State Holiday, when he was not expected to come to work? (see: Trial testimony of Herbert G. Schiff, Brief of Evidence, August, 1913). Alonzo Mann claimed he called Herbert Schiff one time on the morning of Saturday, April 26, 1913, but Schiffs Negro maid alleged Alonzo Mann had called 2x. Did he even call at all? What caused the mix up? The cacophony was even bigger than described here, others claimed to have called Herbert George Schiff at different times, but as 21st century forensic time travellers of the imagination, we can presume Schiff was not expected to come to work that day on April 26, 1913.

It turns out schiff was indeed called during the morning of April 26, 1913, but not to report to work, he was called to inform him his suit had come from the drycleaners and he would need to pick it up Monday, April 28, 1913.

We must come back to the most salient question: Was Schiff even expected to be at work that day? Probably not, why would someone who prided themselves on never missing a single day of work, coincidentally miss work on a state holiday and the day of the Murder?

Alonzo Mann, claimed he came back to the factory at 12:05p.m. because he wanted to speak to Herbert George Schiff, but if Schiff was never expected to be at work on a holiday, and never showed up, it gives greater strength to the likelihood that Alonzo Mann probably lied repeatedly in 1982 to 1985 about coming back and seeing Jim Conley in the lobby carrying Mary Phagan over his shoulder.

Lemmie Quinn, Metalroom Foreman at the National Pencil Company


The other problem Leo Frank had to contend with was the issue of Lemmie Quinn, who allegedly came to the factory at 12:20 p.m. on April 26, 1913, for supposedly 2 minutes, looking for Herbert George Schiff, it turns out to talk about a baseball bet with him. Why was Lemmie Quinn looking for an employee at 12:20 PM on Saturday, April 26, 1913, who was never supposed to come to work on a holiday?

Leo Frank said he had forgotten for a full week to mention Lemmie Quinn’s afternoon arrival at the factory at 12:20 pm and the Coroner Paul Donehoo at the Coroner’s Inquest asked why he didn’t mention this important information to the police once he remembered it a week later. Leo Frank responded by saying he wanted to ask for permission from his lawyers first before revealing it to police, the Coroner Paul Donehoo became incredulous as might be expected.

It was presumed with commonsense that someone accused of murdering a little girl, would make every effort to bring forward exonerating evidence and alibi witnesses as soon as humanly possible and not withhold it for more than a week until May 5th and May 8th, 1913. The result of Leo Frank waiting more than a week to tell anyone about his alibi witness, made the newfangled evidence appear as if it was manufactured or fabricated. Especially in light of the fact that an affidavit was made by Lemmie Quinn a week before the Coroner’s inquest, stating he had left the factory at 11:45 a.m. to go home and then head to a billiards hall on the other side of town (State's Exhibit S, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913)

Lemmie Quinn’s “reappearance” at the factory at 12:20 PM on April 26, 1913, was seen as a physical impossibility given that Lemmie admitted leaving the National Pencil Company at 11:45 AM, going home and then making a 25 minute trip to the billiards hall on the other side of town. Thus it would not have given Lemmie Quinn enough time to get back to the factory at 12:20 pm on Saturday, April 26, 1913, even if Lemmie Quinn only played one quick billiard game and then made the 25 minute trip back to the factory, he still would not have been able to get back to the factory at 12:20 or 12:25 p.m.

Lemmie Quinn Backfired

Lemmie Quinn got caught in a bald face lie and it was likely that none of the 12 Jury members and Judge Leonard Strickland Roan believed Lemmie Quinn. National Pencil Company foreman of the metal room, Lemmie Quinn, gave testimony that simply came off as completely fabricated after the murder, on behalf of Leo Frank as an alibi witness, for the purpose of shrinking the amount of time available for Leo Frank to kill Mary Phagan from Noon to 12:35, down to the range of Noon to 12:19 pm. Even if we were to believe Lemmie Quinn’s newfangled claims, it still left Leo Frank with 18 minutes unaccounted for time according to Dinnerstein, especially in light of the fact Leo Frank changed the time Mary Phagan came into his office four times his credibility is most questionable.

Lemmie Quinn’s Claims Boxed in Leo Frank

The problem with Lemmie Quinn’s supposed appearance at the factory at 12:20 PM is NOT only that our highly refined bullshit detectors tell us that his arrival was likely a fabrication to help Leo Frank, but more importantly by Leo Frank claiming Lemmie Quinn arrived at 12:20 PM, it transformed into another blunder for Leo Frank at his trial, because it makes the Defense’s first floor attack of Mary Phagan even more difficult to believe. If Alonzo Mann allegedly saw Jim Conley carrying the unconscious body of Mary Phagan there in the lobby at 12:05 pm, the Jury would be asking itself, well where was Monteen Stover if State’s Exhibit B is correct concerning when Mary Phagan arrived? If Leo Frank changed the time Phagan came to his office to 12:12 to 12:17, and spoke to Phagan for 2 or 3 minutes, why didn’t she bump into Lemmie Quinn upon exiting? Both Stover and Quinn claimed to be at the factory sandwiching the time Leo Frank said Mary Phagan arrived, so wouldn’t have Quinn bumped into atleast Mary Phagan or Jim Conley at 12:20?


Leo Frank’s Ever Changing Times Concerning Mary Phagan’s Arrival Finally Becomes Significant concerning Alonzo Mann and Lemmie Quinn


The Saturday April 26, 1913, 12:20 pm appearance of Lemmie Quinn was not the only Lie Leo Frank got himself tangled in, but to make matters worse, he changed the time Mary Phagan arrived on April 26, 1913, from:
“12:02 to 12:03″ (The time he gave police orally on Sunday, April 27, 1913); to “12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07″ (The time he gave in a deposition to police on Monday, April 28, 1913 known as State’s Exhibit B, 1913); then it became 12:10 to 12:15 (The time he gave at Coroner’s Inquest, May 5 and 8th, 1913); and finally 12:12 p.m. to 12:17 p.m. (Leo Frank Trial, August 18, 1913).

FOUR SEPARATE TIMES!

Leo Frank gave four separate times Mary Phagan had arrived on four different occasions, damaging his credibility beyond repair, and to make matters worse, they were all in the time period he could not account for, even with Lemmie Quinn’s perjury boxing him in at 12:20 p.m.

The defense theory that Jim Conley attacked Mary Phagan opens up more unanswered questions:

Where was Leo Frank, if and when, Mary Phagan Screamed? Did she scream or was she assaulted and kept quiet? The Lobby was just below Leo Frank's office.

Why was there no forensic or physical evidence the attack happened on the first floor lobby area of the National Pencil Company? That is until Detective McWorth planted evidence against Conley there in the lobby 3 weeks after the crime? Who is Detective McWorth? He was a Pinkerton Agent that switched sides and became an asset to the Leo Frank Defense Team and was hired as an agent by the Burns Detective Agency.

We are again left with asking the question: If Mary Phagan was attacked on the first floor, made “unconscious” and dumped 14 feet to the hard dirt floor of the basement, why did none of the doctors who autopsied her not find broken bones or appropriate bruises from the 14 foot fall?

We know looking back on the case with 21st century forensic eyes that 107lbs of dead weight falling 14 feet is absolutely going to leave unmistakable medical and forensic evidence. That unmistakable evidence, was not reported by doctors who performed numerous autopsies on Mary Phagan! Therefore no 14 foot fall of Mary Phagan likely occurred.



AFTER 69 YEARS OF SILENCE, LYNCHING VICTIM IS CLEARED

reported by WENDELL RAWLS Jr., Special to the New York Times. New York Times. (Late Edition (east Coast)). New York, N.Y.:Mar 8, 1982. p. A.12

Subjects: MURDERS AND ATTEMPTED MURDERS, SENTENCES, (CRIMINAL), VIOLENCE, JEWS
Locations: ATLANTA (GA)

People: Leo Frank, Mary Phagan, Jim Conley, Alonzo Mann,

Author(s): WENDELL RAWLS Jr., Special to the New York Times

Dateline: NASHVILLE, March 7

Publication title: New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York,
N.Y.: Mar 8, 1982. pg. A.12
Source type: Newspaper

ISSN: 03624331
ProQuest document 946649181

Text Word Count 1318

Document URL: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=9...=309&VName=PQD

Abstract (Document Summary)

”Many times I wanted to get it out of my heart,” the white-haired Mr. [Young Alonzo Mann] said in an interview last night. ”I’m glad I’ve told it all. I’ve been living with it for a long time. I feel a certain amount of freedom now. I just hope it does some good.”

”I know I don’t have a long time to live,” he said. ”All I have said is the
truth. When my time comes, I hope that God understands me better for telling it. That’s what matters most.”

”Thousands of times I’ve gone to bed at night with all this on my mind,” he said Saturday.

”I hope you folks tell the whole world what I saw and that [Leo Frank] was innocent.”

Full Text (1318 words): Copyright New York Times Company Mar 8, 1982

“New but long-held secret information was disclosed today in one of the most disputed trials in American history, the murder conviction and subsequent mob lynching of Leo Frank almost 70 years ago.

Mr. Frank, a 29-year-old Jewish factory superintendent, was convicted in
Atlanta of killing one of his employees, Mary Phagan, 14, and dumping her in the basement of the pencil factory where they worked.

But in a sworn statement to the newspaper The Tennessean, an 83-year-old
Virginian who, seven decades ago, was a frightened and reluctant teen-age
witness in that trial, now says that he saw the real killer bear-hugging the
long-haired girl at her waist and carrying her limp, unconscious body to a
partly opened trap door leading to the basement on the day she was murdered.

”Leo Frank did not kill Mary Phagan,” Alonzo Mann insisted in confirmation of
a widely believed theory of historians. Says Janitor Was Murderer

”She was murdered instead by Jim Conley,” he asserted, referring to a factory janitor who was the chief witness against Mr. Frank. Mr. Mann was 14 years old at the time of the murder and was working as Mr. Frank’s office boy for $8 a week. He said the janitor, startled by the boy, threatened to kill him if he ever mentioned what he had seen that day.

Young Alonzo Mann was called to testify at the trial, but was asked only a few perfunctory questions. On the advice of his mother, he volunteered no
information and told no one in authority what he had seen that Saturday, April 26, 1913. He said he continued to heed that advice for several years, except for an occasional confidence to relatives and a rebuffed attempt to tell an Atlanta newspaper reporter 30 years ago.

In later years, he said, he would have agreed, even been eager to talk with
those who have written some 50 books about events surrounding the infamous trial. None of the authors ever approached him, he said.

But when confronted by two Tennessean reporters, Jerry Thompson and Robert Sherborne, who were acting on a tip, he related his story and supplied them with notes, photographs and other materials. He submitted to a lie-detector test and a psychological stress evaluation and passed both impressively, The Tennessean said. The newspaper reported that a two-month investigation satisfied it of the historical accuracy of his information and the validity of his claims.

”Many times I wanted to get it out of my heart,” the white-haired Mr. Mann
said in an interview last night. ”I’m glad I’ve told it all. I’ve been living
with it for a long time. I feel a certain amount of freedom now. I just hope it does some good.”

His lips trembled, but his clear blue eyes belied his frail physique and
failing heart that pumps with the aid of a surgically implanted pacemaker. He now lives in Bristol, Va., where he said he is fond of his friends and his church.

”I know I don’t have a long time to live,” he said. ”All I have said is the
truth. When my time comes, I hope that God understands me better for telling it. That’s what matters most.”

But he is reluctant to tell it again. ”I have laid that burden down and I
don’t ever want to pick it up again,” he said. According to Mr. Mann’s
account: He was working with Mr. Frank in the office that Saturday morning. He had encountered Mr. Conley early that day when the burly black janitor asked to borrow a dime for beer. Mr. Mann, who is white, did not lend him the money.

He worked until about 11:30 A.M., when he left the National Pencil Company
factory to meet his mother to watch the Confederate Memorial Day parade. His mother did not show up, and he returned to work. Startled by Sight

He stepped into the first floor vestibule and walked toward the stairs to the
second floor. But a movement in the shadows caught his attention. He was
riveted by the scene before him: Jim Conley standing beside a trap door clutching the wilted body of a young white girl. Her head lolled on the man’s right shoulder. She seemed either dead or unconscious. He saw no blood, no wounds, no rope.

The janitor looked over his left shoulder at the boy and their eyes locked.
They faced each other for a few moments before the man spoke. ”If you ever mention this, I’ll kill you,” he said.

The frightened youngster fled back to the front door and ran outside. On
arriving home, he told his mother what he had seen and recalled her saying: ”For God’s sake, don’t tell anybody else about this. You just stay out of it.”

Early the next morning, a night watchman found Mary Phagan’s bruised body lying face down in a pile of wood shavings in the basement. A ligature was around her neck, having scorched her throat. Blood had flowed from a deep cut in her scalp. There were signs of a struggle to escape. Her underclothing was ripped, but there was no evidence that she had been raped.

While Mr. Mann was out, she had come to the factory to pick up her pay, $1.20 for 10 hours work. Neither her purse nor her $1.20 was ever found.

The janitor accused Mr. Frank of the killing and said the defendant had paid
him $200 to carry the body to the basement and burn it in the furnace.

Although nothing in Mr. Frank’s history indicated wrongdoing, no other evidence supported the janitor, and the prosecution acknowledged that Mr. Conley had told several other versions of his story, the community and the jury were quick to convict Mr. Frank.

A wave of anti-Semitism was washing over Georgia and mobs swarmed the
courthouse daily, screaming, ”Kill the Jew.” A local newspaper defamed Mr.
Frank as ”a Jew Sodomite.”

Mr. Frank was sentenced to hang. He appealed his case unsuccessfully for two years before Gov. John Slaton commuted the sentence to life in prison days before his term expired in 1915.

The commutation produced a furor of protest. Armed mobs roamed streets forcing Jewish businessmen to board up windows and doors. A mob of several thousand people armed with guns, hatchets and dynamite surrounded the Governor’s mansion until they were dispersed by state militiamen.

Within days of the commutation, 75 men calling themselves Knights of Mary
Phagan met at the girl’s grave in Marietta, Ga., north of Atlanta, and vowed to avenge her death. They armed themselves and stormed a prison farm where Mr. Frank was being held 175 miles to the southeast in Milledgeville, and where he had survived a throat slashing by an inmate a month earlier.

The mob handcuffed Mr. Frank and transported him back to Marietta and hanged him from a oak tree a stone’s throw from Miss Phagan’s birthplace.

In the aftermath of terror, about half the 3,000 Jews in Georgia left the
state. Those who remained hid behind locked doors, forced to survive a
widespread boycott of Jewish businesses.

The Frank trial marked the rebirth of a moribund Ku Klux Klan movement that grew out of the Knights of Mary Phagan, and it also gave rise to the formation of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith.

Recently Mr. Mann went back to Georgia and visited the grave of Mary Phagan and mused about the possibility that he could have saved her life, as well as Mr. Frank’s, if he had shouted out that Saturday in 1913. But he said he often had harbored such thoughts.

”Thousands of times I’ve gone to bed at night with all this on my mind,” he said Saturday. ”I hope you folks tell the whole world what I saw and that Leo Frank was innocent.”

[Illustration]: photo of Alonzo Mann visiting grave of Mary Phagan photo of Leo Frank



1980′s – One Failed Pardon and One Pardon without Exoneration

Second Analysis Repetitive: Alonzo “Lonnie” Mann – March 7, and November, 1982.

A new suspicious and perhaps criminal chapter was unfurled for the public, 69 years after the criminal escapades of the Leo Frank legal defense team. The Nashville Tennessean published a special breaking news report about a story in which Alonzo Mann, Leo Franks former office boy of three weeks in 1913, said he saw janitor Jim Conley carrying Mary Phagans body to the basement of the National Pencil Company in Atlanta, where Mr. Frank was the superintendent. Mr. Mann asserted that Conley killed Mary and Frank was innocent. 1982, About seven decades after the murder of Mary Phagan and Lynching of Leo M. Frank, Alonzo Mann the former office boy of Leo M. Frank came forward in an other doctored up media expose pushing the Jewish Defense position at the behest of the Jewish Community. Now nearly 83 years old, the senile and ailing Alonzo Mann came forward to say he had seen Conley carrying Mary Phagans body on the first floor. Alonzo Mann produced an affidavit seven decades after the Leo M. Frank trial concluded, thus giving the Frankites more odious support for their position. However, because of the Frank Defense’s history of obtaining falsified affidavits through criminal means, the affidavit was not taken seriously by anyone familiar with the case.

Alonzo Mann brought absolutely nothing new to the Leo M. Frank Case with his new testimony, because Jim (James) Conley had admitted to being an accomplice and that he participated in bringing the dead body of Mary Phagan to the basement at Leo M. Frank’s request.

