0165 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [343 words]

Here is the extracted text from the image:

the motion of defendant's counsel to rule out the testimony of
the witness Conley tending to show acts of perversion on the
part of the defendant and acts of immorality wholly discon-
nected with and disassociated from this crime. (Such evidence
being set out and described in grounds 13 and 14 of this motion)

The Court declined to rule out said testimony, and immediately
upon the statement of the Court that he would let such testimony
remain in evidence before the jury, there was instant, pro-
nounced and continuous applause throughout the crowded court
room wherein the trial was being had, by clapping of hands, and
by stamping of feet upon the floor.

The jury was not then in the same room wherein the trial was
being had, but in an adjacent room not more than fifty feet from
where the judge was sitting and not more than fifteen or twenty
feet from portions of the crowd applauding, and so close to the
crowd, in the opinion of the Court, as to probably hear the app
lauding. Immediately upon said applauding the defendant's coun-
sel moved the Court for a mistrial of the cause, and, upon the
announcement of the Court that he would not grant a mistrial,
moved the Court to clear the court room, so that other demon-
strations could not be had.

The Court refused to grant a mistrial and declined to clear
the court room.

In refusing a mistrial and in declining to clear the court-
room, the Court erred. The passion and prejudice of those in
the crowded court room were so much aroused against the
defendant, as contained by counsel for the defendant, that he
could not obtain a fair and impartial trial.

The Court as movant contends, also erred in not clearing the
court room of the disorderly crowd, but left them in the court
room, where their very presence was a menace to the jury.

It is true that the Court did threaten that upon a repetition
of such disorder he would clear the court room, but such a
threat, as movant contends, was wholly inadequate, as evidenced
by the fact that during the same day of the trial, while the