0246 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [364 words]

Here is the extracted text from the image:

the record, you have the right to do that".

Mr. Dorsey (resuming): "This man Frank, with Anglo-Saxon blood
in his veins, a graduate of Cornell, the superintendent of the
pencil factory, so anxious to ferret out this murder that he
'phoned Schiff three times on Monday, April 28th, to employ the
Pinkerton Detective Agency, this man of Anglo-Saxon blood and
intelligence, refused to meet this ignorant negro, Jim Conley.
He refused upon the flimsy pretext that his counsel was out of
town but when his counsel returned, when he had the opportunity
to know at least something of the accusations that Conley brought
against this man, he dared not let him meet him".

Movant says that Court erred in allowing the Solicitor General
to comment upon an alleged failure of the defendant to meet the
witness Conley and erred, when the defendant's counsel objected
and interrupted him, the same not being authorized by the
evidence and erred in not stopping the Solicitor General, and
erred in not making a decisive and unequivocal ruling that
such comment was improper, and should not influence the jury, and
further erred in allowing the Solicitor General to comment, as he
did in the foregoing statement of facts, upon the interruption;
and the Court expressly erred in ruling that the Solicitor
General could comment upon the fact that Frank refused to meet
Conley; and because of such failure and errors on the Court's
part, and because of such improper and prejudicial argument by
the Solicitor General, the movant says that a new trial should
be granted him.

99. Movant further says that a new trial should be granted
because of the following:

The Solicitor General in his concluding argument, referring
to the visit of the defendant to Bloomfield's undertaking estab-
lishment, on April 27, made the following remarks to the jury:
"Frank says that he visited the morgue not only once but twice.
If he went down there and visited that morgue, and saw that
child and identified her body, and it tore him all to pieces, as
he tells you it did, let any honest man, I don't care who he
be, on this jury, seek to fathom the mystery of this thing;
tell me why it was, except for the answer I give you, went
down there to view body again. Rogers says he didn't look
163.