Mary Phagan Autopsy, Conducted on Monday, May 5, 1913, by Dr. H. F. Harris, Reported During the Leo Frank Trial on Friday, August 1, 1913.
DR. H. F. HARRIS, Sworn for the State, August, 1913.
I am a practicing Physician. I made an examination of the body of Mary Phagan on May 5th .
[Skull and Head]
On removing the skull I found there was no actual break of the skull, but a little hemorrhage under the skull, corresponding to point where blow had been delivered, which shows that the blow was hard enough to have made the person unconscious. This wound on the head was not sufficient to have caused death.
I think beyond any question she came to her death from strangulation, from this cord being wound around her neck.
Photo commissioned by Christopher Powell Connolly (1863–1935), better known as C.P. Connolly. Photo Description: The left hand of Leo Frank clasping the base of a cigar projecting vertically from his genital region. This exact unaltered photo was used by former Montana Prosecutor C.P. Connolly, for the front cover of his 1914 & 1915 U.S. Best Seller, called, ‘The [“]Truth[“] About the Leo Frank Case‘. Connolly’s monograph is best described as a maudlin hagiography about Leo Frank that is entirely an inflammatory Frankite propaganda book, falsifying nearly every fact about the Frank-Phagan affair. Be sure to download this Frankite propaganda book, and fact-check it against the official legal records of this case, to learn why Southerners were so outraged by this popular agitprop book.
[Left Fist Punches the Victims Right Eye]
The bruise around the [right] eye was caused by a soft instrument, because it didn’t show the degree of contusion that would have been produced by a hard instrument. The outside cuticle of the skin wasn’t broken. The injury to the [right] eye and scalp were caused before death.
I examined the contents of the stomach, finding 160 cubic centimeters of cabbage and biscuit, or wheaten bread. It had progressed very slightly towards digestion. It is impossible for one to say absolutely how long this cabbage had been in the stomach, but I feel confident that she was either killed or received the blow on the back of the head [From the solid iron handle of the bench lathe found in the metal room] within a half hour after she finished her meal [(According to Mrs. Coleman, 11:30 a.m. is when Mary Phagan ate her last meal)]. I have some cabbage here from two normal persons. Here was same meal taken of cabbage and wheaten bread by two men of normal stomach, and contents taken out within an hour. We found there was very little cabbage left.
I made an examination of the privates of Mary Phagan. I found no spermatozoa. On the walls of the vagina there was evidences of violence of some kind. The epithelium was pulled loose, completely detached in places, blood vessels were dilated immediately beneath the surface and a great deal of hemorrhage in the surrounding tissues. The dilation of the blood vessels indicated to me that the injury had been made in the vagina some little time before death. Perhaps ten to fifteen minutes. It had occurred before death by reason of the fact that these blood vessels were dilated. Inflammation had set in and it takes an appreciable length of time for the process of inflammatory change to begin. There was evidence of violence in the neighborhood of the hymen.
Rigor mortis varies so much that it is not accurate to state how long after death it sets in. It may begin in a few minutes and may be delayed for hours.
[Estimated Range for Time of Death Based on 11:30 a.m. Meal Digestion: Twelve Noon to 12:15 p.m. on Saturday April 26, 1913]
I could not state from the examination how long Mary Phagan was dying. It is my opinion that she lived from a half [noon] to three-quarters of an hour [12:15 p.m.] after she ate her [brunch] meal [at 11:30 a.m. according to Mrs. Coleman, Mary’s biological mother who testified she served her daughter a meal, before she left].
[Sexual Violence: Rape]
The evidence of violence in the vagina had evidently been done just before death.
[Forensics of Strangulation]
The fact that the child was strangled to death was indicated by the lividity, the blueness of the parts, the congestion of the tongue and mouth and the blueness of the hands and fingernails.
The lungs had the peculiar appearance which is always produced after embalming when formaldehyde is used. I am of the opinion that the wound on the back of the head could not have been produced by this stick (referring to: Defendant’s Exhibit 48, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913).