Alonzo Mann: Dead Man’s Affidavit

However, the ADL of B’nai B’rith, American Jewish Committee, Atlanta Jewish Federation and numerous other Jewish organizations re-used the affidavit of Alonzo Mann after he died to push for a Posthumous Pardon with Exoneration for Leo M. Frank.

First Pardon Failed

Attorneys for three Jewish organizations petitioned the State (Georgia) Board of Pardons and Paroles to pardon Leo Frank, but the petition was denied on December 22, 1983.

Posthumous pardon for Leo Frank without real exoneration was achieved March 11, 1986:

Pyrrhic Victory for the Jewish Community resulted after successful pressure from the ADL of B’nai B’rith, Jewish individuals and other Jewish Organizations on March 11, 1986. Jewish pressure groups and individuals were able to coax the Georgia Board of Paroles to pardon Leo M. Frank, but they would not exonerate him of the crime. It was an odd appeasement.

Jewish Power and Political Correctness Prevailed

On March 11, 1986, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles granted Frank a pardon, citing the state’s failure to protect him or prosecute his killers, though they stopped short of exonerating Leo M. Frank of the murder of Mary Phagan. It was ultimately another victory for the prosecution team, as well as the Judge and Jury who presided over the case. Leo Frank’s murder conviction is still today as black letter and settled law, with permanent and binding legal precedent. Even after decades of relentless criminal activity and behind the scenes wheeling and dealing by the Jewish community at large, ultimately the 1913 Leo Frank Trial Judge and Jury have the last word, as do the vigilante lynchers who were never prosecuted and hanged Leo Frank for his crime on August 17, 1915.

Spun Pardon and Pyrrhic Victory

The Jewish Community saw the Pardon at face value as vindication of Leo Frank, but it was really a Pyrrhic victory. First, because in order to pardon someone of a crime, the person has to be guilty, you can’t pardon someone unless you first acknowledge they are guilty first. Therefore the guilt of the individual has to be affirmed and in Leo Frank’s case it was indisputable after every level of the appellate system preserved his verdict of guilt.

So when the Prison Board between 1982 and 1986 basically acknowledged the veracity and truth that Leo M. Frank was guilty, they also refused to exonerate him of his guilt, though they forgave him of the Murder of Mary Phagan, because the state failed to protect Leo M. Frank and because his lynching prevented him from further appeals – there is only one problem with that…

Further appeals at any level of the United States Court System?

The prison board has a clear and full understanding of the law, and yet they made a bald face lie. They were patently in error concerning the lynching of Leo Frank preventing him from any further appeals within the appellate court system, because Leo M. Frank had fully and totally exhausted all of his court appeal options at every level of the State, District and Federal Appellate Courts, with the Supreme Court unanimously overruling any further review of the case, thus closing the door forever at all levels of the appellate court system. When there were no more options left in the court system, the prison board at the time refused a recommendation of clemency and even the bribed Governor John M. Slaton, refused to pardon Leo Frank and actually stated in his commutation letter he was NOT disturbing the guilty verdict given to Leo Frank by the Jury – sustaining the appellate courts and jury. Not a single legal body in the last 100 years has overturned the guilty verdict of Leo Frank, but attempts to spin the truth have endlessly been made by countless Jews.

The Prison Board Affirmed Leo Frank’s Guilt By Proxy

The board affirmed Leo M. Frank’s guilt and quelled the powerful and wealthy Jewish Community, that has for a century been vociferously screeching Leo M. Frank was a “noble and innocent Jew, Framed, railroaded and scapegoated in a vast Anti-Jewish conspiracy”. The last word on the Leo Frank case from the judicial system came in 1986 preserving his guilt forever, period end of story and case closed… or is it?
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org

Last edited by LeoFrank; June 12th, 2015 at 06:57 PM.
 
Old June 13th, 2015 #90
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Read it from page 0 to page 1818.....

SWAN DIVE IN.......... and leave not a single page unread... this is history unlike you can ever imagine.

https://archive.org/details/leo-fran...ords-1913-1914
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 18th, 2015 #91
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Listen to these five impressive articles about the murder of Little Mary Phagan and Leo Frank case originally published in Watson’s Magazine by future U.S. Senator from Georgia, Tom Watson (1. January, 2. March, 3. August, 4. September and 5. October of 1915) rebooted by Omniphi Media in 2015 — the centennial — into audio-books. Check Out — Omniphi Media on www.Archive.org The Internet Archive (Click Here WWW): https://archive.org/details/4.Septem...CaseJewPervert
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 18th, 2015 #92
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

116th Happy Birthday Little Mary Phagan June 1st 2015 in Her Honor:

Seeking Justice for the Murder of Little Mary Phagan

by CURATOR on JUNE 1, 2015

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan authored by Mary Phagan Kean (1987) has been transformed independently into an educational audiobook for the Vanguard News Network Learning College by Alex Linder, beginning on June 1st 2015, in memory of the 116th Birthday of Mary Phagan (1899-1913).



Please take the time to analyze and discuss each chapter of this amazing journey.

01. Introduction and Chapter One of The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 1st, 2015.
02. Chapter 2, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 2nd, 2015.
03. Chapter 3, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 3rd, 2015.
04. Chapter 4, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 4th, 2015.
05. Chapter 5, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 5th, 2015.
06. Chapter 6, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 8th, 2015.
07. Chapter 7, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 8th, 2015.
08. Chapter 8, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 9th, 2015.
09. Chapter 9, 10, 11, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 10th, 2015.
10. Chapter 12, Afterward, The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click & save to desk top on PC): June 11th, 2015.

Download each part to listen: https://archive.org/details/10Phagan...12AfterwordEND

Please go to www.Amazon.com and www.Ebay.com for purchasing a hard copy of this book ‘The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean’ to follow along during these learning college audio programs.
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 18th, 2015 #93
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

131st Happy Birthday Leo Max Frank (Born April 17, 1884): Extremely Rare Leo Frank Case Book Written and Published in 1913, Now Transformed Into 6 Hour Audiobook by Margaret Huffstickler, 2015

by CURATOR on APRIL 17, 2015

The Leo Frank Case, Inside Story of Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery

Complete History of the Sensational Crime and Trial, Portraits of Principals

Price 25 cents (Just Kidding: Free!)

Published by the Atlanta Publishing Company, Atlanta, Georgia 1913

01 Title Page – Leo Frank Case 1913 Atlanta Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery Complete History of the Sensational Crime and Trial, Portraits of Principals

02 Table of Contents – Leo Frank Case 1913

03 Preface – Leo Frank Case 1913

04 Chronology of the Crime – Leo Frank Case 1913

05 Chapter I – Crime Discovered – Leo Frank Case 1913

06 Chapter II – Police Reach Scene – Leo Frank Case 1913

07 Chapter III – Frank Views Body – Leo Frank Case 1913

08 Chapter IV – Mother Hears of Murder – Leo Frank Case 1913

09 Chapter V – Crime Stirs Atlanta Leo – Leo Frank Case 1913

10 Chapter VI – Leo Frank is Arrested – Leo Frank Case 1913

11 Chapter VII – The Inquest Starts – Leo Frank Case 1913

12 Chapter VIII – Frank’s Story – Leo Frank Case 1913

13 Chapter IX – Dictograph Incident – Leo Frank Case 1913

14 Chapter X – Conley Enters Case – Leo Frank Case 1913

15 Chapter XI – Conley in School – Leo Frank Case 1913

16 Chapter XII – Racial Prejudice Charge – Leo Frank Case 1913

17 Chapter XIII – Plants Charged to Frank – Leo Frank Case 1913

18 Chapter XIV – South’s Greatest Legal Battle – Leo Frank Case 1913

19 Chapter XV – The State’s Chain – Leo Frank Case 1913

20 Chapter XVI – Perversion Charged – Leo Frank Case 1913

21 Chapter XVII – Salacious Stories Admitted – Leo Frank Case 1913

22 Chapter XVIII – Frank’s Alibi – Leo Frank Case 1913

23 Chapter XIX – Attorneys Threatened – Leo Frank Case 1913

24 Chapter XX – Frank’s Own Story – Leo Frank Case 1913

25 Chapter XXI – Lawyers Laud and Denounce Frank – Leo Frank Case 1913

26 Chapter XXII – Fear of Lynching Precedes the Verdict – Leo Frank Case 1913

ALL SIX HOURS embedded here for your listening enjoyment:



Bibliography: Sources and References
The Internet Archive @ www.Archive.org

The Leo Frank Case, Atlanta Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery by Margi H.
https://archive.org/details/LeoFrank...ery1913_201503
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old June 18th, 2015 #94
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Further Reading: 100,000 people have read these articles, so you should too. Learn what has been suppressed for 100 years. We encourage you to read the other side of the Mary Phagan Murder.

Background and Events of the Leo Frank Case:

1. Brief History of Georgia, Background to the Murder of Mary Phagan and Trial of Leo Frank

2. The Sex Murder of Little Mary Phagan on Saturday, April 26, 1913

3. The Mary Phagan and Leo Frank Affair: Three Stranglings

4. Leo Frank is Interrogated by Atlanta Police on Monday, April 28, 1913


The Leo Frank Trial for the Murder of Mary Phagan, Summer of 1913:

1. 100 Years Ago Today: The Trial of Leo Frank Begins

2. The Leo Frank Trial: Week One

3. The Leo Frank Trial: Week Two

4. The Leo Frank Trial: Week Three

5. Leo Frank Mounts The Witness Stand On August 18, 1913, At His 29 Day Trial for Murder

6. The Leo Frank Trial: Week Four the Last Days of Testimony

The Leo Frank Trial Ends (August 21, 1913) and Closing Arguments Commence (August 21 - 25, 1913):

7. Closing Arguments of Frank Arthur Hooper, Reuben Rose Arnold, and Luther Zeigler Rosser

8. Closing Arguments by Prosecutor Hugh Dorsey

Aftermath of Leo Frank Trial:

ADL Founded October 1913 in Response to Leo Frank Conviction. Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith: One Hundred Years of Racist Anti-Gentile Hate

The Shanking of Leo Frank in the Milledgeville Prison Dormitory on July 17, 1915

Post Leo Frank Trial Analysis:

Debunking and Deprogramming More Than 100 Years of Racist Anti-Gentile Pseudo-History

Aborted Apotheosis of Leo Frank for the Murder of Little Mary Phagan (part 1 and 2)


Tom Watson's 1915 Analysis of Leo Frank's 1913 Trial:

U.S. Senator Tom Watson's five article serial about the Leo Frank Case published in Watson's Magazine, January, March, August, September, and October of 1915

1. The Leo Frank Case by Tom Watson, January 1915

2. A Full Review of the Leo Frank Case, by Tom Watson, March 1915

3. The Celebrated Case of The State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank, by Tom Watson, August, 1915

4. The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, a Jewish Pervert by Tom Watson, September 1915

5. The Rich Jews Indict a State! The Whole South Traduced. In the Matter of
Leo Frank by Tom Watson, October 1915


21st Century Reviews of the Racist Anti-Gentile Falsification About Leo Frank Case History:

Very popular article: 100 Reasons Leo Frank Is Guilty: The Centennial of Mary Phagan’s Rape and Strangulation

Steve Oney Reviewed: Leo Frank: Who Really Solved the Mary Phagan Sex Murder Case?

Leonard Dinnerstein Reviewed: Leonard Dinnerstein and The Leo Frank Case: A Pseudo-History About the Murder of Mary Phagan

Jason Robert Brown and Alfred Uhry Reviewed: Un-American Subversive Theatre: Parade the Leo Frank Broadway Musical Becomes International Cult Sensation
Read more at
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old August 17th, 2015 #95
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber
Default One hundred years ago today

One hundred years ago today, on the morning of August 17, 1915, White men served justice to a jew sex killer.

jew Leo Frank did THIS to a 13-year-old White girl (Mary Phagan autopsy photo):



So even though powerful US jew liars defended him, good White men did THIS to the jew:



White men now must fight the jews trying to murder the White race.

__________________
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action
 
Old August 27th, 2015 #96
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default

Listen to the amazing 12 hour audiobook by Alex Linder where he transforms the late 20th century book 'The Murder of Little Mary Phagan' by Mary Phagan Kean (1989), into an unforgettable and insightful look at all the facts of the Leo Frank case suppressed by the Jews for more than 100 years (1913 - 2015).

https://archive.org/details/10Phagan...12AfterwordEND

Chances are The Internet Archive might censor or suppress this outstanding audiobook, so would you please download each chapter and upload the full series together on the top 100 FREE file sharing web sites, online libraries and audio hosting services.

We must do whatever it takes to make sure this 10 part audiobook survives for future generations to learn what our hereditary enemies, the Jews, have done to control the narrative of our history. Don't let the Jews win the narrative war, we must do whatever it takes so that 100 years from now people will still be listening to an alternative viewpoint than their domination of our history.

Please listen to all 10 parts and discuss all the evidence, testimony and exhibits the Jews have suppressed from the popular culture:

https://archive.org/details/10Phagan...12AfterwordEND
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old August 27th, 2015 #97
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default



Page 4A - The Marietta Daily Journal

If Trial Were Today, Frank Would Still Be Found Guilty by Jasper Dorsey, Friday, January 20, 1984.

The Mary Phagan murder case has been in the news for many months since Atlanta lawyers, representing several organizations, applied to the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, requesting a posthumous pardon for Leo Max Frank, the convicted murderer.

The murder took place in Atlanta on Saturday, April 26, 1913. Medical evidence proved Mary Phagan, 13 years old, had been beaten unconscious, bitten [The bitten part turned out to be a hoax fabricated in by Pierre van Paassens in his 1964 book 'To Number Our Days'], raped in an unnatural way, then strangled by a small cord. Three competitive Atlanta newspapers then -- Journal, Georgian and Constitution -- gave the murder and trial sensational coverage.

A posthumous pardon is an unprecedented action, especially for someone tried and convicted in 1913. A 70-year-old case cannot really be retried. The petition advanced no significant new evidence. After the trial, efforts of outsiders to re-fight the Civil War was a serious mistake, for it induced feelings of anti-Semitism where none existed. Charges of anti-Semitism and racism raised now, are also counterproductive.

What draws attention is the mob violence after Frank's death sentence was commuted to life by the governor, and way Frank died. He was lynched. Mob violence and lynching are a disgrace. Lynching is an especially heinous crime. Those actions of 1915 are a disgrace today to our state.

But the trial in 1913 was another matter. Frank was represented by legal giants, had a fair trial, and two years of appeals to the highest state and federal courts said that he did.

Alonzo Mann, then a 14-year-old office boy of two weeks, had been a witness for Frank in 1913. His obviously inspired latter-day testimony, if given full credence would not have changed the trial's verdict. Only if Frank had dolts for lawyers would they have failed to get the whole story from a 14-year-old before putting him up as a witness.

Frank was vigorously defended by eminent counsel, one of whom was a former law partner of the veteran trial judge [Leonard Strickland Roan].

Governor John Slaton who ultimately commuted Frank's sentence to life, was a law partner of one defense attorney [Luther Rosser]; Another associate had a cousin on the jury.

There were three motions for new trial before two Superior Court judges, three appeals to the Georgia Supreme Court and two appeals to the U.S. Supreme court; each affirmed the trial court's decision.

Had there been mob influence or intimidation on the trial judge or jury, the judge or defense counsel would have moved for a change of venue or moved for a mistrial.

The three very competitive Atlanta newspapers of 1913, report no mobs during the trial's five weeks, according to an expert who researched the newspaper files. Historian Franklin Garrett reports no mobs in his definitive "Atlanta and Environs."

All jurors signed affidavits that there was no mob influence as did court staff. Even Governor [John] Slaton in his commutation order went to some length to deny that mob influence or anti-Semitism influenced the guilty verdict.

Mob violence began when Frank's sentence was commuted June 21, 1915. The National Guard had to be called out to protect the Governor, who eventually had to leave the state. Years later he ran for a U.S. Senate seat, failing to carry any of Georgia's 159 counties. The disgraceful lynching occurred August 17, 1915, an indelible blot on the state's escutcheon.

There is no way to pardon that terrible event. The Pardons and Paroles Board could consider only the trial. They advised the petitioners that to change the verdict, affirmed many times before the nation's highest courts, new evidence had to prove Frank's innocence beyond any doubt. Mann's new evidence was insignificant if the trial is studied in court records: State vs. Frank, 141 Ga. 243; 142 Ga. 617; 142 Ga. 741; 35 S. Ct. 208.

