The Leo Frank Case Research Library https://leofrank.info Information on the 1913 bludgeoning, rape, strangulation and mutilation of Mary Phagan and the subsequent trial, appeals and mob lynching of Leo Frank in 1915. Sun, 08 Jul 2018 00:20:58 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.7 Audio Book – The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 11 https://leofrank.info/audio-book-the-leo-frank-case-the-lynching-of-a-guilty-man-part-11/ Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:16:05 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13745

Jewish attorney Louis Marshall

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

ALMOST THE ENTIRE pro-Leo Frank narrative is dependent on one claim: that Prosecutor Hugh Dorsey fabricated James Conley’s story (or edited and embellished a story made up by Conley) and then coached him to deliver it skillfully on the witness stand. If Conley’s story was not fiction, and not the result of conspiracy, collusion, and coaching; then it must be true — and Leo Frank must be guilty. Thus everything depends on the “coaching” allegation. In this week’s audio book section, we’ll see how untenable is the “coaching” claim. Why would Dorsey and Conley let stand a fiction that included so many checkable facts? — such as people he and Frank had met on the street on the way to the pencil factory — such as the one-hour time discrepancy between Conley’s version of the visit of Emma Clark and Corinthia Hall, and the time the girls themselves gave — and many other items which were totally unnecessary to establishing Frank’s guilt.

In this, the eleventh audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam, part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, we also learn about the massive public relations campaign by leaders of the Jewish community — men such as Albert Lasker, Louis Marshall, and Adolf Ochs — designed to build a sense of outrage in the minds of Americans that an innocent man had been ruthlessly framed by “anti-Semites.”

 

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 11 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 11 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site, noirg.org.

 

]]>
Mincey’s Own Story https://leofrank.info/minceys-own-story/ Thu, 05 Jul 2018 18:16:38 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13734

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Monday, July 14, 1913

*Editor’s Note: This article also appeared in the Night Edition under the headline “Mincey Tells of Confession.”

Tells How Conley Confessed Killing Girl

‘I AM SEEKING ONLY TO DO MY DUTY FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE’

The Georgian Secures Remarkable Statement From Chief Witness for Defense in the Trial of Frank. Declares Belief in Conley’s Guilt.

On Thursday, July 10, The Georgian published the exclusive story of an affidavit in the possession of the lawyers for Leo M. Frank, accused of the murder of Mary Phagan, made by W.H. Mincey, an insurance agent, the substance of which was to the effect that Jim Conley, the negro sweeper at the pencil factory, had confessed that he killed the little girl.

In his affidavit, Mincey declared that he met the negro Conley at Electric avenue and Carter street on the afternoon of the murder; that Conley was intoxicated and when approached by Mincey for insurance became angry and exclaimed, threateningly: “I have killed a girl to-day; I don’t want to kill nobody else.”

The Georgian has now secured from Mincey a complete statement of his connection with the Phagan case. It is as follows:

By W.H. MINCEY

If Jim Conley told the truth at a time he was most likely to do so, that is, when he was drunk, then I know he killed Mary Phagan, and I have known this for weeks.

I am not an insurance agent, as some of the papers have me, but I am a teacher by profession. I am a graduate of a branch of the State University, A.B. degree, hold a Georgia State Teacher’s license, and have been teaching in Georgia every year for the past twenty-five years. I am now teaching. But during my vacation I worked for an insurance company in Atlanta for ten weeks.

By this company I was assigned a territory west of the Terminal Station. Saturday, April 26, I worked in the office till noon. In the afternoon I went out on Peachtree street and saw the parade. After the parade I went over beyond Davis street on “back calls” and to make an effort to close some “prospects” I had.

I passed down Rhodes street, and when I turned back, I had calls to make back on Electric avenue and Mitchell street. From Rhodes street there is a trailway up a bluff to the junction of Carter street and Electric avenue. I went up this.

Passing the house that sits just on the brow of this bluff I noticed a negro man sitting with his head leaning down on his chest as if asleep. I passed on some twenty feet when this negro raised his head and said: “Who is that?” The sharp, quick, excited manner in which he said this attracted my attention. A negro woman passing by Conley said, “It is a policy man,” meaning an insurance man.

Said He Was Jim Conley

I stopped and got into a conversation with the negro about insurance. He told me his name was Jim Conley. He told me he lived at 172 Rhodes street. I saw at once there was something wrong with him. He was nervous and excited, and tried to put me off and get rid of me by telling me to come to 172 Rhodes street next week and he would take insurance. But as the negro had excited my curiosity by his incoherent, scattering way of talking and his nervous and excited manner, I remained standing there firing questions at him.

He told me he was in trouble. I asked him if they had had him in jail or the stockade. He said no, but he was expecting to be in jail, and that right away. I asked him what for.

He said: “Murder, I killed a girl to-day.”

I said: “Oh, I see! You are Jack the Ripper.”

The thought that occurred to me was that he meant he had[…]

Continued on Page 4, Column 1.

SCHOOL TEACHER TELLS REMARKABLE STORY TO THE GEORGIAN

Says He Only Desires to Prevent a Crime as Bad as Phagan Slaying

Negro Who Declared He Had Killed a Girl First Said His Name Was Jim Conley, Mincey Declares.

Continued From Page 1.