[(Exhibit 48 was a bloody stick planted on the first floor of the National Pencil Company factory, by associates of the Leo Frank legal defense team, nearly three weeks (20 days) after the crime, and discovered by Detective McWorth of the Pinkerton Detective Agency. The significance of the bloody stick planted in the lobby, was that 3 weeks after the murder, other evidence like a pay envelop was put at the lobby where Conley had sat on Saturday, April 26, 1913. The stick was another failed effort to develop forensic evidence that Phagan was assaulted by Jim Conley in the lobby, when she walked down the stairs from the second floor, this planted evidence was in contradiction to all the forensic evidence suggesting Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan in the metal room at the rear of the second floor. The stick was discovered by Detective McWorth around May 15th, 1913. Detective McWorth was relieved of his services in the Mary Phagan murder investigation after he kept on discovering planted evidence in the lobby of the National Pencil Company, three weeks after Atlanta Police had meticulously searched the building for clews.)]
[Microscope Analysis to Determine if Menstruation Could have Caused the Evidence of Violence to the Vagina]
I made a microscopic examination of the vagina and uterus. Natural menses would cause an enlargement of the uterus, but not of the vagina. In my opinion the menses could not have caused any dilation of the blood vessels and discoloration of the walls.
[Stomach and Digestion Analysis]
From my own experiments I find that the behavior of the stomach after taking a small meal of cabbage and bread is practically the same as taking some biscuit and water alone. I examined Mary Phagan’s stomach. It was normal in size, normal in position, and normal in every particular.
I made a microscopic examination of the contents in Mary Phagan’s case. It showed plainly that it had not begun to dissolve, or only to a very slight degree, and indicated that the process of digestion had not gone on to any extent at the time that this girl was rendered unconscious. I found that the starch she had eaten had undergone practically no alteration. The contents taken from the little girl’s stomach was examined chemically and the result showed that there were only slight traces of the first action of the digestive juices on the starch. It was plainly evident that none of the material had gone into the small intestines. As soon as food is put in the stomach the beginning of the secretion of the hydrochloric acid is found.
It is from the quantity of this acid that the stomach secretes that doctors judge the state and degree of digestion. In this case the acid had not been secreted in such an excess that any of it had become what we call free. In this case the amount of acid in this girl’s stomach was combined and was 32 degrees. Ordinarily in a normal stomach at the end of an hour it runs from 50 to 70 or 80. I found none of the pancreatic juices in the stomach which are usually found, about an hour after digestion starts.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DEFENSE:
I don’t remember when Mr. Dorsey first talked to me about making this autopsy. As long as the heart was beating you could have put a piece of rope around the neck of this little girl and produced the same results as I found. I took about five or six ounces altogether out of the stomach. It was all used up in making my experiments. I know of no experiments made as to the effect of gastric juices where the patient is dead. The juices of the body after death gradually evaporate. The chemical analysis of each cabbage varies, not only in the plant but from the way it is cooked. It is a very vague matter as to what influences may retard digestion. Every individual is almost a law unto himself. To a certain extent different vegetables affect different stomachs different ways, but the average normal stomach digests anything that is eaten within reason. Some authorities claim that exercise will retard digestion. I don’t know that mental activity would have very much effect in retarding the digestion.
It is the generally accepted opinion that food begins to pass out of the stomach through the pyloris in about a half an hour. A great many things pass out of the stomach that are not digested. The juices of the stomach make no change in them. The stomach does not emulsify a solid. I never knew a normal man who could digest a solid. The science of digestion is rather a modern thing. I did not call in any chemist in making this examination. I said it was impossible for any one to say absolutely how long the cabbage had been in the stomach of Mary Phagan before she met her death, not within a minute or five minutes, but I say it was somewhere between one-half an hour and three-quarters. I am certain of that. Of course, if digestion had been delayed this time element would
[Penis, Finger or Object?]
The violence to the private parts might have been produced by the finger or by other means, but I found evidence of violence. It takes a rather considerable knock to tear epithelium off to the extent that bleeding would occur. I found the epithelium completely detached in places and in other places it was not detached. A digital examination means putting the finger in. The swelling and dilation of the blood vessels could be seen only with a microscope. It is impossible to say how much they were swollen.
A scalp wound is very prone to bleed.