The evidence there also shows Frank's religion had nothing to do with his conviction. He would have been convicted had he been a Presbyterian minister. He would also be convicted today.

He had married into a distinguished Atlanta family, whose heartbreak was and still is incalculable. His widow was heroic. All of his class, Jewish or Gentile, who knew him, had no idea prior to the murder that he was anything like he turned out to be.

-Marietta Daily Journal, Friday, January 20, 1984. Article by Jasper Dorsey.

https://archive.org/details/marietta...4-frank-phagan
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old August 27th, 2015 #98
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
jewsign

The Rape and Murder of Mary Phagan by Leo Frank the Toilet Strangler

Posted on August 13, 2015 by INCOG MAN

THE RAPE AND MURDER OF MARY PHAGAN

Over 100 years ago, inside a dingy, shuttered factory at the heart of Atlanta’s industrial sector, an infatuated Jewish serial rapist-pedophile viciously assaulted one of his teenage employees who rejected his sexual propositions — for the last time.

EXCLUSIVE ARTICLE FOR INCOG MAN READERS, by Bob Frapples

Mary Anne Phagan, a beautiful young White girl, was only 13 years-old in the spring of 1913 when a perverted Leo Frank raped and murdered her. Jews and the liberal media has ever since portrayed Frank as innocent and unfairly victimized by anti-Semite, racist White Southerners.

Mary Anne Phagan, a beautiful young White girl, was only 13 years-old in the spring of 1913 when a perverted Leo Frank raped and murdered her. Jews and the liberal media has ever since portrayed Frank as innocent and unfairly victimized by anti-Semite, racist White Southerners, when nothing could be further from the truth. (INCOG)

On Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913, young Mary Phagan entered the office anteroom of her boss, National Pencil Company superintendent Leo Frank, just minutes after high noon to pick up her pay envelope for her work the week before.

However, for the past week Mary had been laid off from the Atlanta, Georgia, factory because the brass sheet metal required had all been used up on Monday morning, April 21, 1913. Without this one essential material, there could be no bands created and attached to the ends of pencils, so she couldn’t use the knurling machine at her work station to insert the rubber erasers.

Mary Phagan’s job was absolutely critical in the factory’s manufacturing efforts, because adding erasers to the base of pencils was the very last production stage before they were boxed in tissue paper, loaded up in monogrammed boxes and shipped for distribution nationwide.

Standing in the door frame to his office, Mary looked in and quietly asked, “Mr. Frank?” Leo could feel his heart suddenly beating as he recognized the voice and looked up, especially since he now found himself very much alone with the attractive child laborer under his skillful management — dressed gaily today in lavender and lace for the downtown Parade — a sweet young southern girl whom he had a crush on for some time, and one that had blossomed far beyond her tender age.

Jewish accounts of the Mary Phagan murder case over the coming decades purposefully leave out certain damning facts and details showing what surely happened next…

Leo had only recently fired another worker at the factory, the tall and handsome James Milton Gantt, supposedly because of a $2 shortage in the petty cash box. But all that was nothing more than a ruse.

Leo had seen Mary gazing into James’ baby blue eyes like he was her “Knight in Shining Armor,” and James did in fact look after Mary, so the superintendent decided to get the prince out of the way, so the jealous dragon could play. Mary was the one employee he was most infatuated with, but couldn’t have because of Gantt and she had spurned Leo’s pesterings and subtle innuendos since the spring of 1912 — humiliating his arrogant ego and making him ever more determined.

For a man like Leo Frank who doesn’t like taking no for an answer, now he would finally get even!

Frank said “hello Mary” in his nebbish, New Yorker accent. Phagan immediately requested her pay envelope of $1.20, but also quickly asked if the ordered metal supplies had arrived yet. Leo Frank said inquisitively, “I don’t know yet, let’s have a look” as he stood up briskly from his wooden swivel chair. While walking to the machine room located down the hall from Frank’s office, the two made small talk, wondering if Mr. Darley had received the brass in a timely manner. It was normally stocked in the closet next to the lady’s dressing room, located diagonal to the wall where a lathe work station was situated.

Although Frank told her he “didn’t know,” the requisition papers in his handwritten business ledgers had already indicated the shipment wasn’t to be delivered until early in the following week. Saturday was Confederate Memorial Day — a Georgia State holiday and deliveries would not be made because of the Parade.

The 5′ 8″ tall Leo Frank lured 4′ 11″ Mary Phagan into the metal room on the obvious pretext of determining whether or not she would need to report to work on Monday morning and upon him “realizing” that the brass hadn’t arrived yet, he planned to use her temporary laid-off status for sexual coercion, but something went very wrong and things took an unexpected, violent turn.

Inside the metal room, Frank’s heart began to throb and he whispered while sliding his effeminate hand over her shoulder: “Mary, If you still want to work here, I want you to be with me.” He could feel himself getting aroused already, his manhood pressing hard against his pants. Phagan looked down horrified and tried to swiftly pass by Frank on his left side and run out of the metal room, but he checked her like he was playing basketball for his class team at Cornell, blocking the attempt. This time, there would be no escape.

He seized her with both hands this time, but Phagan jerked, yanking away from his hands and told him “I’m not that kind of girl, take your hands of me!” At this point the incident had crossed the line and could no longer be played off as a joke.

It was at that exact moment when she spurned the ultimatum of her lecherous boss for the last time — denying the advances of a man who had long earned himself a bad reputation amongst the child laborers at the factory as a lascivious creep — terror unfolded. In a sheer explosion of rage, like a bucket of bricks falling out of the sky, Leo Frank clenched his left fist as his gold wedding band tinkled in the dim light falling from the grimy windows and swiveled, punching hard into Mary Phagan’s right eye as she reeled back screaming in horror. His angry knuckles began reigning down in a flurry against her delicate feminine face like sledge hammers on the chain gang.

Jim Conley who was sitting idly on the first floor lobby of the National Pencil Company when the assault was occurring upstairs in the metal room, eerily described to the police the sound of Phagan’s bone chilling echoing cry of mortified agony as a stuttering laugh that broke off into a scream and then absolute silence.

Leo Frank kept pounding Mary Phagan’s face in, blow after blow, while the back of her head slammed against the the bench lathe belonging to Robert P. Barret, leaving behind bloody tresses of her dark strawberry blond hair tangled around its solid iron handle. Why it was never cleaned up after the murder tends to sustain the bespectacled Leo Frank’s irrational state of mind and short-sightedness.

Phagan crumpled at the feet of Leo Frank, whose heart-pounding chest was heaving in breaths of the stale, factory air. Face was flushed with blood and shivering with intensity, Frank immediately dragged Phagan to the doorway of the bathroom in the metal room, tossing her on the greasy wooden floor like a sack of potatoes.

Kneeling down, Frank ripped off a three inch strip of Phagan’s petty-coats, tearing upward from the hem to her crotch, then across and down to the hem again. He gathered the bunched cotton material behind her head like a sponge to soak up the slowly leaking blood from the lathe wound.

Next, Frank frantically hiked up and pealed open her torn dress, ripped her knitted underwear all the way to the right seam, unbuttoned his pants, pushed his underwear down. Soon, her innocence was torn away, bleeding. Phagan suddenly awoke from unconsciousness to agonizing pain, putting her arms and hands over her black and blue eyes, sobbing and crying out in pain repeatedly, “No, No, No,” with tears showering from her swollen face. Trying to roll away was impossible.

In a moment of morbid fear, before he could finish doing his thing, he saw his whole life pass before his eyes in Phagan’s tear-drenched, beaten face. Knowing his reputation in the Jewish community would be irreparably harmed if she told anyone about what happened; his wife from a prominent Atlanta Jewish family would surely seek divorce and his own family would, without a shadow of a doubt, disown him. Very likely he would also live out his life breaking rocks on a chain gang — so there was now no other way out but to permanently silence this goyisher girl and that’s just what he did.

Frank quickly stood up, looking around the room and pulled himself together. With the frightful realization of what he now had to do, he grabbed a nearby seven foot jute cord off a nail on the nearby wall and, with white knuckle fists flexing, hurriedly strangled her to death — burying the cord an eighth of an inch deep into her tender throat. When he knew the dirty, but necessary deed was over, he stepped back, looking down at the dead girl.



In the dark of the night early Sunday morning, Newt Lee, the lanky Negro graveyard shift night watchman — who the Jew racist Leo Frank would soon try to frame for the murder — discovered the mauled body of Phagan. She was dumped in the far end of the basement, near the incinerator and barely visible in the darkened space since the gaslight had been strangely turned all the way down by someone recently. Lee immediately called the police. He then tried to phone his boss, Leo Frank, several times to no avail.

When they arrived, they found tracks indicating Mary Phagan had been dragged face down 140 feet from the elevator shaft across the hard dirt cinders of the basement, dumped diagonal to the incinerator, but oddly enough the deep pocks and scratches didn’t show any signs of bleeding. This told the coroner and investigators the girl was already dead before being taken down into the basement.
The Rape and Murder of America itself by the Jew began over 100 years ago…

MARY PHAGAN MURDER MONTAGE 2Southern honor, justice for Mary and a completely fair trial (including Jews participating both on the prosecution and in the jury) — all were sacrificed for the arrogant and selfish insistence of Jewry about ANY JEW having to be innocent of ANY CRIME. Just think of all the backstabbing Jew spies down the years they never talk about, for crying out loud. It’s always us EVIL WHITE PEOPLE responsible. [INCOG]

Phagan’s underwear that was still attached around her hips, was soaked in dried blood and discharge. Her dress was still moist from top to bottom in urine, suggesting that someone had pissed all over her entire body. Wrapped around her neck was a strip of her blood soaked petty coat, hiding what was underneath, the cord buried an eighth of inch into her neck. Phagan’s face was black and blue, her tongue stuck out a half inch from her mouth and she had wounds on the side and back of her head, and two below the knees. The upper side of her shirt at the chest level had be torn open revealing her left breast.

Her hair and entire body were caked with black dirt. Her arms were reverently crossed over her bosom. Her pocket book was missing and the red flowers from her hat were gone. Her parasol was found at the bottom of the garbage strewn elevator shaft next to a pile of human excrement. The Jewish community would strangely claim for a century that the feces in the elevator shaft is what exonerated Leo Frank.

Police tried many times to contact Frank, but he wouldn’t answer his phone, even though it was ringing just under his second floor bedroom in the dining room below. Finally, Leo Frank picked up the phone in the early morning hours of Sunday, April 27, 1913.

When the police first arrived at Leo Frank’s residence at 68 East Georgia avenue, he was noticeably very nervous and kept delaying leaving the home, asking repeatedly for a cup of coffee. Inside the squad car Leo Frank nervously claimed he didn’t know an employee named Mary Phagan, or any of the girls at the factory, and even denied knowing her name when they showed him the girl’s mutilated corpse on a cooling table at P. J. Bloomfield’s mortuary.

When police and detectives took Frank to his second floor office at the Pencil factory, he opened his payroll ledger, and told the accompanying officers he paid off Mary Phagan at 12:03pm. The next day in the presence of his expensive lawyers, Leo Frank made a deposition to the Atlanta police at the station-house that Mary Phagan came into his office between “12:05pm and 12:10pm, maybe 12:07pm”

What Leo Frank did not know at the time of the sadistic rape-murder is that 14-year-old Monteen Stover, another little girl who had been laid off early in the week for the same reason as Mary — because the brass sheet metal had run out — was waiting inside his office all by herself. Stover waited in Leo Frank’s business office from 12:05 pm to 12:10 pm based on his wall clock, hoping to collect her pay envelope, but left after waiting a full 5 minutes, finally getting up to go because she thought the building might have been deserted due to the holiday.

For three and a half months, Leo Frank swore to the murder alibi that he never left his office when Phagan arrived, until 12:45pm to go upstairs, but then on the witness stand at his trial on August 18, 1913, he — completely reversed himself — making a newfangled and never before heard admission to explain why Monteen Stover had found his office empty during the exact same time he told the police Mary was with him in his office.

Frank seated comfortably on the hard witness stand, said, “NOW GENTLEMEN,” looked the jurors in their eyes and announced to a packed courtroom, that he might have gone to the bathroom in the metal room to use the toilet or urinate and that those were things that a man does “unconsciously.” He would re-assert this newfangled bathroom admission in the March 9, 1914 edition of the Atlanta Constitution (now called the AJC).

It was deliciously ironic for unbiased observers who simply wanted to arrive at the truth and didn’t care either way about his innocence or guilt, but for Leo Frank detractors it was the equivalent of an inescapable murder trial confession. Frank’s defenders would spend 100 years suppressing this “unconscious” incident and claim that all the best evidence at the trial indicated that Jim Conley murdered Phagan in the lobby, where no evidence was found after the murder. Except for a bogus claim by a senile octogenarian named Alonzo Mann, coming forward 70 years after Leo Frank’s verdict to say he saw Conley carrying Phagan there. The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith used this obviously imagined story to secure a posthumous pardon for Frank.

The “unconscious” bathroom revelation by Leo Frank was an earth-shattering admission on the witness stand, because earlier in the trial, Jim Conley said he found Mary Phagan dead in the bathroom area of the metal room on behalf of Leo Frank, who confessed to him that day of murdering her there because she wouldn’t have sex with him. Investigators and workers testified to seeing a five inch dried blood puddle diagonal to the bathroom door in the metal room, blood spots and a lock of Phagan’s bloody hair twisted and tangled around the solid iron handle of the bench lathe in the same room.

LEO FRANK TRIAL MONTAGE

Had you been sitting in the Jury box or behind the judges Rostrum on August 18, 1913, listening to Leo Frank’s explanation for why his office might have been empty, when he claimed he was there alone with Mary Phagan at that exact same time, you would have involuntarily shivered as cold chills spilled down your spine, but for more than 100 years, the Jewish community has waged an anti-Gentile racist defamation campaign against Southern European-Americans, claiming they framed Leo Frank because he was Jewish.
The Leo Frank Case has evolved into the longest anti-Semitic Hate crime hoax and anti-Gentile blood libel slander in the history of the United States of America.

The conviction of Leo Frank was the impetus for the formation of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in October, 1913, after the 500 member strong Atlanta B’nai B’rith voted unanimously on September 24th, 1913, to re-elect their “wrongfully” imprisoned President Leo Frank to a second term as their leader. Frank ran the affairs of his B’nai B’rith chapter behind bars until September of 1914, when he was not re-elected again for a third term. Ever since, the ADL has been at the forefront of perpetuating the hate crime hoax that people were shouting and chanting “hang the Jew” and “kill the jew” outside the Leo Frank trial courtroom that had all of its windows wide open. This is a vicious racist lie by the ADL and Abraham Foxman and Leonard Dinnerstein and many other Jewish domestic extremists.

Why anyone would transform a vicious child molester and convicted child killer into a martyr of anti-Semitism is incomprehensible, but this is what we are up against if we want Western Civilization to survive the coming upheaval that is surely coming at the hands of our Jewish Occupiers. The Jewish community is unanimous in their efforts to rehabilitate Leo Frank and agitate against European-American culture, the same people who consider themselves God’s Chosen, who hold the reigns of power over the mainstream Media, Occidental Governments, U.S. foreign policy and Global Finance, people who hold in total and infinite contempt anyone who is not of their ethno-religious tribe. People who tell everyone else they should be multicultural but practice brutal racial supremacist Apartheid in Israel, where it is indisputable that Palestinians have few civil and human rights.

If you have even any doubts about Leo Frank’s innocence or guilt, then listen to the silent echo from time and space by his wife, Lucille Selig Frank.

Go to the Mount Carmel Cemetery in Queens, New York City, visit Leo Frank’s grave, and look to the left of it, and you will see an empty grave. It was specially reserved for his wife, Lucille Selig. Ask yourself why is it still empty? If you have doubts, go to the front office and ask them if it is indeed empty or not, because they will tell you it is.

You would think after reading all the insistent, shrill Jewish denials in mass media for the last 100 years; books, made-for-TV movies and docudramas– including heart-tugging plays and even a stage musical (Parade) in New York — that Lucille’s love for her husband Leo Frank was eternal and lasted till the day she died in 1957. So, once again, why did she specifically not want to be buried next to Leo Frank?*

Soon the world is going to find out about another girl Leo Frank raped one year before Mary Phagan was raped and killed. In 1912, Leo Frank raped another one of his child employees, and when he was done ravaging her, he slid down between her legs and bit her so hard on the innermost thigh that he permanently scarred her, but this didn’t come out until after the trial, because the girl had gotten pregnant and shipped off to a home for unwed mothers! This is the sadistic pedophile who has been used as a bludgeon for a century to attack, defame, slander, libel, and hate-hoax Americans! This is the man that they hold up as their holy religious martyr of anti-Semitism.