[…]killed some negro woman, and the only thing that seemded peculiar to me was that he said “girl” instead of “woman.”

I said: “Why did you kill her?”

He began to get angry and I saw he was drunk.

He said: “Now, that is for me to know and you to find out.”

Negro Seemed Suspiciously Nervous

I did not attach much to what he was saying, thinking it was the babbling of a drunken negro; but his restless, quick glancing around and his keeping his eyes on me, and the wild, unnatural glare in his eyes caused me to want to press him further to find out really what he had been doing.

I said: “Let me write your insurance this afternoon,” and started down to where he was.

He said: “Don’t you come down here,” speaking this in an angry, threatening manner. This caused me to press him the more.

I said: “No, I will take your application now,” and continued.

He said: “I tell you not to come down here.”

When he saw I was coming on anyway, he jumped up, and as he went round the corner of the house he said: “I have killed one to-day and I don’t want to kill another.”

I said: “Well, one a day is enough; that is 365 a year,” turned and walked off.

Now, if Jim Conley did not in fact tell me that he killed Mary Phagan on that day, then I don’t know what language is, and I am sure I know what language is. I suppose it can be established that Jim Conley was nowhere else than in Atlanta on that day. Mary Phagan was murdered in Atlanta that day.

No Other Girl Slain That Day

So far as is known, no other girl was murdered in Atlanta that day. Now, did Jim Conley not tell me he killed Mary Phagan? If he did not, absolutely, I do not know when I have reasoned out a proposition in algebra, geometry or logic. But I am sure I do know when I have solved a problem.

On Sunday morning after the murder I heard someone saw a 17-year-old girl had been killed the night before and dragged into a basement somewhere, supposed to be a girl of the streets and killed by some rowdies. I knew nothing further of this till Monday morning, passing down Forsyth street by the National Pencil Factory, I heard some one say “There is the place where the girl was killed,” and some men standing there said she was seen at 11 o’clock Saturday night on the corner there. This placed the murder after I had seen and talked to Conley.

But during the day Monday I saw a paper, and as no one about this child’s age saw her on Saturday, knowing that she would seek companions of near her age had she left the building, I at once decided she had never left the plant after going there.

Tuesday morning, passing the factory, I walked in and up the steps to the second floor. Some man walked up to me and asked what I wanted. I told him I wanted to see Mr. Frank.

Mincey Calls at the Factory

He said Mr. Frank was not in, that he could attend to what I wanted.

I told him I wanted to see where that little girl was killed and how many negroes worked there. The man did not want me to look over the building, but told me about the negroes. I asked him what negroes were there on Saturday. He said there were no negroes there on Saturday. I asked him if he was there. He said he was; that he was the day watchman. I asked him what time he left. He said at 11:45.

I said: “That was just a few minutes before that little girl came, then.”

He said: “Yes.”

I said: “Didn’t you see a negro here when you left?”

He said: “No, I told you there were no negroes here; it was holiday and they did not work that day.” I kept asking him about negroes and talking till he was out of patience. All this time I kept walking and looking. He followed me everywhere I went. I learned later that the man’s name to whom I was talking is Holloway, and he is the only one connected with the plant to whom I ever talked.

My talk with Jim Conley on Saturday afternoon convinced me that he had killed some one, or thought he had; but knowing it was impossible for him to be connected with this unless he was there, I got out of patience with Holloway as much as he was out with me.

I saw everything was disturbed and torn up, and Holloway was mad. I was mad, too. At last I turned on him and told him that that little girl never left that building after she came in there, and that some one in the building who knew the building killed her. Things were becoming more confused in the building, and after another parley with him about a negro being there, I turned and left the building, thoroughly disgusted.

Well, this seemed to me to eliminate Jim Conley, yet his words, sets and looks continued to haunt me as if I had seen a ghost. Well, things rocked on, and I worked on. But I believed all the time that there was a missing link somewhere.

Later I saw that some lady saw a negro in the building the day of the murder, but I took no further trouble with it. I did not want to get mixed up in it at all.

Goes to the Police Station

Later, when I learned that a Jim Conley was there on the day of the murder, I one afternoon went down to the police station to see if this was the same Jim Conley I saw the afternoon of the murder.

I did not know any of the detectives, but a very nice, courteous gentleman came out, and I told him I would like to see the negro they had, to see if he was the same I saw on Carter street the day of the murder. He asked me if he seemed excited any way. I said: “Very much so.” He told me to come in.

I went in. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this was the negro I talked to the afternoon of the murder.

I got into a conversation with him. Conley looked just the same. The same dark clothes, the same hat; the voice had mellowed down much, the glare had faded from his eyes; but the voice and eyes were there the same.

I tried to make Conley remember me, but he said he had never seen me before; that he was not on Carter street that afternoon; that he did not know anyone on Carter street.

Now, whether the negro was lying or was so drunk he did not remember, I don’t know; but it is the one or the other.

I did not tell him he was the negro; I told him he looked like the negro.

When I was convinced that Conley was going to deny everything, I said: “Jim, you were pretty drunk that afternoon, were you not?” He said he had been drinking, but was not drunk. At this juncture one of the gentlemen in the room got up and opened the door. He said nothing, but I understood this to be a signal for me to go; and they had been as nice to me as I could have asked, so I said: “That is all. I only wished to see him.” I told the detectives nothing; I just walked in and had a few words with Conley and walked out. I saw they were at something. I did not know what, but I did not care to “butt in.” On the outside of the room some newspaper boys came up to me at once and began to ask me questions, but the newspaper is the last place I want to get into, and I said: “Nothing for the papers.” I walked down.

