Tag Archives: Trial Jury

Frank Watches Closely as the Men Who are to Decide Fate are Picked

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian (Hearst’s Sunday American)
July 27th, 1913

This newspaper article is a continuation from the first page of an Atlanta Georgian newspaper. The first page is missing from our archives. If any readers know where to obtain the first part of this article, we would appreciate any help! Thank you!

[…] Mary Phagan by strangulation. This was followed by the request of the defense that the State’s witnesses be called, sworn and put under the rule.

The prosecution opened by announcing its readiness to go on with the trial and called the list of witnesses. Bailiffs brought them down from the second floor. In regular order called, their names were: Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of Mary Phagan; J. W. Coleman, the girl’s stepfather; George Epps, newsboy; L. S. Dobbs, policeman; W. W. Rogers, bailiff for constable; L. S. Starnes, detective and also prosecutor on the indictment; Pat Campbell, detective; Grace Hicks, girl who identified Mary Phagan’s body; J. M. Gantt, once held for inquiry, now supposed, to be a star witness for the prosecution; Harry Scott, the Pinkerton detective; R. P. Barrett, pencil factory employee; B. P. Haslett, policeman; M. [sic] V. Darley, factory employee; W. A. Gheesling, undertaker that cared for the girl’s body; Dr. Claude Smith, City Bacteriologist; Dr. H. F. Harris, member of the State Board of Health; Dr. J. W. Hurt, Coroner’s physician; E. L. Parry, court stenographer; E. S. Smith, Monteen Stover, girl employee at pencil factory; Minola McKnight, cook at Frank’s home; Albert McKnight, Minola’s husband (McKnight did not appear in court); Helen Ferguson, Mrs. Arthur White, wife of factory employee, and L. Stanford.

Agree on Conley Affidavits.

Attorney Reuben Arnold asked concerning the duces tecum that he had served on the State’s attorneys for the affidavits of Jim Conley and others. On the promise of Solicitor Dorsey that he would produce the affidavits whenever needed the duces tecum was waived.

Continue Reading →

Work of Choosing Jury for Trial of Frank Difficult

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian (Hearst’s Sunday American)
July 27th, 1913

Veniremen Searchingly Examined by Both State and Defense

Slightest Objection Used to Disqualify—Attorneys Shrewdly Gauge Candidates from Every Angle.

In the selection of the twelve men to comprise the jury which will try Leo M. Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan, one of the bitterest contests of the great legal battle which begins Monday is anticipated.

That counsel for both the defense and State will probe deep into the character of each of the men drawn from the venire of 144 who take the stand for examination for jury service in this case is certain. The attorneys will endeavor to unearth in the character of the prospective juryman such traits as they may believe favorable or unfavorable to their case.

The slightest objection will be used to disqualify the man from becoming a member of the deciding tribunal. Under the cross-examination of such skilled lawyers as those who will appear in the Phagan case no iota of information which will tend to sway the verdict will remain concealed to to be carried into the jury box and fight against the delivery of justice.

Continue Reading →