The Jewish Daily Forward (www.Forward.com) is now foaming at the mouth, because 100 years of Jewish pathological lies in the popular mainstream culture are rapidly disintegrating, one by one. The International Jews never dreamed that the entire 1,800 page Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records would end up online for the whole world to carefully read, and now there is no escape from the truth.

We will Never Forget Mary Phagan and we will never stop fighting for her honor until our very last dying breath and we will never stop fighting against the century old culture defamation war waged by the Jewish community, ADL and SPLC against the South and all of Western Civilization.

If you want to learn what really happened, please visit The American Mercury on the Internet and read their August 2013 Leo Frank Case reports — they are publishing an absolutely superb multi-part series on the centennial of the Leo Frank trial. It’s chock full of images and thoughtful analysis you would never get from Jews who go out of their way to distort what happened in the Fulton County court-house 100 years ago.

Introduction to the Leo Frank Trial:

One Hundred Years Ago Today the Leo Frank Trial Began. http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...-frank-begins/

Week One of the Leo Frank Trial: http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...rial-week-one/

Week Two of the Leo Frank Trial: http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...rial-week-two/

Week Three of the Leo Frank Trial: http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...al-week-three/

Leo Frank mounts the witness stand http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...kes-the-stand/

Read Week Four of the Leo Frank Trial, and Closing Arguments!

Visit The American Mercury: http://www.theamericanmercury.org

Other articles about the Leo Frank Case by the American Mercury:

100 Reasons Leo Frank is Guilty
http://theamericanmercury.org/2013/0...ank-is-guilty/

Did Leo Frank Confess?
http://theamericanmercury.org/2012/0...frank-confess/

Who Really Solved the Mary Phagan Murder Mystery?
http://theamericanmercury.org/2012/1...n-murder-case/

Leonard Dinnerstein’s Pseudo-History on the Frank Case
http://theamericanmercury.org/2012/1...seudo-history/

LEO FRANK TRIAL LIBRARY: The Internet’s largest repository of Leo Frank case information. http://www.leofrank.org

* His wife made the specific request in her will not to be buried there and to be cremated. She understood the SOB did it. Also, think about this: If the “evil anti-semitic” southern police detectives and grand jury (which included Jews) had reasonable evidence that one of the factory’s black employees did the actual killing part, don’t you think they would have gladly charged him instead? Leo Frank, and International, globalist Jewry ever since, have long tried to pin the brutal crime on blacks — infuriating hypocritical, considering how the Jewish ADL has the nerve to forever slander us White Southerners as racist, etc., etc. Just think about the BS! [INCOG]
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old August 27th, 2015 #99
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default Introduction to the Leo Frank Trial

100 Years Ago Today: The Trial of Leo Frank Begins

Published by Editor on July 28, 2013
100 Years Ago Today: The Trial of Leo Frank Begins thumbnail

Take a journey through time with the American Mercury, and experience the trial of Leo Frank (pictured, in courtroom sketch) for the murder of Mary Phagan just as it happened as revealed in contemporary accounts. The Mercury will be covering this historic trial in capsule form from now until August 26, the 100th anniversary of the rendering of the verdict.

by Bradford L. Huie

THE JEWISH ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE (ADL) — in great contrast to the American Mercury and other independent media — has given hardly any publicity to the 100th anniversary of the murder of Mary Phagan and the arrest and trial of Leo Frank, despite the fact that these events eventually led to the foundation of the ADL. Probably the League is saving its PR blitz for 1915, not only because that is centenary of Leo Frank’s death by lynching (an event possibly of much greater interest to the League’s wealthy donors than the death of Mary Phagan, a mere Gentile factory girl), but also because encouraging the public to read about Frank’s trial might not be good for the ADL — it might well lead to doubts about the received narrative, which posits an obviously innocent Frank persecuted by anti-Semitic Southerners looking for a Jewish scapegoat.

For readers not familiar with the case, a good place to start is Scott Aaron’s summary of the crime, from his The Murder of Mary Phagan and the Lynching of Leo Frank, which states in part:

“ON SATURDAY morning at 11:30, April 26, 1913 Mary Phagan ate a poor girl’s lunch of bread and boiled cabbage and said goodbye to her mother for the last time. Dressed for parade-watching (for this was Confederate Memorial Day) in a lavender dress, ribbon-bedecked hat, and parasol, she left her home in hardscrabble working-class Bellwood at 11:45, and caught the streetcar for downtown Atlanta.

“Before the festivities, though, she stopped to see Superintendent Leo M. Frank at the National Pencil Company and pick up from him her $1.20 pay for the one day she had worked there during the previous week….

“Almost no one knew it at the time, but by one o’clock one young life was already over. For her there would never again be parades, or music, or kisses, or flowers, or children, or love. Mary Phagan never left the National Pencil Company alive. Abused, beaten, and strangled by a rough cord pulled so tightly that it had embedded itself deeply in her girlish neck and made her tongue protrude more than an inch from her mouth, Mary Phagan lay dead, dumped in the dirt and shavings of the pencil company basement, her once-bright eyes now sightless and still as she lay before the gaping maw of the furnace where the factory trash was burned.”

* * *

IN 1913 GEORGIA, it was customary in criminal cases for all of the prosecution and defense witnesses to be sworn before any of their testimony was taken. In the hot and crowded temporary Fulton County courtroom at 10AM on July 28, 1913, Solicitor Hugh Dorsey called his witnesses and they were duly sworn. But the Leo Frank defense team, in the persons of Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold, surprised everyone by asking to have their witnesses sworn at a later time, claiming that — though they had just declared themselves fully ready to go to trial — their witness list was as yet “fragmentary” and would occasion severe delays if it were required to be completed that morning. But presiding Judge Leonard Roan ruled against them, and in all of five minutes the defense was ready to call their list. It turns out that the defense had wanted to conceal for a time their strategy of making Frank’s character a factor in his defense, and revealing the names of their witnesses — numbers of prominent Atlanta Jews, Frank’s former Cornell University classmates, and others — made that strategy obvious, and would give the prosecution time to find rebuttal witnesses on the subject of the character of Leo Frank.

The first witness was Mrs. Fannie Coleman, Mary Phagan’s mother. She described her last moments with her daughter on the morning of the previous April 26. When asked to identify the clothes that 13-year-old Mary had worn that day, she broke down.
Mary Phagan's aunt, mother, and sister.

Mary Phagan’s aunt, mother, and sister.

The next witness called was 15-year-old George Epps, who said he’s ridden on the trolley car with little Mary from 11:50AM to 12:07PM, when she’d disembarked to go see Superintendent Leo Frank at the National Pencil Company and pick up her pay. The exact timing of Mary’s visit to Frank was to become very important later in the case.

The third prosecution witness — Newt Lee, the pencil company’s night watchman and the man who found Mary Phagan’s bruised body in the factory basement in the wee hours of April 27 — was very damaging to Frank.

Lee stated that he had arrived at work early — at 4PM — on the day of the murder at the explicit instructions of Frank, who had said he was planning to attend a baseball game with a relative. But when Lee came to the factory at 4, Frank appeared very nervous and agitated and said that Lee should leave immediately and come back at 6. When Lee said he’d rather rest for a while at the factory building than go out, Frank insisted that he must go out for two hours.

When Lee did come back, Frank was still acting strangely and became extremely agitated when, around the same time, a friend of Mary Phagan’s and a former worker at the plant, J.M. Gantt, showed up and asked to retrieve some shoes he’d left on the premises. Frank was so nervous that he fumbled the routine task of putting Lee’s slip into the time clock, taking twice as long as usual. After Frank went home, he telephoned Lee to ask him if everything was “all right” — something that Lee said he had never done before.

Lee told the court that, the day after the murder, Frank had told authorities in his presence that Lee’s time slip for the previous night had been punched correctly:

“When did you see Frank?”
“I saw Mr. Frank Sunday morning at about 7:00 or 8:00. He was coming
in the office.”
“How did he look at you?”
“He looked down on the floor and never spoke to me. He dropped his
head down this way.”
“Was any examination made of the time clock?”
“Boots Rogers, Chief Lanford, Darley, Mr. Frank and I were there when
they opened the clock. Mr. Frank opened the clock and said the punches
were all right.”
“What did he mean by all right?”
“Meant that I hadn’t missed any punches.”

This was ominous testimony from Leo Frank’s point of view: As part of an apparent attempt to incriminate Newt Lee, Frank had later told police that Lee had missed several punches — implying that he had had time to be involved in the murder. Around the same time a bloody shirt was planted on Lee’s property. It was detected as a fake when the pattern of stains showed it had not been worn when stained, but had been crumpled up and wiped in blood.

Rosser’s cross-examination of Lee that day could not shake him in any element of his story.
Rosser and Dorsey

Rosser and Dorsey

* * *

The following is a direct transcription of part of the coverage of the first day of the trial in the Atlanta Constitution (July 29, 1913):

Watchman Tells of Finding Body of Mary Phagan

MOTHER AND THE WIFE
OF PRISONER CHEER HIM
BY PRESENCE AT TRIAL

___

Jury Is Quickly Secured and
Mrs. Coleman, Mother of
the Murdered Girl, Is First
Witness to Take Stand.

Dateline Atlanta, Georgia — July 28, 1913: With a swiftness which was gratifying to counsel for the defense, the solicitor general and a large crowd of interested spectators, the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan on April 26, in the building of the National Pencil factory, was gotten under way Monday.

When the hour of adjournment for the day had arrived, the jury had been selected and three witnesses had been examined. Newt Lee, the night watchman who discovered the dead body of Mary Phagan in the basement of the National Pencil factory, and who gave the first news of the crime to the police, was still on the stand, undergoing a rigid cross examination by Luther Z. Rosser, attorney for Frank.

Lee Sticks To First Story.

When the trial is resumed this morning, Newt Lee will again be placed on the stand. It Is not expected that anything new will be adduced from his testimony. Throughout the gruelling cross-examination of Mr. Rosser Monday afternoon Lee stuck to his original story in minutest detail.

Questions that would have confused or befuddled a man of education failed to budge him from the statement he originally made to the police, and has repeated from time to time to reporters and court officials.

The first day’s proceedings of the Frank trial proved singularly free of the dramatic element or the unexpected in testimony. There were touches of the pathetic, as, for example, when Mrs. J.W. Coleman, mother of the dead child, broke down and cried bitterly when she viewed the clothing of her little daughter; and there were touches of humor when the little Epps boy, who had ridden to town with Mary Phagan on the day of her murder, explained to Luther Rosser his method of telling the time of day by the sun, and of Newt Lee, who amused the courtroom by his quaint allusions and his negro descriptions of a tiny light in the basement of the pencil factory, which he likened to the gleam of a lightning bug, and of his quick retort when Mr. Rosser purposely spoke of this insect as a June bug.

“I didn’t say June bug—I said lightning bug,” contradicted Newt.

Careful Attention to Detail.

This brief excerpt Is given as significant of the careful attention to detail that Lee gave to his story.

When the hour of 9 o’clock arrived, Pryor Street in front of the temporary courthouse building was cluttered with the usual mob of the morbidly curious. They hugged the hot walls of the buildings like lethargic leeches, vainly trying to gain admission to the building, or buzzed about like bees, gossiping idly of the case.

Perfect order was maintained, however, and few not directly interested in the trial were allowed to enter the courtroom. All day long the crowd remained on the sidewalks gazing intently at the window to the courtroom, spewing tobacco juice on the street, eagerly questioning every person who left the building.

Interest naturally centered on the appearance in the court of Leo M. Frank, the accused. If Frank has chafed under his confinement, his physical appearance belies the fact. He looked as fit physically as he did the day he was first arrested. He was dressed with scrupulous neatness in a gray suit of pronounced pattern, which was all the more conspicuous on account of his diminutive form. As he entered the courtroom he smiled cordially at several friends. The first person to whom he spoke was a woman employee of the pencil factory.

Next in interest was Mrs. Leo M. Frank, wife of the accused, who, up to this time, has been seen little in public. Mrs. Frank is an extremely attractive-looking young woman. During progress of the trial she kept her eyes constantly fixed on Solicitor Dorsey. Her gaze was one of calm estimate. She seemed to be attempting to fathom his thoughts and to divine his purposes.

Mrs. Coleman Takes Stand.

Efforts to show Mary Phagan’s attitude toward Leo M. Frank by the state and efforts by the defense to show the dead girl’s attitude toward little George Epps, the 14-year-old newsie who testified to riding down town with her on the morning before she was found dead, were the first important things attempted yesterday when the trial of the state v. Leo M. Frank, charged with the Phagan girl’s murder on April 26, was formally opened.

Both efforts were promptly blocked for the present time by opposing counsel, and the testimony was started in regular form by the introduction of Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of Mary Phagan, as the first witness for the state.

During the preliminaries Attorneys Reuben R. Arnold and Luther Z. Rosser, for Frank, tried to conceal the names of their witnesses, but on Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey’s objections, they were overruled by Trial Judge L.S.Roan, and they called and swore their witnesses as the state had done but a few moments previously.

In a come-back for this the defense asked the court to honor their duces tecum which they previously served upon the solicitor, requiring him to bring into court all statements and affidavits made by James Conley, the negro sweeper, who made an affidavit incriminating himself and declaring he had aided Frank in disposing of the girl’s body.

Solicitor Dorsey, after a conference with Frank A. Hooper, a brilliant criminal lawyer aiding him, dictated a statement to the court stenographer in which he agreed to produce these affidavits and statements at the proper time, should they be held material.

Defense Announces Ready.

The case started promptly at 9 o’clock, with the courtroom, thronged with veniremen and spectators, witnesses and lawyers and friends of the principal. Contrary to the persistent rumor that the defense would ask postponement and to their frequent objections to the trial in the heated term, the defense proved ready and willing to go to trial…

You can read the entire Atlanta Constitution for this day by downloading this PDF file. The complete Atlanta Georgian can be downloaded here, and the entire Atlanta Journal can be read by downloading this file.

* * *

The American Mercury will be following these events of 100 years ago, the month-long trial of Leo M. Frank for the brutal murder of Miss Mary Phagan. Follow along with us and experience the trial as Atlantans of a century ago did, and come to your own conclusions.

A fearless scholar, dedicated to the truth about this case, has obtained, scanned, and uploaded every single relevant issue of the major Atlanta daily newspapers and they now can be accessed through archive.org as follows:

Atlanta Constitution Newspaper:
http://archive.org/details/LeoFrankC...aper1913To1915

Atlanta Georgian Newspaper:
http://archive.org/details/AtlantaGe...ilToAugust1913

Atlanta Journal Newspaper:
http://archive.org/details/AtlantaJo...toAugust311913

More background on the case may be found in my article here at the Mercury, 100 Reasons Leo Frank Is Guilty.
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Old August 27th, 2015 #100
LeoFrank
Member
 
LeoFrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 379
LeoFrank
Default Leo Frank Trial Week ONE

The Leo Frank Trial: Week One

Published by Editor on August 5, 2013

The Leo Frank Trial: Week One thumbnail

100 years ago today the trial of the 20th century ended its first week, shedding brilliant light on the greatest murder mystery of all time: the murder of Mary Phagan. And you are there.

by Bradford L. Huie

THE MOST IMPORTANT testimony in the first week of the trial of National Pencil Company superintendent Leo Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan was that of the night watchman, Newt Lee (pictured, right, in custody), who had discovered 13-year-old Mary’s body in the basement of the pencil factory during his nightly rounds in the early morning darkness of April 27, 1913. Here at the Mercury we are following the events of this history-making trial as they unfolded exactly 100 years ago. We are fortunate indeed that Lee’s entire testimony has survived as part of the Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, certified as accurate by both the defense and the prosecution during the appeal process. (For background on this case, read our introductory article and my exclusive summary of the evidence against Frank.)
Newt Lee on the witness stand (click for high resolution)

Newt Lee, far right, on the witness stand (click for high resolution)

Almost all of the information published today about the Frank trial has two characteristics in common: 1) it is stridently pro-Frank with little pretense of objectivity, and 2) it is derivative — meaning that it consists of little more than cherry-picked paraphrases and interpretations of what witnesses said, and reporters and investigators discovered, during those fateful days. To say that much crucial information is left out or glossed over by the partisan writers of today is a vast understatement. We aim to correct some of these intentional omissions in this exclusive series.
The courtroom scene

The courtroom scene

We’ll begin with the entire testimony — taken during direct and cross examination — of Newt Lee. There had been an attempt to frame Lee — through the medium of a planted bloody shirt — before the trial began, an act almost certainly committed by pro-Frank forces. But subsequent events proved that Lee was entirely innocent, and by the time of the trial he was not under any suspicion whatever, and therefore had no known motive to lie. Here are his exact words (emphasis ours, some paragraph breaks added for increased readability):

NEWT LEE (colored), sworn for the State.