Writes Anonymously to Dorsey

Later I wrote Mr. Dorsey a letter, but did not sign my name to it. I asked to not have Jim Conley indicted for anything other than murder, as I had from his own lips that he had killed a girl the afternoon of the murder. I never told any detective or policeman anything. As I stated to Mr. Dorsey, my conditions were such that I could not afford to be caught up there and held as a witness. It was my intention to give the information I had to someone, but who was the proper one and when was the proper time I had not yet decided.

When I noticed a movement, as it seemed, to turn Conley loose, I knew that was not the thing to do, so I went to Mr. Rosser. I told Mr. Rosser I had information I would give him, but I would first have to ask him not to hold me there as a witness, or give out anything to the newspapers. I was assured that I would be safe on this line.

Mr. Rosser told me he would like to hear the statement, no matter whom it was against. That he wanted the murderer of Mary Phagan convicted, no difference who he is. After making the statement he asked me if I objected making the same and swearing to it. I told him I did not. I stepped out in another room and made the statement to be written.

Knows No One in the Case

Now, I know none of the people concerned in this. I saw Jim Conley, I saw one man at the National Pencil Factory, who I learn is Holloway, I saw Mr. Rosser but once.

I have only done what I believe any true citizen would do. I believe any other citizen would do as I have done. I have faith in the people of Georgia. I suppose I know as many people in Georgia as nearly any other man in the State. There are no people anywhere more generous, more noble, or more fair.

Now so far as I know I have told it the best I can, and I am willing to leave everything to the courts and the people.

If Jim Conley did murder little Mary Phagan, I will not remain quiet so far as what I know and let him make me and you and every other citizen a party to another crime just as bad.

I am at work and had much rather never be called as a witness, but should I be called no power can prevent me from doing my duty as a true citizen.

I have criticised no one and shall not do so; and I, as a citizen of Georgia, claim the right to perform a duty to my State and fellowman unmolested.

Signed

W.H. Mincey

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, July 14th 1913, “Mincey’s Own Story,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

]]>
Audio Book – The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 10 https://leofrank.info/audio-book-the-leo-frank-case-the-lynching-of-a-guilty-man-part-10/ Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:03:48 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13730

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

THE “Hang the Jew” hoax — the claim that “anti-Semitic mobs” stood outside the courtroom during the 1913 Atlanta murder trial of Leo Frank, shouting “hang the Jew or we’ll hang you” or the like and thereby intimidating the jury — was demolished during our audio book segment last week, and shown to be an invention totally unsupported by the facts. This week we hear in detail how that hoax has been cut and pasted, repeated, amplified, mangled, and embellished by lazy, sloppy, and partisan academics, writers, and journalists over the years. One source even claimed that the “anti-Semitic mobs” that surrounded the courtroom were “inflamed” by the anti-Jewish rhetoric of populist writer Tom Watson — though it is common knowledge that Watson never wrote about the case until well after the trial. It’s an amazing litany of incompetence and deception by both Jewish and non-Jewish leaders in the American media, educational, and cultural establishment.

In this, the tenth audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam, part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, we also see the evidence that — far from being a “persecuted minority” — Jews in the South were very much accepted as a welcomed and even elite part of the white community, and that Jews in turn accepted and supported the supremacist racial hierarchy system there. Their attitude toward black people, the real persecuted minority, was completely the opposite of how the Jewish organizations like to portray it today: Jews fully supported a system in which black men and women constantly lived in fear of losing their lives for the slightest real or imagined infraction. We’ll learn that Leo Frank himself once even stated that black people had “no value.”

 

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 10 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 10 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site, noirg.org.

 

]]>
Audio Book – The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 9 https://leofrank.info/audio-book-the-leo-frank-case-the-lynching-of-a-guilty-man-part-9/ Thu, 21 Jun 2018 23:15:27 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13725

This view and diagram of the courthouse and the crowd outside, published in the August 3, 1913 issue of the Atlanta Journal, gives the lie to the claims of pro-Frank writers. The crowd is described as patiently waiting for spectators to depart so they, too, could get a seat in the courtroom, and they are lined up at the court’s entrance, nowhere near the windows. The caption reads: “Photo diagram of court room in old city hall building, where Leo M. Frank, superintendent of the National Pencil factory, is on trial for his life charged with the murder of Mary Phagan. Although the available seats are taken soon after court convenes, the crowd waits without all day for some weary spectator to give up a seat. On the second floor the many witnesses await their turn for a gruelling examination by attorneys on either side.”

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

JEWISH WRITERS on the Leo Frank case have made some astounding claims about the “atmosphere of anti-Semitism” during the trial of B’nai B’rith official Leo Frank for the strangulation sex murder of his 13-year-old employee, Mary Phagan, in 1913 Atlanta. There were, we are told, “anti-Semitic” mobs (yes, plural) on the streets, some right outside the open courtroom windows, openly threatening the judge and the jury, screaming “crack the Jew’s neck!” and “hang the Jew or we’ll hang you!” and the like.

