Home » Posts tagged 'Coroner’s inquest'

Tag Archives: Coroner’s inquest

Leo Frank Answers List of Questions Bearing on Points Made Against Him

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

The Atlanta Constitution

Monday, March 9, 1914

Stated That He Was Willing to Reply to Any Questions That Might Be in the Mind of the Public, and Asked to Answer Any Such That Might Be Propounded to Him.


Asserts That Very Fact That He Admitted He Had Seen Mary Phagan on the Day of the Murder, Thus Placing Himself Under Suspicion, Was Proof in Itself That He Was Innocent of Crime.

Probably the most interesting statement yet issued by Leo M. Frank in connection with the murder for which he has been sentenced to hang, is one that he has furnished to The Constitution in the form of a series of answers to questions which were propounded to him bearing on the case.

These questions were prepared by a representative of The Constitution who visited Frank at the Tower last week.

“Ask me any questions you wish,” Frank told the reporter.

In accordance with that, the reporter wrote out a list of questions which, he asserted, comprised the most salient points the prosecution had brought out against him, and to each of these Frank has given an answer.

Here Are Questions.


May Indict Conley as Slayer

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

The Atlanta Georgian

Tuesday, July 1, 1913

Grand Jury Reported as Seriously Considering Connection of Negro With the Crime.

A well founded rumor Tuesday was to the effect that the Grand Jury had Jim Conley’s connection with the Mary Phagan murder mystery under serious consideration with a view of finding an indictment against the negro on the charge of causing the death of the little factory girl.

Announcement was made after the close of Tuesday’s session that the present Grand Jury would hold its last session Wednesday, and it was reported that if action were not taken on Conley’s case before adjournment, recommendations would be left with the next Grand Jury suggesting that the negro’s connection with the crime be rigidly investigated.

If the indictment is returned against the negro it will mean that he will be taken from the custody of the detectives and placed in the Tower. He also will bear a different relation to the case in the future, being a defendant instead of a material witness. Attorneys interested in the case said they had heard nothing of the proposed action by the Grand Jury.

Rumors that Newt Lee, negro night watchman at the National Pencil factory, had made sensational disclosures to his attorney, Bernard L. Chappell, and would be one of the State’s most important witnesses in the trial of Leo M. Frank, were set at rest Tuesday by Mr. Chappell.

The negro’s attorney said after the inquest that he would make no effort to procure the release of Lee, as he believed his client was a vital witness and it would be the wisest plan for him to remain in the protection of the State.

His statements at this time and up to the date of the indictment found against Frank led to the impression that Lee had confided in his lawyer significant circumstances, which he has told neither to the detectives nor to the members of the Coroner’s jury.

Denies Confession Reports.


Frank Is Willing for State to Grill Him

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

The Atlanta Georgian

Tuesday, July 1, 1913

Accused Man Declares He’s Anxious Even for Prosecution to Cross-Examine.

Surpassing in interest any of the other testimony at the trial of Leo M. Frank will be the story related on the stand by the accused man himself. That Frank will make a detailed statement of his movements on the day that Mary Phagan was murdered is regarded as one of the certainties of the trial.

It was learned Wednesday that Frank was desirous of going even further than this by being sworn and submitting to a cross-examination by the attorneys for the prosecution. He will request his lawyers, Luther Z. Rosser and Reuben R. Arnold, that the privilege of cross-examination be extended the State.


Frank Trial Will Not Be Long One

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

The Atlanta Georgian

Friday, June 20, 1913

Few Witnesses of the Scores Examined Will Be Called When Case Is Heard.

That the trial of Leo M. Frank will take a much shorter time that is generally thought was indicated in a statement by Judge L. S. Roan. The judge said the greatest difficulty and almost as great a length of time would be consumed in drawing a jury as in the hearing of the case. He said the actual taking of evidence might not consume more than a day.

Judge Roan intimated that he expected neither side to introduce the scores of witnesses who had been examined and made affidavits, but that from these witnesses the State and the defense would select the most material evidence, or salient points, and then introduce the most reliable witness who could cover the ground.

For instance, eight or ten different persons might be able to testify on some different minor points, while there would be one witness who could testify to the same thing the different witnesses could. This witness, he thought, would be the one to go on the stand, and the others would not be summoned.

Affidavits Are Plentiful.

As a matter of fact, it is known that only a comparatively small number of the witnesses examined by the Solicitor will be introduced at the trial. In the course of his investigation he secured an affidavit from almost every employee of the pencil factory. While he questioned them closely and had each sign an affidavit, he found little that threw any new light on the case. He examined them, he said, to be sure that he would overlook nothing that might have been missed at the Coroner’s inquest or by the police. (more…)

Recent Posts