On the 26th day of April, 1913, I was night watchman at the National Pencil Factory. I had been night watchman there for about three weeks. When I began working there, Mr. Frank carried me around and showed me everything that I would have to do. I would have to get there at six o’clock on week days, and on Saturday evenings I have to come at five o’clock.

On Friday, the 25th of April, he [Leo Frank] told me “Tomorrow is a holiday and I want you to come back at four o’clock. I want to get off a little earlier than I have been getting off.”

I got to the factory on Saturday about three or four minutes before four. The front door was not locked. I pushed it open, went on in and got to the double door there. I was paid off Friday night [April 25, 1913 — Ed.] at six o’clock. It was put out that everybody would be paid off then [because Saturday was a State holiday, Confederate Memorial Day — Ed.]. Every Saturday when I get off he gives me the keys at twelve o’clock, so that if he happened to be gone when I get back there at five or six o’clock I could get in, and every Monday morning I return the keys to him. The front door has always been unlocked on previous Saturday afternoons. After you go inside and come up about middle ways of the steps, there are some double doors there.

It was locked on Saturday when I got there. Have never found it that way before.

I took my keys and unlocked it. When I went upstairs I had a sack of bananas and I stood to the left of that desk like I do every Saturday. I says like I always do, “Alright, Mr. Frank,” and he come bustling out of his office. He had never done that before. He always called me when he wanted to tell me anything and said “Step here a minute, Newt.”

This time he came up rubbing his hands and says, “Newt, I am sorry I had you come so soon, you could have been at home sleeping, I tell you what you do, you go out in town and have a good time.” He had never let me off before that.

I could have laid down there in the shipping room and gone to sleep, and I told him that. He says, “You needs to have a good time. You go down town, stay an hour and a half and come back your usual time at six o’clock. Be sure and be back at six o’clock.”

I then went out the door and stayed until about four minutes to six. When I came back the doors were unlocked just as I left them and I went and says,” All right, Mr. Frank,” and he says, “What time is it’?” and I says, “It lacks two minutes of six.” He says, “Don’t punch yet, there is a few worked today and I want to change the slip.”

It took him twice as long this time than it did the other times I saw him fix it. He fumbled putting it in, while I held the lever for him and I think he made some remark about he was not used to putting it in.

When Mr. Frank put the tape in I punched and I went on downstairs.

While I was down there Mr. Gantt [a young man who was a former pencil factory employee and who had been a friend of Mary Phagan’s — Ed.] came from across the street from the beer saloon and says “Newt, I got a pair of old shoes that I want to get upstairs to have fixed.”

I says, “I ain’t allowed to let anybody in here after six o’clock.”

About that time Mr. Frank come busting out of the door and run into Gantt unexpected and he jumped back frightened.

Gantt says, “I got a pair of old shoes upstairs, have you any objection to my getting them?”

Frank says, “I don’t think they are up there, I think I saw the boy sweep some up in the trash the other day.”

Mr. Gantt asked him what sort they were and Mr. Frank said “tans.” Gantt says, “Well, I had a pair of black ones, too.” Frank says, “Well, I don’t know,” and he dropped his head down just so. Then he raised his head and says, “Newt, go with him and stay with him and help him find them,” and I went up there with Mr. Gantt and found them in the shipping room, two pair, the tans and the black ones.

Mr. Frank phoned me that night about an hour after he left, it was sometime after seven o’clock. He says”How is everything?” and I says, “Everything is all right so far as I know,” and he says, “Good-bye.”

No, he did not ask anything about Gantt. Yes, that is the first time he ever phoned to me on a Saturday night, or at all.

There is a light on the street floor just after you get in the entrance to the building. The light is right up here where that partition comes across. Mr. Frank told me when I first went there, “Keep that light burning bright, so the officers can see in when they pass by.” It wasn’t burning that day at all. I lit it at six o’clock myself. On Saturdays I always lit it, but week-days it would always be lit when I got there. On Saturdays I always got there at five o’clock. This Saturday he got me there an hour earlier and let me off later.

There is a light in the basement down there at the foot of the ladder. He told me to keep that burning all the time. It has two little chains to it to turn on and turn off the gas. When I got there on making my rounds at 7 p. m. on the 26th of April, it was burning just as low as you could turn it, like a lightning bug. I left it Saturday morning burning bright.

I made my rounds regularly every half hour Saturday night. I punched on the hour and punched on the half and I made all my punches. The elevator doors on the street floor and office floor were closed when I got there on Saturday. They were fastened down just like we fasten them down every other night.

When three o’clock came I went down the basement and when I went down and got ready to come back I discovered the body there. I went down to the toilet and when I got through I looked at the dust bin back to the door to see how the door was and it being dark I picked up my lantern and went there and I saw something laying there which I thought some of the boys had put there to scare me, then I walked a little piece towards it and I seen what it was and I got out of there.

I got up the ladder and called up [the] police station. It was after three o’clock. I carried the officers down where I found the body.

I tried to get Mr. Frank on the telephone and was still trying when the officers came. I guess I was trying about eight minutes.
The jury listens intently to the testimony in the Leo Frank case.

The jury listens intently to the testimony in the Leo Frank case.

I saw Mr. Frank Sunday morning at about seven or eight o’clock. He was coming in the office. He looked down on the floor and never spoke to me. He dropped his head right down this way. Mr. Frank was there and didn’t say nothing while Mr. Darley was speaking to me. Boots Rogers, Chief Lanford, Darley, Mr. Frank and I were there when they opened the clock [the time clock — Ed.].

Mr. Frank opened the clock and said the punches were all right, that I hadn’t missed any punches. I punched every half hour from six o’clock until three o’clock, which was the last punch I made. I don’t know whether they took out that slip or not.

On Tuesday night, April 29th at about ten o’clock I had a conversation at the station house with Mr. Frank. They handcuffed me to a chair. They went and got Mr. Frank and brought him in and he sat down next to the door. He dropped his head and looked down. We were all alone.

I said, “Mr. Frank, it’s mighty hard for me to be handcuffed here for something I don’t know anything about.”

He said, “What’s the difference, they have got me locked up and a man guarding me.”

I said, “Mr. Frank, do you believe I committed that crime,” and he said, “No, Newt, I know you didn’t, but I believe you know something about it.”

I said, “Mr. Frank, I don’t know a thing about it, no more than finding the body.”

He said, “We are not talking about that now, we will let that go. If you keep that up we will both go to hell.” Then the officers both came in.

When Mr. Frank came out of his office that Saturday he was looking down and rubbing his hands. I have never seen him rubbing his hands that way before.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I don’t know how many times I told this story before. Everybody was after me all the time down there at the station house. Yes, I testified at the coroner’s inquest and I told them there that Mr. Frank jumped back like he was frightened when he saw Mr. Gantt. I am sure I told them, and I told them that Mr. Frank jumped back and held his head down. I didn’t say before the coroner that he said he had given one of the pair of shoes of Mr. Gantt to one of the boys; they got that wrong.

On Saturdays I had to wake up usually and get to the factory at twelve o’clock. This time Mr. Frank told me to get back at four. I did say before the coroner that he was looking down when he came out of his office. I told them also that there was a place in that building [where] I could go to sleep, but they didn’t ask me where.

When you come in the front door of the factory, you can go right on by the elevator and right down into the basement, anybody could do it. The fact that the double doors on the steps were locked wouldn’t prevent anybody from going in the basement. That would only prevent anybody from up stairs from going into the basement unless they went by the elevator or by unlocking those double doors.

All of the doors to the factory were unlocked when I got back there Saturday afternoon about 6 o’clock, the first floor, the second floor, the third floor and the fourth floor. Anybody could come right in from the street and go all over the factory without Mr. Frank in his office knowing anything about it.

The doors are never closed at all. That is a great big, old, rambling place up there. The shutters, the blinds to the factory were all closed that day because it was a holiday, excepting two or three on the first floor which I closed up that night. It’s a very dark place when the shutters are closed. That is why we have to burn a light.

There is a light on the first floor near the clock, it burns all the time because that is a dark spot. There are two clocks, one punches to a hundred, the other punches to two hundred, because there are more than a hundred employees. I punch both of them.

About Mr. Frank and Mr. Gantt, they had had a difficulty and I knew that Mr. Frank didn’t want him in there. Mr. Frank had told me “Lee, I have discharged Mr. Gantt, I don’t want him in here, keep him out of here,” and he had said,” When you see him hanging around here, watch him.”

That is the reason I thought Mr. Frank was startled when he saw Mr. Gantt. Mr. Gantt is a great big fellow, nearly seven feet. When he went out I watched him as he went to the beer saloon and I went on upstairs. He left the factory about half past six.

I went through the machine room every time I made a punch that night. I went to the ladies’ dressing room every half hour that night until three o’clock. I went all over the building every half hour, excepting the basement. I went down to the basement every hour that night, but not all the way back.

Mr. Frank had instructed me to go over the building every half hour and he said go down in the basement once in awhile. He said go back far enough to see the door was closed. He told me to look out for the dust bin because that is where we might have a fire and to see that the back door is shut and to go over all the building every half hour.

No, he didn’t give me any different instructions on that Saturday, he didn’t tell me not to go in the basement or in the metal department. He allowed me to carry out the instructions just like I had been doing before. Yes, if I had gone back to find out whether that door was closed or not, I would have found the body, but I could see if the door was open, because there was a light back there. No, it wasn’t open that night. It was shut when I found the body.

It was about ten minutes after I telephoned the police that they arrived. When I was down there I was close enough to the door to see it was shut, there was a light in front of it. There was no light between the body and the door. It was dark back there. The body was about sixty feet from that door. If the back door had been open I could have seen that big light back there in the alley. The back door was closed when I found the body.

The first time I went down the basement that night was seven o’clock. I went just a little piece beyond the dark, so I could see whether there was any fire down there. That’s what I was looking for.

Yes, I could tell whether the door was open from there. No, I didn’t go back as far as they found the body, I didn’t go back that far at all during the night. The reason I went that far back when I saw the body was because I went to the closet. There are two closets on the second floor, one on the third floor and one on the fourth floor. I didn’t see the lady’s hat or shoe when I went down to that little place with my lantern, nor the parasol. My lantern was dirty.

I was sitting down there, after I had punched, on the seat, set my lantern on the outside. When I got through I picked up my lantern, I walked a few steps down that way, I seed something over there, about that much of the lady’s leg and dress.

I guess I walked about three or four feet, or five or six. I guess the body was about ten feet from the closet. As to what made me look in that direction from the closet, because I wanted to look that way. I picked up the lantern to go down there to see the dust bin, to see whether there was any fire there. The dust bin was to the right of me. When I was sit- ting down there the dust bin was not entirely hid behind the partition. I could see where the dust came down.

The balance of the night in order to see whether there was any fire in the dust bin or not I went twenty or twenty-five feet from the scuttle hole, and when I was down in the closet I had to go at least ten feet to see whether or not there was any fire in the dust bin. I would have gone further if I hadn’t discovered the body.

When I saw the body, the closest I ever got to it was about six feet. I was holding my lantern in my hand. I just saw the feet. When I first saw it I was about ten feet from it. As to how far the body was from where I was sitting in the closet, it was not less than ten feet and not more than thirty. I stood and looked at it to see whether or not it was a natural body.

When I first got there I didn’t think it was a white woman because her face was so dirty and her hair was so crinkled and there were white spots on her face. When the police came back upstairs they said it was a white girl. I think I reported to the police that it was a white woman. She was lying on her back with her face turned kinder to one side. I could see her forehead. I saw a little blood on the side of her head that was turned next to me. The blood was on the right side of her head. I am sure she was lying on her back.

Mr. Frank had told me if anything serious happened to call up the police and if anything like fire to call up fire department. I already knew the number of the station house.

I did say at the coroner’s inquest that it took Mr. Frank longer to put the tape on this time than it did before. I did not say it took twice as long at the coroner’s inquest, because they didn’t ask me. I didn’t pay any attention to him the first time he put the tape on. The reason the last time I know it took him longer because I held the lever and had to move it backwards and forwards.

When I was in the basement one of the policemen read the note that they found. They read these words, “The tall, black, slim negro did this, he will try to lay it on the night” — and when they got to the word “night” I said “They must be trying to put it off on me.” I didn’t say, “Boss, that’s me.”

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

The first time I saw Mr. Frank put any tape on, he didn’t say anything about it being any trouble. The last time he put it on, he said something about that he wasn’t used to putting it on. I was holding the lever there and he got it on twice and he had put it on wrong and he would have to slip it out and put it back.

When Mr. Frank came out rubbing his hands, he came out of his inner office into the outer office and from there in front of the clock.

I did not go down in the basement as far as the boiler during the night, except when I discovered the body. The officers talked to me the whole time. I didn’t get to sleep hardly, day or night. Just the time I would get ready to go to sleep, here they was after me. Then I would go back to my cell, stay a while and then another would come and get me. They carried me where I could sleep, but they wouldn’t let me stay there long enough to sleep. I didn’t get no sleep until I went over to the jail, and I didn’t get no sleep at jail for about two weeks. That was before the coroner’s inquest, when I was first arrested.

When I went back to the jail I was treated nicely. As to who talked to me longer, Mr. Frank or Black, Mr. Black did. Mr. Arnold talked to me longer than Mr. Frank did on April 29th.

In the southwest corner is some toilets for men and women.

Modern accounts of the Frank trial often include the claim that Frank could not have been convicted without the testimony of Jim Conley, and that, except for Conley, no one’s testimony made out much of a case for Frank’s guilt. But Lee’s testimony was very damaging indeed to Frank. And neither the Coroner’s Jury nor the grand jury which indicted Frank (which included several Jews) heard a word from Jim Conley.
Courtroom sketch of the defendant, Leo M. Frank

Courtroom sketch of the defendant, Leo M. Frank

Frank’s decision to have Newt Lee arrive early, and then, when he arrived, sending him away for two hours might be seen as an innocent change of plans — but Frank’s absolute insistence that Newt could not rest on the premises during the two-hour gap is definitely suspicious — as is Frank’s first and only telephone call ever made to Lee, at 7:30 PM on the night of the murder, asking him if everything was “all right.” It also seems quite strange that every single person in Frank’s sizable household would fail to be awakened by a telephone that rang insistently for some eight minutes. The police would also find it difficult to reach Frank via telephone, not getting an answer until 6:30 AM.

Lee’s testimony that Frank was so nervous (some six hours after the murder, with Mary Phagan’s body hidden in the basement) that he wrung his hands, jumped in fear when seeing Mary’s friend Gantt (who could have been theoretically looking for her), and couldn’t properly operate the time clock (that he had previously worked with ease for nearly five years) without help made an impression. But even more significant was the statement (later corroborated by other witnesses) that Frank had inspected Lee’s time card the day after the murder and had declared that it was all correct, with every punch made at the proper time. Later the bloody shirt was found at Lee’s home — and Frank would be telling a very different tale about the time card, contradicting himself and declaring that several punches were missing. It’s hard to explain that about-face as anything other than a ham-handed attempt to implicate Lee.

In fact, the Frank defense team were still trying to plant the idea in the jurors’ minds that Lee might have had something to do with the crime. Frank’s lead defense lawyers, Reuben Arnold and Luther Rosser, explained their strategy to the judge while the jury was not present, citing Lee’s reaction to the Ebonics-style “death notes” found near the body which included references to a “night witch,” which seemed a semi-literate allusion to the night watchman:

“In an instant, Lee said, ‘That night witch means me.’ It showed familiarity with the notes. Isn’t it strange that a negro so ignorant and dull that Mr. Rosser had to ask him a question ten times over could in a flash interpret this illegible scrawl?”

“We’ve got to commence somewhere and at some time to show the negro is a criminal and we might as well begin here as anywhere else.”

Rosser’s and Arnold’s effort was to imply that Newt Lee had something to do with the crime, at least the writing of the death notes at the behest of factory sweeper Jim Conley, who the defense would allege was the real murderer. This theory was greatly weakened while aborning, though, when Lee told the court that he hadn’t even met Conley until he saw him — a month after the murder — in jail.
Reuben R. Arnold, attorney for the defense

Reuben R. Arnold, attorney for the defense

On Sunday, April 27, 1913, Leo Frank had said that Lee had punched his time card correctly — even reviewing it in front of police officers. Frank was then allowed to put it back in the company safe.
Defendant's Exhibit 1, supposedly a copy of Newt Lee's "time slip, dated April 26, taken out of clock by Frank." It shows four missed punches, though Frank showed officers Lee's time slip the day after the murder, and no punches had been missed.