It is even claimed that Jew-haters with rifles stood almost on the window sills during the trial, aiming at the trial participants just a few feet away. This doesn’t comport well with the contemporary accounts of the trial from Atlanta’s three daily newspapers of the time, the Constitution,  the Journal, and the Georgian — none of which reported any such outrages, despite the fact that they took a generally pro-Frank tone throughout the trial — despite the fact that all three employed Jewish editors — and despite the fact that Leo Frank and his defense team praised the newspaper coverage they received. All contemporary accounts show that the trial proceeded with dignity, fairness, proper procedure, and decent composure throughout. The judge wouldn’t even tolerate applause when court was in session.

(ILLUSTRATION: click here for a large version, showing detail; This view and diagram of the courthouse and the crowd outside, published in the August 3, 1913 issue of the Atlanta Journal, gives the lie to the claims of pro-Frank writers. The crowd is described as patiently waiting for spectators to depart so they, too, could get a seat in the courtroom, and they are lined up at the court’s entrance, nowhere near the windows. The caption reads: “Photo diagram of court room in old city hall building, where Leo M. Frank, superintendent of the National Pencil factory, is on trial for his life charged with the murder of Mary Phagan. Although the available seats are taken soon after court convenes, the crowd waits without all day for some weary spectator to give up a seat. On the second floor the many witnesses await their turn for a gruelling examination by attorneys on either side.”)

In this, the ninth audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam, part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, we also learn that large Jewish advertisers — even the major shareholders in Leo Frank’s place of business, the National Pencil Company, in whose factory the murder took place — were also satisfied with the trial coverage given by the Atlanta dailies, and maintained their significant spending on ad space before, during, and after the trial.

 

The two versions of the trial — the calm and serious one reported by every reporter who was there, and the one featuring near-rabid anti-Jewish mobs making violent threats — are very different. They are mutually contradictory. They can’t both be true. Perhaps it is telling that, in very recent years, some Jewish writers (not including the ADL) have quietly dropped the lurid tales of “anti-Semitic” mobs from their version of events.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 9 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 9 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site, noirg.org.

 

]]>
Audio Book – The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 8 https://leofrank.info/audio-book-the-leo-frank-case-the-lynching-of-a-guilty-man-part-8/ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:45:47 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13721

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

THE PROSECUTION in the Leo Frank case never mentioned the word “Jew” until it was brought up by the defense — and lead prosecutor Hugh Dorsey had a long history of friendly relations and close collaboration with Jews throughout his life and career. So the accusation, common today among pro-Frank partisans, that the indictment and prosecution of Leo Max Frank was motivated by “anti-Semitism” simply doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

In this, the eighth audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam — part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews — we also learn that Frank himself denied that anti-Jewish feelings played any part in his arrest and trial.

 

Thomas B. Felder, and his expansive smile.

In this section of the book, we also learn of the amazing, blustering, and mysterious entry into the case of prominent Atlanta lawyer — shyster, really — “Colonel” Thomas B. Felder. Felder tried to present himself as a merely a public-spirited attorney, working for the Phagan family to “get to the bottom” of the mystery of Mary Phagan’s death. But when he was caught trying to bribe police officials to illegally obtain original documents related to the case — and when the Phagan family denied any connection with him — he beat a hasty retreat while loudly proclaiming his belief in Leo Frank’s guilt and claiming that “Jew money” was causing the authorities to “shield Frank.” Despite his strident attacks on Frank after he was discredited, the evidence is very strong that Felder was actually in Frank’s employ.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 8 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 8 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site, noirg.org.

 

]]>
Girl Bares New Vice System https://leofrank.info/girl-bares-new-vice-system/ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 20:28:51 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13714

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Monday, July 14, 1913

Young Woman From the Country Says She Was Lured to Resort on Peters Street.

Raid Frees Victim of Alleged Gang From a Resort on Peters Street.

Five White Men and Dozen Negroes Arrested in Raid Are Convicted in Court.

*Editor’s Note: This article was also published under the headlines “Police Hunt Vice Band’s Leader” and “17 Caught in Vice Drag Fined,” the latter article containing the following six paragraphs in brackets. The sub-headlines for each article are listed above in the same order. There is also a continuation of the article on a second page, which does not show on the scanned source text.

[The police crusade against vice resulted Monday afternoon in the conviction and fining of five white men and twelve negroes who were caught in a raid on a negro dive at 76 Chestnut avenue early Sunday morning.

Judge Broyles sharply scored the existence of such alleged dives, and declared every effort must be put forth to close them. Chief Beavers has ordered the house closed immediately.

The trial created a stir in police court, as eight of the negroes were chauffeurs for some of the most prominent men in Atlanta, who were on hand to make bond for them.

The white men, who were fined $15.75 each, are C.F. Smith, clerk, of 54 Angler avenue; S.B. Moore, clerk, of 131 South Pryor street; A.B. Arnold, of Macon; J.W. Little, of Macon, and C.D. Kirk, of 348 North Jackson street.

Eight of the negro men were fined $10.75 each.

Eilene Lester, who, it is alleged, runs the place; Henry Lester, her husband, and Theresa Gilbert and Minnie Jones, two other negro women implicated, were bound over to the Superior Court under $500 bond each.]

General Order Issued.

