Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.
August 6th, 1913
ROSSER ADOPTS NEW TONE MONDAY
Jim Conley, upon whose story practically the entire result of the Frank case is believed to rest, went on the stand at 9:03 o’clock and when court adjourned for lunch at 12:30 he was still being cross-examined by Luther Rosser for the defense.
The lawyer had reached that point in his cross-fire of questions where he had begun to hector the witness and to take him up whenever he made a mistake, but it appeared that he was only about half through with his work. When the adjournment was taken Conley was still sticking to the main points of his story in a way that was considered remarkable, although he had admitted discrepancies in many of the minor points and had grown confused over them.
When Attorney Rosser started out Monday his manner was mild, but only throughout the afternoon he worked up to a slightly harsher manner. When he began Tuesday he was using his usual rather abrupt tone of voice.
Solicitor Hugh Dorsey and Frank A. Hooper, his colleague, made frequent objections to the manner in which the cross-examination was being conducted and did, to a certain extent, restrain the defense.
“Jim, you made your second statement to Mr. Black and Mr. Scott on a Saturday, didn’t you?” was the first question Mr. Rosser asked.
“I disremembers the day, boss,” replied Conley.
“You told them, though, that you wrote those notes on Friday?”
“Yes, sir, I tole ‘em dat.”
“They they [sic] told you that that wouldn’t do, didn’t they?”
“No, sir, dey didn’t say nothing about that.”
“Didn’t they tell you that it wouldn’t fit in?”
“They didn’t say them words.”
“Are you sure, Jim?”
“Yes, sir, I’m sure.”