Defendant’s Exhibit 1, supposedly a copy of Newt Lee’s “time slip, dated April 26, taken out of clock by Frank.” It indicates four missed punches, though Frank showed officers Lee’s time slip the day after the murder, and no punches had been missed.

On Monday, April 28, Frank changed his story. Now he said that Lee had missed three or four punches on the clock. This would have amounted to three to four hours of Lee’s time unaccounted for. It took about 30 minutes to get to Lee’s home home from the factory — plenty of time to have committed the murder and dispose of evidence.

Leo Frank asked the police to check his laundry for blood two days after the murder, possibly to suggest they should check Newt Lee’s home as well. When Lee’s residence was searched, a bloody shirt — later proven to have been planted, obviously by someone trying to incriminate Lee — was indeed found at the bottom of Newt Lee’s garbage burning barrel. It suggested to police that Lee had “forgotten to burn the bloody shirt that had been stained during the Mary Phagan murder.”

The defense subjected Lee to a grueling ordeal of confusing questions, cross-questions, insults, and accusations — but they could not rattle him nor catch him in any contradiction.

Sergeant L. S. Dobbs told the jury of how he found the lifeless body of Mary Phagan: “The girl was lying on her face, the left side on the ground, the right side up. Her face was punctured, full of holes, and was swollen and black. The cord was around her neck, sunk into the flesh. Her tongue was protruding.”

Detective John Starnes was called to the stand. Here is his complete testimony from the Brief of Evidence:

J. N. STARNES, sworn for the State.

I am a city officer. Went to the pencil company’s place of business between five and six o’clock, April 27th. The pencil company is located in Fulton County, Georgia. That is where the body was found. The staple to the back door looked as if it had been prized out with a pipe pressed against the wood. There was a pipe there that fitted the indentation on the wood.

I called Mr. Frank on the telephone, and told him I wanted him to come to the pencil factory right away. He said he hadn’t had any breakfast. He asked where the night watchman was. I told him it was very necessary for him to come and if he would come I would send an automobile for him, and I asked Boots Rogers to go for him. I didn’t tell him what had happened, and he didn’t ask me.

Mr. Frank appeared to be nervous; this was indicated by his manner of speaking to Mr. Darley; he was in a trembling condition.

I was guarded with him in my conversation over the phone.

About a week afterwards I went to the factory and had the night watchman there, Mr. Hendricks, to show me about the clock. He took a new slip and put it in the clock and punched the slip all the way around in less than five minutes (State’s Exhibit P).

I got some cord on the second floor of the pencil factory, the knots in these cords are similar to the knots in this cord (State’s Exhibit C [the cord used to strangle Mary Phagan — Ed.]).

On the floor right at the opposite corner, what might be called the northwest corner of the dressing room, on Monday morning, April 28th, I saw splotches that looked like blood about a foot and a half or two feet from the end of the dressing room, some of which I chipped up. It looked like splotches of blood and something had been thrown there and in throwing it had spread out and splattered.

There was no great amount of it. I should judge that the area around these spots was a foot and a half. The splotch looked as if something had been swept over it, some white substance. There is a lot of that white stuff in the metal department.

It looked like blood. I found a nail fifty feet this side of the metal room toward the elevator on the second floor that looked like it had blood on the top of it. It was between the office and the double doors. I chipped two places off on the back door which looked like they had bloody finger prints.

I don’t know when Frank was arrested. I don’t think he was arrested on Monday. He was asked to come to the station house on Monday. It takes not over three minutes to walk from Marietta Street at the corner of Forsyth across the viaduct and through Forsyth Street down to the pencil factory.

Lee was composed at the factory; he never tried to get away.

The door to the stairs from the office floor to the third floor was barred when I first went up there.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I am guessing about the time. It wouldn’t take over five minutes to get off the car, walk to the pencil factory, walk in, walk up the stairs and back into Mr. Frank’s office.

The hasp is bent a little.

I heard Boots Rogers testify at the coroner’s inquest and I testified twice. I did not correct any statement at the coroner’s inquest that Boots Rogers made. I am the prosecutor in this case. I cannot give the words of the conversation of the telephone message between myself and Mr. Frank. I could be mistaken as to the very words he used. It was just a casual telephone conversation.

I don’t know that the splotches that I saw there were blood. The floor at the ladies’ dressing room is a very dark color.

I saw cord like that in the basement, but it was cut up in pieces. I saw a good many cords like that all over the factory. I never found the purse, or the flowers or the ribbon on the little girl’s hat. This diagram (State’s Exhibit A) is a correct diagram of second floor and basement of pencil company and other places. No. 11 on diagram (State’s Exhibit A) is the toilets.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

I was guarded in what I said over the phone to Mr. Frank though it was just a conversation between two gentlemen. These pieces of wood look like what I chipped off the floor. I turned them over to Chief Lanford. (Referring to State’s Exhibit E).

RECALLED FOR THE STATE.

I saw Mr. Rosser at the coroner’s inquest. I never heard him say anything throughout the hearing.

The most important facts brought forth by Starnes were the pointed contrast between Leo Frank’s extreme nervousness compared with Newt Lee’s relative calm. This was all the more remarkable because, as the jury well knew, Lee, a black man in racially-stratified 1913 Atlanta, who had been caught alone in a dark factory at night with the body of a dead white girl, was under a much heavier cloud of suspicion than Frank — and had in fact been arrested, while Frank had not.

Next came the testimony of W.W. “Boots” Rogers, who had accompanied the officers:

W. W. ROGERS, sworn for the State.

I am now connected with Judge Girardeau’s court. I was at the station house Saturday night, April 26th, and went to the National Pencil Company’s place of business. It was between five and five thirty that I heard Mr. Starnes have a conversation over the phone. I heard him say, “If you will come I will send an automobile after you.”

It took us five or six minutes to get out to Mr. Frank’s residence at 68 E. Georgia Avenue. Mr. Black was with me. Mrs. Frank opened the door. She wore a heavy bath robe. Mr. Black asked if Mr. Frank was in. Mr. Frank stepped into the hall through the curtain. He was dressed for the street with the exception of his collar, tie, coat and hat. He had on no vest.

Mr. Frank asked Mr. Black if anything had happened at the factory. Mr. Black didn’t answer. He asked me had anything happened at the factory. I didn’t answer. Mr. Frank said, “Did the night watchman call up and report anything to you?” Mr. Black said, “Mr. Frank, you had better get your clothes on and let us go to the factory and see what has happened.” Mr. Frank said that he thought he dreamt in the morning about 3 a. m. about hearing the telephone ring.
Leo Frank

Leo Frank

Mr. Black said something about whiskey to Mrs. Frank in Mr. Frank’s presence. Mrs. Frank said Mr. Frank hadn’t had any breakfast and would we allow him to get breakfast. I told Mr. Black that I was hungry myself. Mr. Frank said let me have a cup of coffee. Mr. Black in a kind of sideways, said, “I think a drink of whiskey would do him good,” and Mrs. Frank made the remark that she didn’t think there was any whiskey in the house.

Mr. Frank seemed to be extremely nervous. His questions were jumpy. I never heard him speak in my life until that morning. His voice was a refined voice, it was not coarse. He was rubbing his hands when he came through the curtains. He moved about briskly. He seemed to be excited. He asked questions in rapid succession, but gave plenty of time between questions to have received an answer.

Mr. Frank and Mr. Black got on the rear seat and I took the front seat and as I was fixing to turn around, one of us asked Mr. Frank if he knew a little girl by the name of Mary Phagan. Mr. Frank says: “Does she work at the factory?” and I said, “I think she does.” Mr. Frank said, “I cannot tell whether or not she works there until I look on my pay roll book, I know very few of the girls that work there. I pay them off, but I very seldom go back in the factory and I know very few of them, but I can look on my pay roll book and tell you if a girl by the name of Mary Phagan works there.”

One of us suggested that we take Mr. Frank by the undertaking establishment and let him see if he knew this young lady. Mr. Frank readily consented, so we stopped at the telephone exchange, Mr. Frank, Mr. Black and myself got out and went in the undertaking establishment.

I saw the corpse. The corpse was lying in a little kind of side out room to the right of a large room. The light was not lit in this little room where the body was laying, and Mr. Gheesling stepped in ahead of me and went around behind the corpse and lit the light above her head and her head was lying then towards the wall. I stepped up on the opposite side of the corpse with a door to my left. Mr. Gheesling caught the face of the dead girl and turned it over towards me. I looked then to see if anybody followed me and I saw Mr. Frank step from outside of the door into what I thought was a closet, but I have afterwards found it was where Mr. Gheesling slept, or where somebody slept. There was a little single bed in there.
The clothes worn by Mary Phagan when she was killed.

The clothes worn by Mary Phagan when she was killed

I immediately turned around and came back out, in front of the office. I didn’t see Frank look at the corpse. I don’t remember that Mr. Frank ever followed me in this room. He may have stopped on the outside of the door, but my back was toward him and I don’t know where he stopped. Mr. Gheesling turned the head of the dead girl over towards me and I looked around to see who was behind me and I saw Mr. Frank as he made that movement behind me. He didn’t go into the closet as far as I could see, but he got out of my view. He could have looked at the corpse from the time that Mr. Gheesling was going around behind, but he could not have seen her face because it was lying over towards the wall. The face was away from me and I presume that was the cause of Mr. Gheesling turning it over.

There was some question asked Mr. Frank if he knew the girl, and I think he replied that he didn’t know whether he did or not but that he could tell whether she worked at the factory by looking at his pay roll book.

As we were leaving Mr. Frank’s house, Mr. Frank asked Mrs. Frank to telephone Mr. Darley to come to the factory.

Mr. Frank was apparently still nervous at the undertaking establishment, he stepped lively. It was just his general manner that indicated to me that he was nervous. I never saw Mr. Frank in my life until that morning.

After we got out of Mr. Frank’s house and was in my car, was the first time Mr. Frank had been told that the young lady was named Mary Phagan and that there had been any murder committed at the factory.

From the undertaker’s we went to the pencil factory in my car. We went into Mr. Frank’s office, he went up to the safe, turned the combination, opened the safe, took out his time book, laid the book down on the table, ran his finger down until he came to the name Mary Phagan, and said, “Yes, Mary Phagan worked here, she was here yesterday to get her pay.” He said, “I will tell you about the exact time she left there. My stenographer left about twelve o’clock, and a few minutes after she left the office boy left and Mary came in and got her money and left.” He said she got $1.20 and he asked whether anybody had found the envelope that the money was in.

Frank still seemed to be nervous like the first time I seen him. It was just his quick manner of stepping around and his manner of speech like he had done at the house that indicated to me that he was nervous.

He then wanted to see where the girl was found. Mr. Frank went around by the elevator, where there was a switch box on the wall and Mr. Frank put the switch in. The box was not locked. Somebody asked him if he was used to keeping the switch box locked. He said they had kept it locked up to a certain time until the insurance company told him that he would have to leave it unlocked, that it was a violation of the law to keep an electric switch box locked. We then stepped on the elevator. He still stepped about lively and spoke up lively, answering questions, just like he had always done.

After we got on the elevator, he jerked at the rope and it hung and he called Mr. Darley to start it and we all stepped out of the elevator. Mr. Darley came and pulled at the rope two or three times and the elevator started.

As to whether anybody made any statement down in the basement as to who was responsible for the murder, I think Mr. Frank made the remark that Mr. Darley had worked Newt Lee for sometime out at the Oakland plant and that if Lee knew anything about the murder that Darley would stand a better chance of getting it out of him than anybody else.

After we came back from the basement it was suggested that we go to the station house and as we started out Mr. Frank says, “I had better put in a new slip, hadn’t I, Darley?” Darley told him yes to put in a slip. Frank took his keys out, unlocked the door of the right-hand clock and lifted out the slip, looked at it and made the remark that the slip was punched correctly. Mr. Darley and Newt Lee was standing there at the time Mr. Frank said the punches had been made correctly. Mr. Frank then put in a new slip, closed the door, locked it and took his pencil and wrote on the slip that he had already taken out of the machine, “April 26, 1913.”

I looked at the slip that Mr. Frank took out (Defendant’s Exhibit I), the first punch was 6:01, the second one was 6:32 or 6:33. He took the slip back in his office. I glanced all the way down and there was a punch for every number.

While we were walking through the factory Mr. Frank asked two or three times to get a cup of coffee. As to what Mr. Frank said about the murder, I don’t know that I heard him express himself except down in the basement. The officers showed him where the body was found and he made the remark that it was too bad or something to that effect. When we left the factory to go to police headquarters, Newt Lee was under arrest. I never considered Mr. Frank as being under arrest at that time. There had never been said anything to him in my presence about putting him under arrest. Mr. Frank’s appearance at the station house was exactly like it was when I first saw him. He stepped quickly, when the door of the automobile was open, he jumped lightly off Mr. Darley’s lap, went up the steps pretty rapid.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I never saw Mr. Frank until that morning. I don’t know whether his natural movements or manner of speech were quick or not. We didn’t know whether the girl was a white girl or not until we rubbed the dirt from the child’s face and pulled down her stocking a little piece. The tongue was not sticking out, it was wedged between the teeth. She had dirt in her eye and mouth. The cord around her neck was drawn so tight it was sunk in her flesh and the piece of underskirt was loose over her hair.

I don’t know whether Mr. Frank went upstairs or not after we reached his house. I think he called to his wife to get him his collar and tie. He got his coat and vest some place, but I don’t know where. At the time Mrs. Frank was calling Mr. Darley, Mr. Frank was putting on his collar and tie down in the reception hall. We were at the house 15 or 20 minutes. After Mrs. Frank had said something about Mr. Frank getting his breakfast before he went, Mr. Black said something about a drink would do good. Mrs. Frank then called her mother, who said that there wasn’t any liquor in the house, that Mr. Selig had an acute attack of indigestion the night before and used it all up.

Mr. Frank readily consented to go to the undertaker’s with us. When we got in the car we told him it was Mary Phagan and he said he could tell whether she was an employee or not by looking at his book, that he knew very few of the girls.

Yes, anybody facing the door of the little chapel at the undertaker’s could have seen the corpse. As to whether I know that Mr. Frank didn’t see the corpse he could have got a glance at the whole corpse, but when Mr. Gheesling turned the face over no one could have got a good look at the face unless they stepped in the room. Mr. Gheesling turned the young lady’s face directly toward me, Mr. Frank was standing somewhere behind me, outside of the room. I turned around to see if Mr. Frank was looking. I don’t know that he didn’t get a glance at the corpse, but no one but Mr. Gheesling and I at this moment stepped up and looked at the little girl’s face. What Mr. Frank and Mr. Black saw behind my back, I can’t say. I don’t say that Mr. Frank stepped into that dressing room, but he passed out of my view. So did Mr. Black. Mr. Gheesling had a better view of Mr. Black and Mr. Frank than I did, because my back was to them and Mr. Gheesling was looking straight across the body at them.

Mr. Frank had no difficulty in unlocking the safe when we went back to the factory. The elevator we went down on is a freight elevator, makes considerable noise. It stops itself when it gets to the bottom. I don’t think it hits the ground.

She was lying on her face with her hands folded up. Her face was turned somewhat toward the left wall. A bruise on the left side of her head, some dry blood in her hair. One of her eyes were blackened. There were several little scratches on her face. Somebody worked her arms to see if they were stiff. The arms worked a little bit. The joints in her arms worked just a little bit.
Mary Phagan -- and the spot where her body was discovered

Mary Phagan — and the spot where her body was discovered

When we first went down the basement we stayed down there about 20 or 25 minutes. During that time neither the shoe, the hat, nor the umbrella had been found. In the elevator shaft there was some excrement. When we went down on the elevator, the elevator mashed it. You could smell it all around. It looked like the ordinary healthy man’s excrement. It looked like somebody had dumped naturally; that was before the elevator came down. When the elevator came down afterwards it smashed it and then we smelled it. As to the hair of the girl anyone could tell at first glance that it was that of a white girl.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

The body wasn’t lying at the undertakers where it could have been seen from the door.

RE-CROSS EXAMINATION.

At the moment the face was turned towards me, I didn’t see Mr. Frank but I know a person couldn’t have looked into the face unless he was somewhere close to me. I was inside and Mr. Frank never came into that little room.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

When the face was turned towards me, Mr. Frank stepped out of my vision in the direction of Mr. Gheesling’s sleeping room.