As a result of a sensational story told in police court Monday morning by Effie Drummond, a 20-year-old country girl, who was arrested Saturday when the police raided the boarding house of Mrs. Lulu Bell, at Fair and Peters streets, Chief Beavers at noon issued a general order for the arrest of Joe North, named by the Drummond girl as a “white slaver.”

The girl charges that North, after he had promised to marry her, lured her to the Bell woman’s place, and after giving her liquor until she was stupefied, forced her into the companionship of men whom he and the Bell woman had brought to the place.

Chief Beavers thinks the testimony of the Drummond girl forms an important link in the chain of evidence he is weaving around members of the vice ring said to exist in Atlanta.

The testimony of the girl indicates, the police believe, that North merely was the agent of men higher up, and that he acted on their instructions in luring the Drummond girl, and possibly others, to the Bell woman’s place.

Tells All to Court.

The Chief has announced that every phase of the girl’s story will be investigated thoroughly. Some of the things she has told dovetail into statements made by other girls who have been lured to ruin by the band which is alleged to have its headquarters in Atlanta.

The story of the Drummond girl was one of the most astounding and dramatic told since Chief Beavers started his vice probe. She laid bare the workings of what the police believe is an organized gang of “white slavers.”

“I came to Atlanta three weeks ago from my home in the country near Rockmart, Ga.,” she said. “I heard lots about Atlanta and what a great town it was. I had never been in a town larger than Rockmart, and I thought the people in Atlanta would be as good and kind to me as they were in my own little home town.

“After I had been in Atlanta about a week, I met Joe North. I was lonely. I had made no friends, no one had offered to help except some women with whom I would have nothing to do, and I was glad to meet anyone who showed an interest in me. He was very nice to me at first. He took me to shows and I had a good time.

Promised to Wed Him.

“Then he began to make love to me, and finally asked me to marry him. I had learned to love him in the few weeks I knew him, and I promised to marry him.

“Then he said he would get me a boarding house where he could be near me, and he took me to Mrs. Bell’s place. He said it was a nice, respectable boarding house, and I didn’t know any better. For a few days he treated me as nice as ever, and then he began urging me to drink beer. After I drank one or two glasses of beer I became almost intoxicated and North took advantage of my condition.

“After that he made me drink all the time, and he brought his friends to see me. The first time he brought a man there he made me get drunk.

“Mrs. Bell and North got all the money I made. They said I owed them for room rent and board.

“Lots of times I wanted to go back home, but they wouldn’t let me. North said if I tried to get out of the house he would cut my throat.

Says She Was Threatened.

“On one occasion he rubbed a razor across my throat, and said if I didn’t see the men he brought to the place[…]

Continued on Page 2, Column 1.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, July 14th 1913, “Girl Bares New Vice System,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

]]>
Vice Pickets Posted at Hotels https://leofrank.info/vice-pickets-posted-at-hotels/ Sun, 10 Jun 2018 20:26:15 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13711

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Monday, July 14, 1913

Revocation of License Will Be Asked if Law Is Violated. Girl Sentenced.

The vice inquiry Monday morning resulted in a close surveillance of hotels which, it is alleged, harbor young girls for immoral purposes. If the law is violated, the police authorities say, the police committee of Council will be requested to revoke the license of the hotel involved.

Chief Beavers has detailed men to watch for violations of the law following information given by Corinne Wilson and Dora Rosthstein [sic], sentenced to the Reform School Saturday afternoon.

The new information, it is understood, involves one more well-known downtown hotel and several other parties, one of whom is said to be prominent. Developments are expected to-day as a result of work along this line.

In the meantime five cases, made out against four women and one man following a raid Saturday on the home of Mrs. Lula Bell on Peters Street have been set on the Recorder’s docket for trial Monday morning.

One of Saturday’s victims, Corinne Wilson, has called upon her husband, who resides in Marietta, to come to her.

“I love him,” said the girl, “and I believe he loves me. If he only will come to me and keep me out of the Reform School, I will be straight.”

Dora Rothstein probably will be sent to the Reform School the latter part of the week.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, July 14th 1913, “Vice Pickets Posted at Hotels,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

]]>
Audio Book – The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 7 https://leofrank.info/audio-book-the-leo-frank-case-the-lynching-of-a-guilty-man-part-7/ Fri, 08 Jun 2018 03:54:10 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13705

Leo Frank’s lead attorney, Luther Z. Rosser, who, along with Reuben Arnold and other members of the Frank defense team, played the 1913 version of the “race card” with vigor, attacking James Conley in particular and, in his words, “niggers” in general.

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

WE HEAR A LOT today about people “playing the race card” — using race unjustly in a dispute, or as a moral bludgeon to obscure the facts. In 1913 Atlanta, the Leo Frank defense team played the race card — and in a very big way. Interestingly, the pro-Frank forces used race in a way that most people would find grossly unacceptable today: crudely attacking prosecution witness James Conley, a black man, in open court and on the record as a “dirty,” “lying,” “thieving” “nigger” — and characterizing the sex killing of Mary Phagan as a “Negro crime” of which “white man” Leo Frank, president of the Atlanta B’nai B’rith, would be — they insinuated — “incapable.”

In this, the seventh audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam — part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews — we also learn that the Frank defense promoted the idea that there was a separate category of testimony — “Negro testimony” — which wise jurors ought to ignore or regard as false. Nevertheless, the race-baiting strategy failed and the all-white jury believed the black man.

