0883 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [454 words]

Visible Translated Text Is As Follows:

that to the State authorities; was a circumstance going to show the guilt of
Frank.

27. Because the Court permitted the witness Harry Scott, to testify over
the objection of defendant's counsel, made while the testimony was offered,
that the same was irrelevant, immaterial, illegal and not binding on the de-
fendant, that the witness first communicated Mrs. White's statements about
seeing a negro on the street floor of the pencil factory on April 26, 1913, to
Black, Chief Lanford, and Bass Rosser, that the information was given to
the detectives on April 28th.

The Court, over the defendant's objections, permitted the above testimony
to be given, and in doing so erred for the reasons above stated. This was
prejudicial to the defendant, because it was contended by the State that this
witness, Harry Scott, who was one of the Pinkerton detectives who had been
employed to ferret out the crime, by Frank acting for the National Pencil
Company, had not promptly informed the officials about the fact of Mrs.
White's seeing this negro and that such failure was evidence pointing to the
guilt of Frank.

This witness was one of the investigators for the Pinkerton Detective
Agency, who was employed by Frank acting for the National Pencil Company
to ferret out this crime.

28. Because the Court permitted Harry Scott, a witness for the State,
to testify over the objection of the defendant, made at the time that same was
offered, that the same was irrelevant, immaterial, illegal and prejudicial to
the defendant; that the witness, in company with Jim Conley, went to the jail
and made an effort to see Frank. And that after Conley made his last state-
ment (the statement about writing the notes on Saturday) Chief Beavers,
Chief Lanford and the witness went to the jail for the purpose of confronting
Frank. That Conley went with them; that they saw the Sheriff and explained
their mission to him and the Sheriff went to Frank's cell, that the witness
saw Frank at the jail on May 3rd (Saturday), and that Frank refused to see
Conley only through Sheriff Mangum; that he did.

The Court, in admitting this testimony over the objections made, erred
for the reasons stated above. This was error prejudicial to the defendant,
because the witness Mangum, over the defendant's objection, had already,
been allowed to testify that Frank declined to see Chief Lanford, Chief Beavers and the witness and Conley, except with the consent of his counsel or with
his counsel; and the Solicitor in his argument asserted that the failure of
Frank to see the witness while he was employed by the Pencil Company to
ferret out the crime in the presence of the negro and the two chiefs, was strong
evidence of his guilt.

29. Because J. M. Minar, a newspaper reporter for the Atlanta Georgian,
was called by the defendant for the purpose of impeaching the witness George
63