Well, the tangled issue of whether Frank actually dared to look directly into the dead face of Mary Phagan is interesting but not conclusive: Many’s the person too sensitive to want to do that. But Frank’s denial of knowing Mary Phagan by name is hardly credible: he had paid her some 52 times prior to the murder, and written her initials each time in his accounting book. And Rogers confirmed the fact that Leo Frank had — initially — stated that all of Lee’s time clock punches were correct. He also revealed that the original time slip was, unfortunately, left in Frank’s custody instead of that of the police.

The next important testimony was that of Detective John R. Black, who had known Frank before the Phagan murder. He stated that Leo Frank was not naturally nervous or excitable, giving his nervousness immediately after the killing more significance. Black also had knowledge of Frank’s change of heart regarding the “missed punches” on Newt Lee’s time slip and the circumstances surrounding the finding of the bloody shirt. But Black, unlike Lee, was easily confused and rattled by the defense’s rapid-fire cross-examination, damaging his credibility.

JOHN R. BLACK, sworn for the State.

I am a city policeman. I don’t know the details of the conversation between Mr. Starnes and Mr. Frank over the ’phone. I didn’t pay very much attention to it. I went over to Mr. Frank’s house with Boots Rogers. Mrs. Frank came to the door. Mrs. Frank had on a bath robe. I stated that I would like to see Mr. Frank and about that time Mr. Frank stepped out from behind a curtain. His voice was hoarse and trembling and nervous and excited. He looked to me like he was pale.

I had met Mr. Frank on two different occasions before. On this occasion he seemed to be nervous in handling his collar. He could not get his tie tied, and talked very rapid in asking questions in regard to what had happened.

He wanted to know if he would have time to get something to eat, to get some breakfast. He wanted to know if something had happened at the pencil factory and if the night watchman had reported it, and he asked this last question before I had time to answer the first. He kept insisting for a cup of coffee.

When we got into the automobile as Mr. Rogers was turning around Mr. Frank wanted to know what had happened at the factory, and I asked him if he knew Mary Phagan and told him that she had been found dead in the basement of the pencil factory. Mr. Frank said he didn’t know any girl by the name of Mary Phagan, that he knew very few of the employes.

I suggested to Mr. Rogers that we drive by the undertaker’s. In the undertaking establishment Mr. Frank looked at her. He gave a casual glance at her and stepped aside. I couldn’t say whether he saw the face of the girl or not. There was a curtain hanging near the room and Mr. Frank stepped behind the curtain. He could get no view from behind the curtain. He walked behind the curtain and came right out. Mr. Frank stated as we left the undertaking establishment that he didn’t know the girl but he believed he had paid her off on Saturday. He thought he recognized her being at the factory on Saturday by the dress that she wore but he could tell by going over to the factory and looking at his cash book.

At the pencil factory Mr. Frank took the slip out, looked over it [Newt Lee’s time clock slip — Ed.] and said it had been punched correctly. On Monday and Tuesday following Mr. Frank stated that the clock had been mis-punched three times. This slip was turned over to Chief Lanford on Monday. I saw Mr. Frank take it out of the clock and went back with it toward his office. I don’t know of my own personal knowledge that it was turned over to Chief Lanford Monday.

When Mr. Frank was down at police station on Monday morning Mr. Rosser and Mr. Haas [Lawyers for Frank and the National Pencil Company. — Ed.] were there. About 8 or 8:30 o’clock Monday morning Mr. Rosser came in police headquarters. That’s the first time he had counsel with him. That morning Mr. Haslett and myself went to Mr. Frank’s house and asked him to come down to police headquarters. About 1 1:30 Monday Mr. Haas demanded of Chief Lanford that officers accompany Mr. Frank out to his residence and search his residence. Mr. Haas stated in Frank’s presence that he was Mr. Frank’s attorney and demanded to show that there was nothing left undone, that we go out to Mr. Frank’s house and search for anything that we might find in connection with the case.

On Tuesday night Mr. Scott and myself suggested to Mr. Frank to talk to Newt Lee. Mr. Frank spoke well of the negro, said he had always found him trusty and honest. They went in a room and stayed from about 5 to 10 minutes alone. I couldn’t hear enough to swear that I understood what was said. Mr. Frank stated that Newt still stuck to the story that he knew nothing about it.

Mr. Frank stated that Mr. Gantt was there on Saturday evening and that he told Newt Lee to let him go and get the shoes but to watch him, as he knew the surroundings of the office. After this conversation Gantt was arrested. Frank made no objections to talking to Newt Lee.

Mr. Frank was nervous on Monday. After his release Monday he seemed very jovial.

On Tuesday night Frank said at station house that there was nobody at [the] factory at 6 o’clock but Newt Lee and that Newt ought to know more about it, as it was his duty to look over factory every thirty minutes. Also that Gantt was there Saturday evening and he left him there at 6 o’clock and that he and Gantt had some trouble previous to discharge of Gantt and that he at first refused to allow Gantt to go in factory, but Gantt told him he left a pair of shoes there.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

When I said that Mr. Frank was released I spoke before I thought. I retracted it on cross-examination. I don’t know that Mr. Rosser was at the police station between 8 and 8:30 Monday morning, I said that to the best of my recollection. I wouldn’t swear Mr. Rosser was there. I heard Mr. Rosser say to Mr. Frank to give them a statement without a conference at all between Mr. Frank and Mr. Rosser. I said that we wanted to have a private talk with Mr. Frank without Mr. Rosser being present. I wanted to talk to Mr. Frank without Mr. Rosser being present. While I was at the coroner’s inquest Mr. Frank answered every question readily.

I wouldn’t swear positively, but to the best of my recollection I had a conversation with Mr. Frank on two previous occasions. When I met Mr. Frank on previous occasions I don’t remember anything that caused me to believe he was nervous, nothing unusual about him.

I heard the conversation Mr. Starnes had over the telephone with Mr. Frank early that morning. It was about a quarter to six, or a quarter past six. I think we got to the undertaker’s about 6:20. As to the reason why I didn’t tell Mr. Frank about the murder when I was inside the house, but did tell him as soon as he got in the automobile, I had a conversation with Newt Lee and I wanted to watch Mr. Frank and see how he felt about the murder.

Mr. Frank didn’t go upstairs and put his collar and cravat on. Mrs. Frank brought him his collar and tie, I don’t know where she got them. He told her to bring his collar and tie and he got his coat and hat. I don’t know whether he went back to his home or not. He put his collar and tie on right there. I don’t know where he got his coat and vest at. I don’t know what sort of tie or collar he had. He put his collar and tie on like anybody else would; tied it himself. I don’t know whether Mr. Frank finished dressing upstairs or not. I couldn’t see him when he went behind those curtains.

We stayed at the Frank home about ten minutes. At the undertaking establishment I was right behind Mr. Frank. He was between me and the body. I saw the face when the undertaker turned her over. Yes, Mr. Frank being in front of me had an opportunity to see it also. No, Mr. Frank didn’t go into that sleeping room. Mr. Frank went out just ahead of me. When we went back to the pencil factory, Mr. Frank went to the safe and unlocked it readily at the first effort. He got the book, put it on the table, opened it at the right place, ran his finger down until he came to the name of Mary Phagan and says, “Yes, this little girl worked here and I paid her $1.20 yesterday.”

We went all over the factory that day. Nobody saw that blood spot that morning. I guess there must have been thirty people there during that day. Nobody saw it. I was there twice that day. Mr. Starnes was there with me. He didn’t call attention to any blood spots. Chief Lanford was there, and he didn’t discover any blood spots.

Mr. Frank was at the police station on Monday from 8:30 until about 1 1:30. Mr. Frank told me he had discharged Mr. Gantt on account of shortage and had given orders not to let him in the factory.

As regards Mr. Frank’s linen, Mr. Haas said he was Mr. Frank’s attorney and requested that we go to Mr. Frank’s house and look over the clothes he had worn the week before and the laundry too. Yes, we went out there and examined it. Mr. Frank had had no opportunity to telephone his house from the time we mentioned it until we got out there. He went with us and showed us the dirty linen. I examined Newt Lee’s house. I found a bloody shirt in the bottom of a clothes barrel there on Tuesday morning about 9 o’clock.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

Mr. Frank had told me that he didn’t think Newt Lee had told all he knew about the murder. He also said after looking over the time sheet and seeing that it hadn’t been punched correctly that that would have given Lee an hour to have gone out to his house and back. I don’t know when he made this last statement. I don’t remember whether that was before or after I went out to Lee’s house and found the shirt. We went into his house with a skeleton key. It was after Frank told me about the skips in the punches. The shirt is just like it was the day I found it. The blood looks like it is on both sides of the shirt.

RE-CROSS EXAMINATION.

I don’t know whether I went out to Lee’s house before or after Mr. Frank suggested the skips in the time slips. I don’t like to admit it, but I am so crossed up and worried that I don’t know where I am at, but I think to the best of my knowledge it was Monday that Frank said that the slips had been changed.

Much is made of Black getting “crossed up and worried” on cross-examination, and his vagueness about just when Frank started suggesting that houses ought to be searched. (It was Dorsey’s theory that Frank wanted his own house to be searched because it would naturally follow that Lee’s house would then be searched also, and the planted bloody shirt be found.) But far more important than any of the confusion are the two elements that Black could not be “crossed up” on: Frank’s extreme nervousness on the morning after the murder — he could not even properly tie his own tie — and the fact that he did indeed change his position on Lee’s time slips by 180 degrees.
Leo Frank, center, and the legal minds arrayed for and against him

Leo Frank, center, and the legal minds arrayed for and against him

Next in the witness box was James Gantt, the man whose presence at the factory Sunday evening had so frightened Frank. Whether the fright was because Gantt had been fired by Frank, or because Gantt was a friend of Mary Phagan’s, was a matter of contention. But Gantt had much more to say, too:

J. M. GANTT, sworn for the State.

From June last until the first of January I was shipping clerk at the National Pencil Company. I was discharged April 7th by Mr. Frank for alleged shortage in the pay roll. I have known Mary Phagan when she was a little girl.

Mr. Frank knew her, too. One Saturday afternoon she came in the office to have her time corrected, and after I had gotten through Mr. Frank came in and said, “You seem to know Mary pretty well.” No, I had not told him her name.

I used to know Mary when she was a little girl, but I have not seen her up to the time I went to work for the factory. My work was in the office and she worked in the rear of the building on the same floor in the tip department.

After I was discharged, I went back to the factory on two occasions. Mr. Frank saw me both times. He made no objection to my going there.

One girl used to get pay envelopes for another girl with Mr. Frank’s knowledge. There was an alleged shortage in the pay roll of $2.00. Mr. Frank came to see me about it and I told him I didn’t know anything about it, and he said he wasn’t going to make it good, and I said I wasn’t, and he then discharged me. Prior to my being discharged Mr. Frank told me he had the best office force he ever had. I was the time keeper.

Mr. Frank could sit at his desk and see the employees register at the time clock if the safe door was closed. Mr. Frank did not fix the clock frequently, possibly two or three times. On April 26th, about six o’clock I saw Newt Lee sitting out in front of the factory and I remembered that I left a pair of shoes up there and I asked Newt Lee what about my getting them, and he said he couldn’t let me up. I said Mr. Frank is up there, isn’t he? because I had seen him in the window from across the street, and while we were standing there talking, in two or three minutes, Mr. Frank was coming down the stairway and got within fifteen feet of the door when he saw me and when he saw me he kind of stepped back like he was going to go back, but when he looked up and saw that I was looking at him he came on out, and I said “Howdy, Mr. Frank,” and he kind of jumped again.

I told him I had a pair of shoes up there I would like to get and he said, “Do you want to go with me, or will Newt Lee be all right?” and he kind of studied a little bit, and said, “What kind of shoes were they?” and I said, “They were tan shoes,” and he said, “I think I saw a negro sweeping them up the other day.” And I said, “Well, I have a pair of black ones there, too,” and he kind of studied a little bit, and said “Newt, go ahead with him and stay with him until he gets his shoes,” and I went up there and found both pair right where I had left them.

Mr. Frank looked pale, hung his head, and nervous and kind of hesitated and stuttered like he didn’t like me in there somehow or other.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I testified at the coroner’s inquest. I admit I did not testify about Frank’s knowing Mary very well there, that has been recalled to my mind since I was arrested on Monday, April 28th, at 11 o’clock and held until Thursday night about six.

Frank, according to Gantt, remarking “You seem to know Mary pretty well,” did not jibe with Frank’s claim that he didn’t know the murdered girl by name. It was a riveting moment. It implied far more than a mere knowledge of the dead girl’s name or the catching of the superintendent in a lie — it implied that Leo Frank was noticing who noticed Mary, and therefore might have had designs on her for some time. The prosecution’s theory was that Frank’s killing of Mary had proceeded from a failed attempt to seduce her.
Mary Phagan and her aunt

Mary Phagan and her aunt

Next in the witness box was Pinkerton agent Harry Scott, whose testimony was particularly credible because his agency had been brought into the case at the specific request of the National Pencil Company and was being paid by forces friendly to Frank.

HARRY SCOTT, sworn for the State.

I am Superintendent of the local branch of the Pinkerton Detective Agency. I have worked on this case with John Black, city detective. I was employed by Mr. Frank representing the National Pencil Company.

I saw Mr. Frank Monday afternoon, April 28th, at the pencil factory. We went into Mr. Frank’s private office. Mr. Darley and a third party were with us. Mr. Frank said, “I guess you read in the newspapers about the horrible crime that was committed in this factory, and the directors of this company and myself have had a conference and thought that the public should demand that we have an investigation made, and endeavor to determine who is responsible for this murder.” And Mr. Frank then said he had just come from police barracks and that Detective Black seemed to suspect him of the crime, and he then related to me his movements on Saturday, April 26th, in detail.

He stated that he arrived at the factory at 8 a.m., that he left the factory between 9:30 and 10 with Mr. Darley for Montag Bros. for the mail, that he remained at Montag Bros. for about an hour; that he returned to the factory at about 11 o’clock, and just before twelve o’clock Mrs. White, the wife of Arthur White, who was working on the top floor of the building that day with Harry Denham, came in and asked permission to go upstairs and see her husband. Mr. Frank granted her permission to do so.

He then stated that Mary Phagan came in to the factory at 12:10 p. m. to draw her pay; that she had been laid off the Monday previous and she was paid $1.20; that he paid her off in his inside office where he was at his desk, and when she left his office and went in the outer office, she had reached the outer office door, leading into the hall and turned around to Mr. Frank and asked if the metal had come yet; Mr. Frank replied that he didn’t know and that Mary Phagan then, he thought, reached the stairway, and he heard voices, but he could not distinguish whether they were men or girls talking, that about 12:50 he went up to the fourth floor and asked White and Denham when they would finish up their work and they replied they wouldn’t finish up for a couple of hours; that Mrs. White was up there at the time and Frank informed Mrs. White that he was going to lock up the factory, that she had better leave; Mrs. White preceded Mr. Frank down the stairway and went on out of the factory as far as he knew, but on the way out, Mrs. White made the statement that she had seen a negro on the street floor of the building behind some boxes, and Mr. Frank stated that at 1:10 p.m. he left the factory for home to go to luncheon; he arrived at the factory again at 3 p. m., went to work on some financial work and at about four o’clock the night watchman reported for work, as per Mr. Frank’s instructions the previous day; that he allowed Newt Lee to go out and have a good time for a couple of hours and report again at six o’clock, which Newt did and at six o’clock when Lee returned to the factory, he asked Mr. Frank, as he usually did, if everything was all right, and Mr. Frank replied “Yes” and Lee went on about his business.

Mr. Frank left the factory at 6:04 p. m. and when he reached the street door entrance he found Lee talking to Gantt, an ex-book-keeper who Frank had discharged for thieving. Mr. Frank stated that he had arrived home at about 6:25 p. m. and knowing that he had discharged Gantt, he tried to get Lee on the telephone at about 6:30; knowing that Lee would be in the vicinity of the time clock at that time and could hear the telephone ring; that he did not succeed in getting him at 6:30, but that he got him at seven; that he asked Lee the question if Gantt had left the factory and if everything was all right, to which Lee replied “Yes,” and he hung up the receiver. Mr. Frank stated he went to bed somewhere around 9:30.

After that Mr. Frank and Mr. Darley accompanied me around the factory and showed me what the police had found. Mr. Darley being the spokesman. We went first to the metal room on the second floor, where I was shown some spots supposed to be blood spots, they were already chipped up, and I was taken to a machine where some strands of hair were supposed to have been found. From there we went down and examined the time clock and went through the scuttle hole and down the ladder into the basement, where I was shown where everything had been found.

As to Mr. Frank’s manner and deportment at the time we were in his office, he seemed to be perfectly natural. I saw no signs of nervousness. Occasionally between words he seemed to take a deep breath, and deep sighs about four or five times. His eyes were very large and piercing. They looked about the same they do now. He was a little pale. He gave his narrative rather rapidly.