 

We also hear about Leo Frank’s own statement to the court. We can’t really call it testimony, because under Georgia law at the time, the defendant had the right to make an unsworn statement and deny the prosecution the right to cross-examine him on it — which is exactly what Leo Frank did. Frank spoke for hours on end, and almost all of that time was spent telling the jury about the intricacies of managing the accounts of the pencil factory where he was superintendent — presumably to give the impression that he would have been so busy with his books on that fatal day that he simply wouldn’t have had time to commit the murder and move the body to the basement. It was ultimately unconvincing.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 7 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 7 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site, noirg.org.

 

]]>
Prosecution Attacks Mincey’s Affidavit https://leofrank.info/prosecution-attacks-minceys-affidavit/ Thu, 07 Jun 2018 03:47:46 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13701

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Monday, July 14, 1913

MRS. CRAWFORD BEGINS FIGHT FOR HER FREEDOM

STATE STILL CONFIDENT OF CASE

Story of Negro Who Says He Was Eyewitness of Slaying Disbelieved by Solicitor.

Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey and Attorney Frank A. Hooper, engaged in the prosecution of Leo M. Frank, were induced Monday to break the silence they have maintained grilling the negro Jim Conley last week. They made their first public comments on the sensational developments of the last few days in the Phagan murder mystery.

Both declared emphatically that neither the affidavit of W. H. Mincey, insurance solicitor, nor the reported confession of the negro Will Green, who is said to have been an eyewitness of the attack upon Mary Phagan, gave evidence sufficient to shake their conviction of Leo Frank’s guilt.

Rumors that the State was preparing to change its theory and to ask for the indictment of Jim Conley were laughed at.

Mincey Affidavit Discounted.

“I sincerely doubt,” said Mr. Hooper, “if that Mincey affidavit ever will be heard from again as a seriously considered piece of evidence in the Phagan case. To my mind it means absolutely nothing. The statement, undoubtedly, was made and sworn to, but the prosecution places no dependence in it and will be able to disprove it if its signer is called as a witness in the case.

“It is difficult to understand, of course, how such a statement could be made in good faith. I believe that Mincey was laboring under a delusion. Possibly he was talking to a negro the afternoon of the crime. When he read of the murder of the little factory girl, the incidents of his conversation with some unidentified colored man took on a form in his excited imagination that made him certain that this negro had told of a killing and that the negro was Jim Conley.”

But the defense is firm in the belief that the affidavit and Mincey’s testimony will be important in their efforts to prove the innocence of Frank and the guilt of Conley. This part of the defense will be strengthened by character testimony for Mincey and by statements from negro women who are said to have overheard the conversation between Conley and Mincey in which the negro is quoted as boasting:

“I killed a girl to-day; I don’t want to kill anybody else.”

Green Important Witness.

Much depends on the testimony of the negro, Will Green, who has been tracked through a half-dozen States and is now believed to be in the hands of detectives in Birmingham, Ala. The report that he had declared he had been an eye-witness of the attack upon Mary Phagan and had asserted that it was a negro who was guilty of the crime gave weight for the first time to the possibility that direct evidence would be produced at the trial of Leo Frank.

Until Green entered the case the evidence against both Frank and Lee was purely circumstantial. If Green sticks to the story he is said to have told to companions, it will throw the bulk of the dependence for the conviction of Conley upon his evidence.

Green, according to report, told friends he was shooting craps with a negro on the first floor of the pencil factory on Saturday, April 26. He is reported to have said a little girl came down the steps and that his negro companion, who was partially intoxicated and had been losing money, declared he was going to steal the girl’s money.

Green remonstrated, he said, but the other negro started toward the girl and Green fled. The next Monday he read of the murder and left for St. Louis. It was at this city the hunt for him began.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, July 14th 1913, “Prosecution Attacks Mincey’s Affidavit,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

]]>
Indictment of Conley Puzzle for Grand Jury https://leofrank.info/indictment-of-conley-puzzle-for-grand-jury/ Tue, 05 Jun 2018 07:53:57 +0000 https://leofrank.info/?p=13673

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Sunday, July 13, 1913

*Editor’s Note: Some text is blurred in the original document, and illegible text is marked by “[…]”. The text box insert is transcribed at the bottom of this post.

Old Police Reporter Declares True Bill Against Negro Might Alter Entire Frank Prosecution.

RULES OF EVIDENCE CITED

Mincey Affidavit May Have Important Bearing on Defense of Pencil Factory Manager.

By An Old Police Reporter.

Persistent rumors have been abroad of late that the present Grand Jury may indict James Conley for the murder of Mary Phagan.

This is interesting, for if the Grand Jury should indict Conley it would set up a situation immediately possible of most decided results.

Frank already has been indicted, for reasons presumably sufficient to the Grand Jury then acting upon his case.

Would the present Grand Jury be justified in proceeding to the indictment of Conley, notwithstanding the former Frank indictment?

Unquestionably it would, if the circumstances of the case warranted it—indeed, there are many who will think it should proceed to that, if in that way justice seemed more likely to be established.

In getting a point of view in this matter, I have found it necessary to go back to the beginning, and to ask myself this:

Would the Grand Jury, in possession of all the present facts and circumstances pointing toward either Conley or Frank as the guilty man, have indicted Frank or Conley, as a primary proposition?