-End of Witness Testimony Concerning the Mary Phagan Autopsy, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, 1913
21st Century Forensic and Psychological Analysis, What Stands Out One Hundred Years Later in the Year 2013:
Mary Phagan was dumped on a saw dust pile at the North-West rear of the cellar. When she was found, her arms were reverently crossed upon her bosom. A blood soaked strip torn mid-sagitally from the petticoat of her dress, had been wrapped under and around her neck where a seven foot cord tied into a slipknot, was sunk 1/8 an inch deep, remained cinched around her neck. Phagan’s blood soaked underwear was still attached to her body, but had been ripped or cut open across the vagina up to the the right seam. The entire front of Phagan’s body was caked with dirt and scratches giving the appearance she had been dragged by the ankles face down. Someone had urinated on Mary Phagan. The soaked fabric covering her left breast had been cut open in an L shaped pattern flap, revealing her breast.
The service ramp door at the back of the basement had its locking mechanism pried open and gave the appearance that the perpetrator of the crime had fled this route out to the back alley. There were contrived blood smears found on this exit door as if they were some kind of finger prints, but on expert examination it turned out to be inconclusive. There was an African-American woman who had had a food cart at the end of the alley where the back of the National Pencil Company lead to the street. She saw no one come out of the building, but later produced an affidavit that Mrs. Lucille Selig Frank, Rabbi David Marx and another unknown Jew tried to pressure her into falsely claiming she saw Jim Conley come out of the back of the alley, walked to her food cart, and order lunch (Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Records, 1913, 1914). Lucille told the Negro food cart owner that if she lied it would remove the rope from her husband Leo Frank’s neck.
Mary Phagan’s Arms Reverently Crossed
But of all these details, it was the odd arrangement of Mary Phagan, concerning her arms crossed reverently over her bosom, in the way one would cross them for the deceased before the beloveds funeral. It was rather striking, because of the gruesome scene of the mauled girl and gave some kind of unusual indication or impression that whoever had dumped her perhaps felt some kind of sacred sympathy for the deceased. There was something about the crossing of the arms that under the circumstances seemed out of place. Several weeks after the murder, the police finally broke Jim Conley down, using the third degree (good cop verses bad cop) method. Conley finally admitted to dragging the body to the rear of the basement and dumping it there, but claimed he had done so at Leo Frank’s orders. Conley dragging Mary Phagan face down across the cellar’s dirt floor, made it seem as if she had been assaulted in the basement, but it became another sustaining detail in the uncovered plot to frame the Negro nightwatchman Newt Lee, along with the contrived service ramp door staged to look like the escape route – because of something the police noticed about the dragging scratches on Mary Phagan’s face.
Dragging from the Elevator an Important Detail
Three weeks before Jim Conley confessed to dragging Phagan’s body facedown from the elevator shaft across the cellar’s hard dirt floor to the rear of the basement, the police on Sunday morning, April 27, 1913, using primitive electric flash lights (yes they had them back then) noticed very clear dragmark tracks from the cellar elevator entryway, across 140 feet of the earthen floor, to the garbage staging area (located on the North West wall of the cellar). In an eerie premonition, Phagan had been dumped were garbage was normally placed in the factory cellar, before being burned in the giant furnace-incinerator located on the right hand side in the middle-rear of the basement. The physical evidence turned out to be another gruesome detail in the plot to conceal the nature of the murder. According to Jim Conley after breaking down by skillful interrogation three weeks after the murder, the garbage furnace-incinerator was indeed intended to be the final destination for Mary Phagan, but Conley claimed he refused to cremate Phagan at the last minute without the help of Leo Frank who refused to help Conley do this final cover-up step. It was the refusal of Conley to stuff Mary Phagan into the furnace-incinerator, that caused Leo Frank to take back the $200 greenback bribe he had given to Conley for the purpose of cremating the corpse in an over-sized garbage oven that could heat the entire building. (The Leo Frank Trial Jurors would have some interesting remarks to say after the trial, about this incident and the way Dorsey elaborated it). In the fall out of Jim Conley not destroying the corpse with fire, Conley instead helped manufacture the coup de grace, to seal the fate of the nightwatchman Newt Lee – and then he ghost wrote the Mary Phagan murder notes!
