0222 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [404 words]

Here is the extracted text from the image:

she had them on a stool, I believe. She was dressed. I don't
remember how her dress was; I didn't look. I paid no attention to
him, only he just walked in and turned and walked out; looked at
the girls that were sitting in the window and walked out. There
was something said about this, but I don't remember. I have heard
something about him going in the room and staring at them, but I
don't remember exactly. Mr. Frank walked in the dressing room on
Miss Mamie Kitchens. She and I were in there. I have heard this
spoken of, but I don't remember. I have heard them speak of other
times, when I wasn't there. Mr. Frank said nothing either time
when I was there. The door was pushed to, but there was no way
to fasten the door. He pushed the door open and stood in the door.
the dressing room had a mirror in it. It was all one room, except
there were a few lockers for the foreladies, and there was a
place where the girls changed their street dresses and got into
their working dresses, and vice versa. There was no way for Mr.
Frank to tell before he opened the door what the condition of the
girls was in there. I do not know whether he knew they were in
there or not. That was the usual time for the girls to go in the
dressing room, undress and get ready to go to work, changing
their street clothes and putting on their working clothes.
We had all registered on before we went up there in the dressing
room. Mr. Frank knew the girls had stopped there to register. The
day he looked in the dressing room at Miss Mayfield, he smiled,
or made some kind of a face that looked like a smile--smiling
at Miss Mayfield, he didn't speak or didn't say a word.
This evidence was objected to for the reasons above stated,
and for the further reason that statements tending to show the
conduct of Mr. Frank with girls, in going into the dressing room
with girls, was intended to create prejudice in the minds of the
jurors against the defendant; and, not so illustrate the question
of whether he was or was not the murderer of Mary Phagan. The
Court overruled these objections and let the testimony go to the
jury. Movant excepts. Motion denied. Error alleged. Error
above stated.
79. (zz). Because the Court permitted the witness, Harlee
Branch, at the instance of the Solicitor General, to testify to