Much Room for Speculation.

Readers who look upon this strange Phagan case largely as an abstract proposition will find much to speculate upon if they will shape their theorizing in that direction—retrospectively, as I have done.

Last Sunday I set forth eighteen circumstances tending, in my mind, to set forth the defense’s likely attitude in suspicion of Conley.

He is admittedly an accessory after the fact of the murder. Shall he be held to be a principal to it?

That’s a pretty puzzle—and it is not surprising that the Grand Jury is asking itself seriously which way it shall be answered.

Undoubtedly suspicion points toward Conley from many directions.

Suspicion, however, also points toward Frank.

Last Sunday I listed the suspicious circumstances in the case of Conley, and commented upon them, from the viewpoint of the defense.

What, then, are the suspicious circumstances against Frank?

They are three in number.

(1) Frank was in the factory at a time when the crime might have been committed.

(2) Frank let Newt Lee off for the afternoon of Saturday, April 26, which was contrary to his usual custom.

(3) Frank telephoned to the factory late Saturday afternoon, to inquire of Lee whether things were all right there, which also was contrary to his usual custom.

Are there any other really suspicious circumstances against Frank?

If so, a diligent search of the newspaper files fails to reveal them.

I do not know what, if anything, by way of circumstantial evidence against Frank may be held in reserve. Of Conley’s statement I write further along.

The first suspicious circumstance against Frank seems to be admitted.

Day Was Legal Holiday.

The second is explained—though this explanation is not necessarily conclusive—that Saturday, April 26, was a legal holiday, and that all employees had been excused. That Lee should have been excused then was not, therefore, extraordinary.

The third suspicious circumstance the defense accounts for by the fact that just before Frank left for home Saturday afternoon a former employee of the factory, discharged in unpleasant circumstances, was in the factory, ostensibly to look up a pair of shoes, and that the Frank telephone message was sent to ascertain if he had departed, and things remained all right.

Street rumor had it for a time that Frank, immediately upon hearing of the killing of Mary Phagan, employed a lawyer and began to frame a defense, also that he employed a Pinkerton man to direct suspiciou [sic] away from himself.

The undisputed facts, as revealed in a study of the newspaper files, however, show that Frank had no lawyer until Monday afternoon, after he had been “detained” at police headquarters, and that then his lawyer was sent to him rather than that he sent for his lawyer.

Frank was apprised of the killing of Mary Phagan early Sunday morning. He accompanied the police to the pencil factory at once, answering all questions propounded readily and unhesitatingly.

From there he went to the undertaker, where he promptly identified Mary Phagan as a girl he had paid off about noon the day before.

After this, he remained with the police some time, then went home and spent a […] of Sunday afternoon with his people.

Monday morning he returned, as usual, to work in the pencil factory, whence he was summoned later to come to police headquarters.

When a newspaper extra was […] the streets Monday, saying that Leo Frank was “satisfied” at police headquarters, then, AND NOT UNTIL THEN, did Frank have a lawyer to look after him […] was SENT to him […] without Frank’s previous […].

Detective Sought Slaver.

It is […] murderer of Mary Phagan, whoever it might be!”

Beyond the suspicion, therefore, that Frank MIGHT have killed Mary Phagan because he was in the factory at a time when the murder MIGHT have been consummated, and the fact of the Conley affidavits against him, what else remains?

It gets back where I left it last Sunday, to this:

Both the prosecution and the defence likely will have to rely upon Conley largely in trying the indictment againt [sic] Frank.

If Conley’s statement is made to “stand up” in court, it will be very damaging to Frank.

If it falls down, it will clear Frank, no doubt!

The present Grand Jury, however, in seeking to determine whether it ought to indict Conley NOW, will not consider, in all probability, the effect such an indictment might have upon the Frank case.

Of course, if the Mincey statement against Conley can be sustained by competent corroborative evidence—and it now is claimed that there are creditable witnesses ready to swear that Conley DID say the things to Mincey which the Mincey affidavit charges him with having said—the case against Conley immediately gets partly out of the circumstantial evidence catalogue, and Conley will stand face to face with the peril of DIRECT evidence.

If it can be shown to the Grand Jury that Conley did say to Mincey, in the manner Mincey says he said it, on the afternoon of the day Mary Phagan was killed, “I have killed one girl to-day, and do not wish to kill another,” and that he was a half-drunken stupor when he said it, that, in connection with the other evidence against Conley, unquestionably would seem to make it the present Grand Jury’s positive DUTY to indict Conley, without further ado!

And particularly is this true if it can be shown that Mary Phagan’s pay envelope was found near where Conley was sitting on the day the girl was killed.

Grand Jury Wants Justice.

The Grand Jury will be guided SOLELY, I think, however, by what seems the surer way to get at JUSTICE and the truth of Mary Phagan’s death.

Since this case, whether it turns finally against Frank or Conley, will be controlled in large measure by the law of circumstantial evidence, and since there is much confusion in the public mind as to just what circumstantial evidence is, I looked up some law in the Georgia Supreme Court Reports Saturday, and I am sure it will help many of my readers in speculating upon the Phagan case to contemplate that law as I have done.