The Drag Marks Identified
After the police scoured every inch of the basement with their flash lights and noted the dragmarks from the elevator entryway to the cellar rear, the body of Mary Phagan was then removed in a wicker body basket, and taken to the undertakers at P.J. Bloomfield’s mortuary in the middle of the night for the examination, autopsy, cleaning and embalming of Mary Phagan were conducted.
The Failure of the Dragging and How the Police Figured Out Phagan Wasn’t Murdered in the Basement
The medical examination of Mary Phagan’s body, suggested an intention of the dragging, was perhaps to put forensic evidence on her, intimating the struggle, rape and strangulation, had happened down in the basement and not the metal room (that was later determined forensically to be the place of her murder). However the contrived attempt by the unknown murderer was doomed to fail from the start, not only because of what the dragmarks suggested, but because the scratches on Phagan’s face provided conclusive proof she had not been killed in the basement!
None of the dragging scrapes and scratches on Mary Phagan’s face bled
When the human heart stops beating, the body ceases the natural healing cascade, this very important fact suggested Phagan was likely not killed in the basement, but more likely in the metal room, where Jim Conley claimed to have first found Mary Phagan in the bathroom area, because if Phagan had been killed in the basement after a struggle, the scratches all over her face and body would have bled, but they didn’t.
To Bleed or Not to Bleed: That is the Question!
Thus if Phagan was alive in the basement when she was dragged from the elevator to the furnace-incinerator staging area, the scratches made on her face would have bled or showed some signs of scabbing and clotting (see: Dr. Hurt at the Leo Frank Trial, August 3, 1913).
Conley’s later revelation, that the nightwatchman had been setup as the patsy, tended to affirm the theory that was developed by the police about the true initial location of where the murder occurred, namely in the metal room.
Defense Team Theory: Jim Conley Assaulted Mary Phagan on the first floor lobby of the NPCo and then threw her down the elevator shaft or scuttle hole
At the Trial of Leo Frank, the Defense suggested the theory that Jim Conley may have assaulted and then thrown an unconscious Mary Phagan, 14 feet down the elevator shaft, or through the scuttle hole at the side of the elevator or crowded back into the former location of the Clark Woodenware Company that had departed January 17, 1913 from its first floor office space that was locked off. The problem with the three defense theories, was that had Phagan at 4’11” tall and 107lbs, had been thrown down the 14 foot elevator shaft or scuttle hole while she was unconscious, there would have been clear identifiable forensic medical evidence of it on her body to indicate as such, and it would have been reported by the defense and prosecution examining physicians. But no physical evidence was found on Mary Phagan to suggest when she was alive, if and when her body was theoretically thrown down the elevator shaft or scuttle hole. Moreover, the dragmarks found on the basement floor, beginning at the entryway of the elevator shaft, had tended to rule-out the scuttle hole. The Clark Woodenware theory was ruled out because the door to their area had been locked by the owner of the building, and no one but him had access to that area. The National Pencil Company was a rented building. Interestingly enough, the lobby entry door to the former Clark Woodenware company was broken open 4 days after the murder, so that the Frank defense could use it as one of their three theories of how Jim Conley could have murdered Phagan.
WARNING FRAUD ALERT: The 1964, Phagan-Frank Bitemark and X-ray Hoax.
Jewish-American Leo Frank Case revisionists (Oney, Dinnerstein, Golden, Alphin, Melnick, Wilkes, and others) have been intentionally perpetuating a known fraud called the ‘1964 Mary Phagan Neck and Shoulder Bitemark Hoax’ (for short), or the ‘1964 Mary Phagan Neck and Shoulder Bitemark, and Leo Frank teeth X-ray Hoax’ (for long). Their claim of bitemarks on Mary Phagan’s neck and shoulder can not be substantiated by the several thousand pages of surviving official legal records concerning Leo Frank’s trial or appeals, nor do any period newspaper reports on the case from 1913 to 1915 mention any such bitemarks. The Leo Frank commutation hearings presided over by Governor John M. Slaton, has several thousand pages of surviving documents archived at Emory University, and nothing at all is mentioned about evidence of bitemarks on Mary Phagan’s shoulder, neck or anywhere else on her body. Nor do any of these reports support any evidence that Leo Frank’s teeth were X-rayed. If Mary Phagan had been indeed bitten, a simple cast mold of Leo Frank’s teeth could have been made.
