520 Sheet – American State Trials 1918 Volume X Leo Frank Document

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [403 words]

Here is the translated text as follows:

488 X. AMERICAN STATE TRIALS.

The prosecution aimed to prove that Killroy harbored preconceived malice in his heart, not specifically against the unfortunate victims who were killed, but against the inhabitants in general. They argued that he possessed the spirit not only of a Turk or an Arab, but of the devil himself. However, even if this testimony were taken as literally true, and Killroy indeed harbored all the malice they sought to prove, if he was assaulted that night and his life was in danger, he had the right to defend himself just as any other man would. Prior malice, if it existed, did not strip him of his right to defend himself against any aggressor. Moreover, it was not at all improbable that there was some misunderstanding about these loose expressions. Perhaps the man had no thoughts of what his words might imply. Many a man, in his cups or in anger—a short fit of madness—utters the rashest expressions without generally possessing a savage disposition. Therefore, there was little weight in expressions uttered at a kitchen fire, before a maid and a coachman, where he might think himself at liberty to talk as much like a bully, a fool, or a madman as he pleased, believing no evil would come of it.

In regard to Montgomery, the evidence was clear that he was personally assaulted and knocked down before he fired. When the multitude was shouting and huzzaing, threatening life, with the bells ringing, the mob whistling, screaming, and rending like an Indian yell, and people from all quarters throwing every species of rubbish they could pick up in the street, and some who were quite on the other side of the street throwing clubs at the whole party, Montgomery was particularly smitten with a club and knocked down. As soon as he could rise and take up his firelock, he was struck on his breast or shoulder by another club from afar. What could he do? Did the jury expect him to behave like a stoic philosopher lost in apathy—patient as Epictetus while his master was breaking his legs with a cudgel? It was impossible for them to find him guilty of murder. They must suppose him divested of all human passions if they did not think him at the least provoked, thrown off his guard, and into the furor brevis by such treatment as this.

---