1419 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [380 words]

Visible Translated Text Is As Follows:

(25) and thirty (30) minutes after twelve (12) o'clock noon, when she reached the store, the reason for knowing that it was about that time being because the Swift Soap company do not permit their employees to use the 'phone after twelve thirty (12:30) o'clock, and witness knows that she was just in time because she had only a moment or two to talk to Mr. Newcomb.

Witness further says that when she entered the Pencil factory that day, Jim Conley was sitting on a box between the stairway and the elevator on the first floor. Witness says that she would not have noticed Conley but for the fact that he made a noise with his foot against the box upon which he was sitting which attracted her attention and caused her to look up and see him.

Witness says that she has made an affidavit to Mr. Hugh Dorsey and further says that if Mr. Dorsey had treated her properly and had not abused her and off and on story and interrupted her continuously, she would have told him exactly the same state of facts that she has outlined and described in this affidavit. Witness says that she wanted to tell Mr. Dorsey all she knew that might throw light on the investigation that he was conducting, but that Mr. Dorsey wanted to get from her evidence of conditions that were not the facts, on account of which she got mad with Mr. Dorsey and with his methods.

Witness further says that it was very evident that Mr. Dorsey became angry with witness, the result being that he took only a short affidavit from her, and witness says that Mr. Dorsey had her so confused at the time that she cannot at this time recall just what Mr. Dorsey put in the affidavit which he took from her and witness left his office and has not seen him since.

Witness further says that she makes this statement of her own free will and accord and without any promise of reward of any kind from any person.

Movant submits that the foregoing evidence is very material and vital and that the same would probably produce a different result upon another trial of said case. Movant says that upon the