Section 984 of the Penal Code lays down this law:

“To warrant conviction on circumstantial evidence, the proved facts must not only be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt, but must exclude EVERY OTHER REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS save that of the GUILT of the accused.”

In other words, the circumstantial evidence relied upon must prove the guilt of the accused to the EXCLUSION OF ANY OTHER CONCLUSION that might be reasonably reached from that evidence!

Verdicts of guilty under circumstantial evidence are arrived at, if arrived at legally, through a stern process of elimination.

The law is very jealous of its honor and complete integrity!

It will be observed, therefore, that there is a very great and grave difference between CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE and SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES.

In this connection I find that no less eminent an authority than that wonderful jurist, Chief Justice Hiram Warner, grandfather of the present Mr. Justice Hiram Warner Hill. In the Fiftieth Georgia, Earp vs. the State, said:

“The law does not allow anyone to be convicted of ANY offense merely on a SUSPICION of his guilt!”

Simmons’ Words Fit Case.

Further along I found, in the case of Williams vs. the State, 112 Georgia, some words from the pen of Chief Justice Simmons that fit strangely into the Phagan case in many ways.

Citing section 248 of the Criminal Code, heretofore laid down in this article, Chief Justice Simmons said:

“Under this rule, if the State relies upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence must be so strong as to exclude every other hypothesis SAVE that of guilt of the accused. IT MUST BE INCONSISTENT WITH HIS INNOCENCE.

“This court has ruled on several occasions that in cases involving life or liberty this rule MUST NOT BE RELAXED.

“When a heinous crime has been committed in a community, and the people are greatly shocked thereby, it is natural for them to catch at any little circumstance to throw suspicion upon SOME person and to conclude from this or that circumstance that he is the guilty party.

“The bearer of the crime and their desire as good citizens to see the guilty party punished and the law vindicated, frequently leads them to PREMATURE JUDGMENT, which oftentimes follows them into the jury box, where as jurymen they not infrequently find persons guilty on BARE SUSPICION alone!”

Oh, rare Justice Simmons, whose clear-seeing eyes now have fallen on eternal sleep, did ever any man before or since his time make nobler or fairer plea for the majesty and the sanctity of impartial and just LAW than the plea contained in the foregoing prophetic words?

Excusing, ever extenuating, the proneness of the average citizen, shocked by horrible crime, to forget himself and form premature and ill-conceived opinions and judgments upon persons accused, he points them to the LAW, evolved by the Anglo-Saxon race of a thousand years of progress and civilization, as the sure arbiter of truth in the end.

Only Law Insures Decency.

How foolish it makes one feel to think of his prattlings and gabblings of the “law’s delays and technicalities,” when it so surely is a fact that through the orderly and dignified application of the law ALONE is decency and the right most certainly assured to the law-abiding and the just.

It has been eleven weeks since Mary Phagan was found dead in the basement of the National Pencil factory.

Much has been written and unwritten since then.

When Frank was indicted it was not even whispered that James Conley might have had a hand in the great murder mystery.

It was not known then that he even had been in the pencil factory on the day of the murder.

Suppose everything that is NOW known, both of Conley and Frank, had been laid before the Grand Jury that indicted Frank, would that Grand Jury still have indicted Frank in preference to Conley?

That is the puzzle the present Grand Jury has to consider—and it is the problem it is reported to be considering.

There stands the indictment of Leo Frank.

Is Frank guilty, as charged in that indictment?

I do not know. I can not possibly know.

As a rule, I have sought merely to set up possible situations, as the facts in the case against Frank seemed to develop large or small.

I have endeavored to avoid conclusions. The reader may form them or not, as he pleases.

Is James Conley, rather than Leo Frank, the real murderer of Mary Phagan? I do not know. I can not know.

Should Conley Be Indicted?

As between these two men, toward which does the finger of suspicion more surely SEEM to point?

If the Grand Jury has as much against Conley now as it had against Frank when Frank was indicted, should it indict Conley?

If it has more against Conley now than it did against Frank when it indicted Frank, should it now indict Conley?

If its first judgment against Frank seems now to have been premature, should it take counsel with itself and consider the wise words of Chief Justice Simmons set forth hereinbefore?

The case against Conley has developed slowly—from the first discovery of his untruthfulness as to whether he could write to the amazing Mincey disclosures of the past week.

Has it developed to the point where now the case against Conley is stronger than the case against Frank, or even as strong?

If so, what will the Grand Jury do with James Conley?

The Grand Jury alone is to answer that!


A CHIEF JUSTICE’S DECISION ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

The following is a decision by Chief Justice Simmons, in the 113 Georgia. He says:

“If the State relies upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence must be so strong as to exclude every other hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused. IT MUST BE INCONSISTENT WITH HIS INNOCENCE. This rule must NOT be relaxed.

“When a heinous crime is committed in a community, and the people are greatly shocked thereby, it is natural for them to catch at any little circumstance to throw suspicion upon SOME person, and to conclude from this or that circumstance that he is the guilty party.

“The horror of the crime, and their desire as good citizens to see the guilty punished and the law vindicated, frequently leads them to PREMATURE JUDGMENT, which oftentimes follows them into the jury box, where as jurymen they not infrequently find persons guilty on BARE SUSPICION alone!”

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, July 13th 1913, “Indictment of Conley Puzzle for Grand Jury,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

]]>