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

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [378 words]

Here is the translated text as follows:

In the act which defines this offense and outlines the punishment, a liberality of defense is provided, which is unknown, I believe, in any other country where the party is tried for a libel on the government. Here, under the third section of that act, the defendant is allowed to present evidence of the truth of the matters charged as a libel in the publication. The jury has the right to determine the law and the facts under the direction of the court. The true spirit of the law is that the defendant shall not be found guilty of publishing defamatory writings unless they are false. Even if they are false, he shall not be considered guilty under the law unless the intent of the publication appears to be malicious.

If the publication is based on knowledge of the truth, the defendant is permitted to present this as evidence. If true, it must be allowed to significantly influence the jury's perception that the malicious motives imputed to him are not true. In private actions for slander, where a person seeks pecuniary redress for the injury their character has sustained, the defendant is entitled to present evidence as a defense to the action, demonstrating the truth of the words spoken or the written libel. If the truth of the assertions is proven, it amounts to a justification. There is no difference, then, between the defense that may be set up in an action of slander or libel on a private person and that which is permitted under the law on which this indictment is grounded.

The defendant has undertaken to convince the jury that, in this publication, he had no malicious intention against the President of the United States. I join issue with him on this point and request your particular attention to it. He alleges that he did not impute improper motives to the President and attempts to substantiate his allegation by referring you to his declaration at the outset, where he says, "I cannot believe him (the President) capable of such gross misrepresentations, for I still think well of his intentions, however I may disapprove of his conduct." However, to this, I shall add that he goes on and concludes with a paragraph...

---