State’s Witnesses Autopsy and Examination Reports About Mary Phagan
Numerous examinations were conducted on Mary Phagan by physicians, police, the undertaker, and other government officials, none of their reports mention teeth marks on Mary Phagan’s neck and left shoulder, or anywhere on her body for that matter (GA Supreme Court Case File, Brief of Evidence, 1913). None of the defense physicians mention any bitemarks on Mary Phagan during their examination on the witness stand at the Leo Frank trial. None of the physician witnesses for the defense ever mentioned Leo Frank having his teeth X-rayed or bitemarks on Mary Phagan.
The Purpose of the 1964 Mary Phagan Bitemark Hoax
The hoax manufactured in 1964 by Pierre van Paassen is often used by Leo Frank partisans for the specific purpose of deceiving the general public into thinking State’s Prosecution Team suppressed evidence and that Leo Frank was really an innocent Jew, wrongfully convicted for the murder of Mary Anne Phagan, because of an alleged widespread European-American conspiracy of anti-Semitism in the State of Georgia and South in general.
What is a Frankite?
A Frankite is a person who will go to the most extreme lengths to defend and rehabilitate a serial pedophile, even if it means making bald faced lies, omitting facts and falsifying official U.S. legal records.
Leo Frank Revisionists Perpetuating the 1964 Phagan-Frank Bitemark X-ray Fraud
The Mary Phagan bitemark fraud has been perpetuated by historian Leonard Dinnerstein, retired Professor Emeritus of Judaic Studies at the University of Arizona; journalist-author Steve Oney; academic attorney Donald E. Wilkes, Jr., Professor of Law, University of Georgia School of Law; Veteran childrens book author, Elaine Marie Alphin; activist Professor Jeffrey Paul Melnick (Black-Jewish Relations on Trial, 2000, obfuscated and incorrectly cited the hoax on page 68, & notes 141), American Studies Associate Professor, College of Liberal Arts, University of Massachusetts at Boston; along with many other prominent members of the Jewish community, who are perpetuating the century-long racist anti-Gentile version of the Leo Frank case, that requires intentionally misrepresenting or omitting the most salient facts, evidence and testimony presented at the Leo Frank trial. This is why these people should be labeled as Frankites.
The Origin of the 1964 Mary Phagan Bite Mark Hoax
The Leo Frank and Mary Phagan fraud was originated by the zany, narcissistic & self-absorbed Pierre van Paassen, with the 1964 publication of his book, ‘To Number Our Days‘. Pierre van Paassen devotes less than 2 pages in his entire 404 page book to the Leo Frank Affair. In his grandiose memoirs, Pierre van Paassen, recollects memories back more than 40 years earlier, to 1922, when he was living and working in capital of Georgia for the Atlanta Constitution. He claims to he had direct access to the Leo Frank case files at the Fulton County courthouse and found what might be described as “TOP SECRET” folder of intergalactic UFO-like X-ray technology, since it was never possible to X-ray bitemarks on human flesh in 1913 or 2013. Unfortunately, no one before 1922, or afterwards, has ever found these X-ray photographs, because probably Martians, may have removed them, after they were discovered by Pierre van Paassen. If the Prosecution wanted to suppress earth shattering evidence, they certainly would not have left it within the courthouse records to be easily found.
To Number Our Days (1964), Chapter, ‘Short Stand in Dixieland’, beginning on Page 237, Line 27:
The Jewish community of Atlanta at that time seemed to live under a cloud. Several years previously one of its members, Leo Frank, had been lynched as he was being transferred from the Fulton Tower Prison in Atlanta to Milledgeville for trial on a charge of having raped and murdered a little girl in his warehouse which stood right opposite the Constitution building.
Many Jewish citizens who recalled the lynching were unanimous in assuring me that Frank was innocent of the crime. I took reading all the evidence pro and con in the record department at the courthouse. Before long I came upon an envelope containing a sheaf of papers and a number of X-ray photographs showing teeth indentures. The murdered girl had been bitten on the left shoulder and neck before being strangled. But the X-ray photos of the teeth marks on her….
