1684 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 4 minutes [524 words]

Visible Translated Text Is As Follows:

our objections,- Conley spoke about some girls on the fourth floor, and we had a right to go into it and see what girls on the fourth floor; but are we going to try four or five different fornication cases now? Let's settle it right now, Your Honor.
Mr. Dorsey: They have asked certain witnesses if they had been to Frank's office Monday afternoon and Tuesday afternoon and anything immoral was done. If they can put that in, why can't we go on with this case, and show that such things did occur with this witness?
The Court: That came in without objection, and came in absolutely in rebuttal of something you had gotten in there, that they sought to rule out,- a piece of evidence Conley testified to,- and if it had been objected to at the beginning, I think I would have been compelled to have ruled it out, but I thought, inasmuch as it had come in, I would let Conley on it for a day or so, if you had a right to let it in.
Mr. Dorsey: Isn't it right for me to take this question and substituting the word "Miss" Small" and say "Miss Wood, you are a lady that worked on the fourth floor of the National Pencil Company two days. I'm going to ask you a question that they, the defendant's counsel have asked every lady that worked on that floor, so they say, 'Have you ever been down in Mr. Frank's office after hours drinking or doing anything immoral, or at any time in that factory?', and then can't I add, 'or did Frank propose anything?'"
The Court: To my mind, it isn't debatable at all.
Mr. Dorsey: Then we are absolutely shut out.
The Court: Well, I don't care, then the law shuts you out, if that's the case. According to that, you could put up everybody here and prove anything else he has ever done in his lifetime.
Mr. Dorsey: Now, they wanted to show by a witness that worked at the National Pencil Company, that she saw Frank in a woman's room with a woman there?
The Court: I don't know, it's a good deal owing to what it shows.
Mr. Rosser: He means showing an immoral act on his part.
Mr. Dorsey: I am simply illustrating-have we got a right to show or not what this man did to girls when he went through the factory stopping them and all that?
The Court: I don't know about that, if it's relevant to this case.
Mr. Arnold: Relevant to this case, what some other woman did?
The Court: When you put up these witnesses and prove bad character, then they can go into that and ask what makes up that bad character,- what have you heard, and so on. Now, as I never said anything about any immorality except to disprove what Jim Conley testified to, he didn't say a word as to anything immoral about these things. I'll let you show by this woman or by any other person, bad character on the part of this man,- but no specific acts or any specific crimes. That's the law.