437 Sheet – American State Trials 1918 Volume X Leo Frank Document

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [417 words]

Here is the translated text as follows:

LEO M. FRANK, 405

When a man's character is put in evidence, and in the course of the investigation any specific act of misconduct is shown, this does not go before the jury for the purpose of showing affirmatively that his character is bad or that he is guilty of the offense with which he stands charged. Instead, it is to be considered by the jury only in determining the credibility and the degree of information possessed by those witnesses who have testified to his good character.

When the defendant has put his character in issue, the state is allowed to bring witnesses to prove that his general character is bad, and thereby to disprove the testimony of those who have stated that it is good. The jury is allowed to take this testimony and has the right to consider it along with all the other evidence introduced on the subject of the general character of the defendant. It is for the jury finally to determine from all the evidence whether his character was good or bad. However, a defendant is not to be convicted of the crime with which he stands charged, even though, upon a consideration of all the evidence as to his character, the jury believes that his character is bad, unless from all the other testimony in the case they believe that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

You will, therefore, observe that this is the rule you will be guided by in determining the effect to be given to the evidence on the subject of the defendant's character. If, after considering all the evidence pro and con on the subject of the defendant’s character, you believe that prior to the time of Mary Phagan’s death he bore a good reputation among those who knew him, and that his general character was good, you will consider that as one of the facts in the case. It may be sufficient to create a reasonable doubt of the defendant’s guilt, if it so impresses your minds and consciences, after considering it along with all the other evidence in the case. If it does, you should give the defendant the benefit of the doubt and acquit him. However, though you should believe his general character was good, still if, after giving due weight to it as one of the facts in the case, you believe from all the other evidence that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you should convict him.