As to whether he stated any fixed definite time as to hours or minutes, he didn’t state any definite time as to when Mary Phagan came in, he said she came in at about 12:10. We furnished attorneys for Frank with reports. After refreshing my memory I now state that Mr. Frank informed me at the time I had that conversation with him that he heard these voices before 12 o’clock, before Mary Phagan came.

He also stated during our conversation that Gantt knew Mary Phagan very well, that he was familiar and intimate with her. He seemed to lay special stress on it at the time. He said that Gantt paid a good deal of attention to her.

As to whether anything was said by any attorney of Frank’s as to our suppressing any evidence as to this murder, it was the first week in May when Mr. Pierce and I went to Mr. Herbert J. Haas’ office in the 4th National Bank Building and had a conference with him as to the Pinkerton Agency’s position in the matter. Mr. Haas stated that he would rather we would submit our reports to him first before we turned it over to the public and let them know what evidence we had gathered. We told him we would withdraw before we would adopt any practice of that sort, that it was our intention to work in hearty co-operation with the police.

I saw the place near the girls’ dressing room on the office floor, fresh chips had already been cut out of the floor and I saw white smeared where the chips had been cut out and there were also some dark spots near the chipped out places. It was just as though somebody had taken a cloth and rubbed some white substance around in a circle, about eight inches in diameter. This white stuff covered all of the dark spots.

I didn’t note any unusual signs of nervousness about Frank in his office. There wasn’t any trembling or anything of that sort at that time. He was not composed.

On Tuesday night, April 29th, Black, Mr. Frank and myself were together and Mr. Black told Mr. Frank that he believed Newt Lee was not telling all that he knew. I also said to Mr. Frank that Newt knew more than he was telling, and that as he was his employer, I thought he could get more out of the nigger than we could, and I asked him if he would consent to go into a room as employer and employee and try to get it out of him. Mr. Frank readily consented and we put them in a private room, they were together there for about ten minutes alone. When about ten minutes was up, Mr. Black and I entered the room and Lee hadn’t finished his conversation with Frank and was saying, “Mr. Frank it is awful hard for me to remain handcuffed to this chair,” and Frank hung his head the entire time the negro was talking to him, and finally in about thirty seconds, he said, “Well, they have got me too.” After that we asked Mr. Frank if he had gotten anything out of the negro and he said, “No, Lee still sticks to his original story.” Mr. Frank was extremely nervous at that time. He was very squirmy in his chair, crossing one leg after the other and didn’t know where to put his hands; he was moving them up and down his face, and he hung his head a great deal of the time while the negro was talking to him. He breathed very heavily and took deep swallows, and sighed and hesitated somewhat. His eyes were about the same as they are now.

That interview between Lee and Frank took place shortly after midnight, Wednesday, April 30th. On Monday afternoon, Frank said to me that the first punch on Newt Lee’s slip was 6:33 p. m., and his last punch was 3 a. m. Sunday. He didn’t say anything at that time about there being any error in Lee’s punches. Mr. Black and I took Mr. Frank into custody about 1 1 :30 a.m. Tuesday, April 29th. His hands were quivering very much, he was very pale.

On Saturday, May 3d, I went to Frank’s cell at the jail with Black and I asked Mr. Frank if from the time he arrived at the factory from Montag Bros. up until 12:50 p. m., the time he went upstairs to the fourth floor, was he inside of his office the entire time, and he stated “Yes.” Then I asked him if he was inside his office every minute from 12 o’clock until 12:30 and he said “Yes.”

I made a very thorough search of the area around the elevator and radiator and back in there. I made a surface search. I found nothing at all. I found no ribbon or purse, or pay envelope, or bludgeon or stick. I spent a great deal of time around the trap door and I remember running the light around the door way right close to the elevator, looking for splotches of blood, but I found nothing.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

Yes, I sent you this report as to what happened between Mr. Herbert J. Haas and myself: “This afternoon Supt. H.B. Pierce and myself held a conference with Mr. Herbert Haas, at which the agency’s position in the matter was discussed, and Mr. Haas stated they wanted to learn who the murderer was, regardless of who it involved.” Mr. Haas told me that after I had told him we would withdraw from the cause before we would not co-operate with the police. No, I did not report that to you. I reported the motive of our conference. No, I did not say anything about Mr. Haas wanting us to do anything except locate the murderer. Yes, I talked to you afterwards and you also told me to find the murderer, even if it was Frank.

Mr. Haas had said to Mr. Pierce and me that he would rather that we submit our reports of evidence to him before we turned it over to the police. No, there was nothing said about not giving this to the police.

I testified at the coroner’s inquest as to what conversation I had with Mr. Frank. I did not give you in my report the details of Mr. Frank’s morning movements, when he left home, arrived at the factory and went to Montag Bros., and returned to the factory. As to my not saying one word about Gantt being familiar with this little girl, that was just an oversight, that is all. No, I did not testify to that either at the coroner’s inquest. I didn’t put it in the report to you, because Gantt was released the next day and I didn’t consider him a suspect.

There was no reason for my not giving it to you. It was an oversight. I am representing the National Pencil Company, who employed me, and not Mr. Frank individually. It is true in my report to you with reference to the interview between me and Mr. Frank that I stated “I had no way of knowing what they said because they were both together privately in a room there and we had no way of knowing except what Lee told us afterwards.” I now state that I did hear the last words of Lee.

I didn’t put in my notes that Gantt was familiar with Mary Phagan, I don’t put everything in my notes and the coroner didn’t examine me about it either. No, I didn’t tell the coroner anything about Frank crossing his legs and putting his hands up to his face. I never went into detail down there. No I didn’t mention his hanging his head.

We always work with the police on criminal cases. No, I did not testify before the coroner about any white stuff having been smeared over those supposed blood spots.

I am not sure whether I got the statement about Mary Phagan being familiar with Gantt from Mr. Darley or Mr. Frank. Mr. Frank was present at the time.

Mr. Frank told me when the little girl asked if the metal had come back that he said “I don’t know.” It may be true that I swore before the coroner that in answer to that question from Mary Phagan as to whether the metal had come yet that Frank said, “No,” and it is possible that I so reported to you. If I said “No,” I meant “I don’t know.” I say now that Mr. Frank told me he left the factory at 1:10 p.m. If I reported to you that he told me he left at one o’clock, I made a very serious mistake. That is an oversight. Yes, I reported to the police before I reported to Mr. Haas or Mr. Montag.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

Yes, our agency reported to the police about finding the club. I find it is in our report of May 15th. I don’t know when it was reported; I was out of town. I worked all through this case with Detective Black and every move he made was known to both of us. As to the stairway from the basement to the upper floor, there was a great deal of dust on the stairs and the dust didn’t seem to be disturbed. This stairway is not in the picture but is near the back door. It was nailed and closed.

The “club” referred to was, along with part of a company pay envelope, “discovered” on the first floor of the factory — where African-American sweeper Jim Conley had been sitting on the day of the murder — by a rogue Pinkerton agent who was soon dismissed. (The “discovery” occurred days after minute examination by police investigators and by Scott, who found nothing.)

The real bombshell in Scott’s testimony was his revelation that Frank — who had denied even knowing Mary Phagan, to say nothing of her relationships — had told Scott that “Gantt knew Mary Phagan very well, that he was familiar and intimate with her.” Shortly thereafter, Gantt was arrested as a suspect. He was eventually released.

The testimony of the next witness on the stand, brief as it was, would prove devastating to Frank. She was pretty blonde Monteen Stover, a co-worker of Mary Phagan’s. She was not hostile to Frank, and in fact thought highly of him. But one thing she was sure of — he definitely was not in his office continuously from noon to 12:45 on the day Mary Phagan died, as he had claimed:
Miss Monteen Stover

Miss Monteen Stover

MISS MONTEEN STOVER, sworn for the State.

I worked at the National Pencil Company prior to April 26th, 1913. I was at the factory at five minutes after twelve on that day. I stayed there five minutes and left at ten minutes after twelve. I went there to get my money. I went in Mr. Frank’s office. He was not there. I didn’t see or hear anybody in the building. The door to the metal room was closed. I had on tennis shoes, a yellow hat and a brown rain coat. I looked at the clock on my way up, it was five minutes after twelve and it was ten minutes after twelve when I started out. I had never been in his office before. The door to the metal room is sometimes open and some- times closed.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I didn’t look at the clock to see what time it was when I left home or when I got back home. I didn’t notice the safe in Mr. Frank’s office. I walked right in and walked right out. I went right through into the office and turned around and came out. I didn’t notice how many desks were in the outer office. I didn’t notice any wardrobe to put clothes in. I don’t know how many windows are in the front office. I went through the first office into the second office. The factory was still and quiet when I was there. I am fourteen years old and I worked on the fourth floor of the factory. I knew the paying-off time was twelve o’clock on Saturday and that is why I went there. They don’t pay off in the office, you have to go up to a little window they open.
Diagram of Leo Frank's outer and inner office: How likely is it that Monteen Stover could have missed Frank had he really been in the office as he claimed?

Diagram of Leo Frank’s outer and inner office: How likely is it that Monteen Stover could have missed Frank had he really been in his office as he claimed?

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.

The door to the metal room is sometimes closed and sometimes open. When the factory isn’t running the door is closed.

Next to the stand came pencil company machinist R.P. Barrett, who had discovered hair that looked like Mary’s on a factory metal room lathe, and bloodstains hastily covered with a lubricant nearby. The hair and stains had not been there when work ended on Friday, he said.
The hair found on the lathe. Where did it come from?

The hair found on the lathe. Where did it come from?

R.P. BARRETT, sworn for the State.

I am a machinist for the National Pencil Company. I have been there about eight weeks. On Monday morning, April 28th, I found an unusual spot that I had never seen before at the west end of the dressing room on the second floor of the pencil factory. That spot was not there Friday. The spot was about 4 or 5 inches in diameter and little spots behind these from the rear — 6 or 8 in number. I discovered these between 6:30 and 7 o’clock Monday. It was blood. It looked like some white substance had been wiped over it. We kept potash and haskoline, both white substances, on this floor. This white stuff was smeared over the spots. It looked like it had been smeared with a coarse broom. There was a broom on that floor, leaning up against the wall. No, the broom didn’t show any evidence of having been used, except that it was dirty. It was used in the metal department for cleaning up the grease. The floor was regularly swept with a broom of finer straw.

I found some hair on the handle of a bench lathe. The handle was in the shape of an “L.” The hair was hanging on the handle, swinging down. Mell Stanford saw this hair. The hair was not there on Friday.

The gas jet that the girls sometimes use to curl their hair on is about ten feet from the machine where the hair was found. Machine Number is No. 10. It is my machine. I know the hair wasn’t there on Friday, for I had used that machine up to quitting time, 5:30.

There was a pan of haskoline about 8 feet from where the blood was found. The nearest potash was in vats in the plating department, 20 or 25 feet away. The latter part of the week I found a piece of a pay envelope (State’s Exhibit U) under Mary Phagan’s machine. I have examined the area around the elevator on the main floor and I looked down the ladder and I never saw any stick. I did not find any envelope or blood or anything else there.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I never searched for any blood spots before, until Miss Jefferson came in and said she understood Mary had been murdered in the metal department, then I started to search right away; that was the only spot I could find; I could tell it was blood by looking at it. I can tell the difference between blood and other substances. I found the hair some few minutes afterward — about 6 or 8 strands of hair and pretty long. When I left the machine on Friday I left a piece of work in there. When I got back the piece of work was still there. It had not been disturbed. The machine was in the same position in which I left it Friday night; there was no blood under this machine.

There is no number or amount on the envelope I found, and no name on it, just a little loop, a part of a letter. Yes, I have been aiding Mr. Dorsey and the detectives search the building. Yes, Mr. Dorsey subpoenaed me to come to his office; it was a State subpoena. I gave him an affidavit.

DNA evidence didn’t exist in 1913, so it was impossible to test the hair or blood to see if they had come from Mary Phagan. But the hair looked like Mary’s, and it’s hard to imagine another plausible explanation for their appearance over a holiday weekend.
Witnesses: Mrs. Jefferson, R.P. Barrett, Mrs. White

Witnesses: Mrs. Jefferson, R.P. Barrett, Mrs. White

After Barrett left the stand, janitor Mel Stanford confirmed Barrett’s statement that neither the hair nor the bloodstains had been present at the end of business on the Friday before the murder. Then Mrs. G.W. Jefferson testified that she had found the bloodstains with Barrett, and that they covered an area “as big as a fan.”

Dr. Claude Smith, a chemist for the city of Atlanta, stated that although he had only seen four or five corpuscles on the wood chips, his analysis had proved them to be blood:

DR. CLAUDE SMITH, sworn for the State.

I am physician and City Bacteriologist and Chemist. These chips (Exhibit E, State) appear to be the specimen which the detectives brought to my office and which I examined. They had considerable dirt on them and some coloring stain. On one of them I found some blood corpuscles. I do not know whether it was human blood. This shirt (Exhibit E for State [The shirt planted at Newt Lee’s residence — Ed.]) appears to be the same shirt brought to my office by detectives which I examined. I examined spots and it showed blood stain. I got no odor from the arm pits that it had been worn. The blood I noticed was smeared a little on the inside in places. It didn’t extend out on the outside. The blood on shirt was somewhat on the inside of the garment high up about the waist line which to my mind could not have been produced by turning up the tail.

CROSS EXAMINATION.

I found grit and stain on all of the chips. I couldn’t tell the one that I found blood on. I did the work in the ordinary way. The whole surface of the chips was coated with dirt. I couldn’t tell whether the blood stain was fresh or old. I have kept blood corpuscles in the laboratory for several years. I found probably three or four or five blood corpuscles in a field. I don’t know how much blood was there. A drop or half drop would have caused it, or even less than that. Rigor mortis begins very soon after death. Sometimes starts quicker, but usually starts very soon. I could not say when rigor mortis would end.

The next significant witness was Frank’s business associate N.V. Darley. While Darley verbally fenced with Solicitor Dorsey to avoid incriminating his friend Frank, he finally did confirm that Frank was nearly out of his mind with anxiety after the murder was discovered, admitting that Frank was “trembling all over.”
Prosecutor Hugh Dorsey

Prosecutor Hugh Dorsey

Dr. Henry F. Harris established the time of Mary Phagan’s death as very close to that of Monteen Stover’s visit to Leo Frank’s empty office, and stated he had determined the cause of death to be strangulation, though it had been preceded by a blow with a blunt object, probably a fist, and a collision of her head with a sharp object, possibly a lathe. He also testified that, although no seminal fluid was present, some violence had been done to Mary’s private parts before she died.

Mrs. Arthur White, who had been visiting her husband who was working on an upper floor, testified that she had seen a black man lurking near the elevator on the first floor when she left around 1 PM. This fitted with the prosecution’s theory that the man was Jim Conley, on watch during Frank’s attempted tryst, and who would eventually help Frank move the body.

* * *

Be sure to read next week’s installment here at The American Mercury as we follow the trial that changed the South — changed America — and changed the world 100 years ago.

For further study we recommend the following resources:

_________

Full archive of Atlanta Georgian newspapers relating to the murder and subsequent trial

The Leo Frank case as reported in the Atlanta Constitution

The Leo Frank Case (Mary Phagan) Inside Story of Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery 1913

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean

American State Trials, volume X (1918) by John Lawson

Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey in the Trial of Leo Frank

Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913, Brief of Evidence

The American Mercury will be following these events of 100 years ago, the month-long trial of Leo M. Frank for the brutal murder of Miss Mary Phagan, in capsule form on a regular basis until August 26, the 100th anniversary of the reading of the verdict. Follow along with us and experience the trial as Atlantans of a century ago did, and come to your own conclusions.

A fearless scholar, dedicated to the truth about this case, has obtained, scanned, and uploaded every single relevant issue of the major Atlanta daily newspapers and they now can be accessed through archive.org as follows:

Atlanta Constitution Newspaper:
http://archive.org/details/LeoFrankC...aper1913To1915

Atlanta Georgian Newspaper:
http://archive.org/details/AtlantaGe...ilToAugust1913

Atlanta Journal Newspaper:
http://archive.org/details/AtlantaJo...toAugust311913

More background on the case may be found in my article here at the Mercury, 100 Reasons Leo Frank Is Guilty.
__________________
Jews have aggressively dominated the false narrative of the Leo Frank Case since 1913, but as of 2013 you can finally learn everything the Jews have tried to censor & suppress at The Leo Frank Research Library: http://www.LeoFrank.org
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:10 PM.
Page generated in 0.83547 seconds.