1442 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 2 minutes [259 words]

Visible Translated Text Is As Follows:

unknown to his counsel at the date of the
original trial and at the date when the motion for new trial
was overruled, and the fact that it is so newly discovered until
it only came to their attention on the date of the affidavit of
said Exhibit B and could not have been discovered by exercise
of due diligence.
Movant further shows that this testimony is material, and
presents such an extraordinary set of circumstances as would
and should produce a different verdict upon another trial.
Roeser and Brandon,
R. P. Arnold,
Leonard Haas,
Herbert J. Haas.
Attys. for Deft.

State of Georgia, (1. No. Fulton Superior Court
Vs. (2. Conviction of Murder, July Term, 1913
Leo M. Frank. (3. Extraordinary Motion for New Trial.

G E O R G I A,
FULTON COUNTY.

Before the undersigned, personally appeared Morris Brandon,
R. R. Arnold, Leonard Haas, Herbert J. Haas, and L. Z. Roeser,
each of whom deposes and says as follows:
That they, nor either of them, until the date of Exhibits A
B,D,E. attached to the amended extraordinary motion for new trial
this day allowed, did not know of the facts set out in said Exhibits
A,B,D and E.
Deponents Arnold, Roeser and Herbert J. Haas, who had actual
charge of the case, themselves went to the factory and made a
personal examination of the employees of the factory, seeking
to see each and all of the said employees; and thus, seeking
among the employees of the factory, they did not discover and
did not know until the date of said Exhibits A,B,D and E,
that Geo Igia Doham and Cora L. Lafeer knew the facts set out in
said Exhibits A,B,D and E.
69