To Number Our Days, Page 238
….body did not correspond with Leo Frank’s set of teeth of which several photos were included. If those photos had been published at the time of the murder, as they should have been, the lynching would probably not have taken place. Though, as I said, the man died several years before, it was too late, I thought, to rehabilitate his memory and perhaps restore the good name of his family.
I showed Clark Howell the evidence establishing Frank’s innocence and asked permission to run a series of articles dealing with the case and especially with the evidence just uncovered. Mr. Howell immediately concurred, but the most prominent Jewish lawyer in the city, Mr. Harry Alexander, whom I consulted with a view to have him present the evidence to the grand jury, demurred. He said Frank had not even been tried. Hence no new trial could be requested. Moreover, the Jewish community in its entirety still felt nervous about the incident.
If I wrote the articles old resentments might be stirred up and, who knows some of the unknown lynchers might recognize themselves as participants in my description of the lynching. It was better, Mr. Alexander thought, to leave sleeping lions alone. Some local rabbis were drawn into the discussion and they actually pleaded with Clark Howell to stop me from reviving interest in the Frank case as this was bound to have evil repercussions on the Jewish community.
That someone had blabbed out of school became quite evident when I received a printed warning saying: Lay off the Frank case if you want to keep healthy. The unsigned warning was reinforced one night, or rather, early one morning when I was driving home. A large automobile drove up alongside of me and forced me into the track of a fast-moving streetcar coming from the opposite direction. My car was demolished, but I escaped without a scratch…
Source: To Number Our Days, Published in 1964 By Pierre Van Paassen. Page 237-8. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-13633. 404 Pages.
21st Century Questions, Leading to 21st Century Analysis
Is Pierre Van Paassen Credible?
Pierre van Paassen is far from a credible source, he claimed in his autobiography to have seen on several occasions a poltergeist black dog which would appear and disappear at will. To make things even more unbelievable, he describes witnessing this same ghost dog using invisible magical powers, that caused his own German Sheppard police-dog, to have a heart attack and die on the spot (Days of Our Years, 1939, pages 248-251). The first clue Pierre Van Paassen is not a reliable source of factual information, comes from reading his 404 page book (‘To Number Our Days’, 1964), filled from beginning to end with egomaniac fantastic tall tales defying: the laws of physics, basic common sense, logic and reason. Pierre van Paassen claims while in Palestine, he dressed up like a minstrel character, rubbing burned cork on his face, fooling Arabs, so he could enter the famous golden domed mosque in Jerusalem, (because only Muslims are ever allowed to enter).
How Reliable is a 40+ Year Old Memory?
The second clue Pierre Van Paassen is not a reliable source of factual information, comes from the fact that when he published his book in 1964 (4 years before he died), he was recollecting memories from 1922, about 7 years after the Leo Frank affair concluded at the end of a hangman’s noose, and there was a separation of about 42 years of time, between the alleged event in 1922, and the publication of the book in 1964. Any court expert or psychologist familiar with the reliability of human memory — especially concerning when someone near the end of their lifespan, reports something after more than 40 years has passed — can tell you the veracity is highly suspect and unreliable after decades has passed from the initial incident, especially in a politically charged case like this one.
Who was one of Leo Frank’s Appeals lawyers?
Leo Frank’s appeals lawyer was named Mr. Henry A. Alexander, not “Harry Alexander”, as Pierre van Paassen cited.
Does the Account Make Sense or Defy Commonsense?
Why would Henry Alexander talk with a tabloid journalist about putting together and presenting exonerating evidence for a Grand Jury concerning Leo Frank, when the May Term Fulton County Grand Jury of 21 men – which included 4 Jewish members – had already rendered its unanimous decision (21 to 0) on Saturday, May 24, 1913, indicting Leo Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan. Especially after the Leo Frank case went to trial, from July 28 to August 21, 1913, resulting in an August 25, 1913, conviction, followed by two years of failed appeals.
Did Leo Frank have a Trial in Atlanta or was he Killed on the way to his Trial in Milledgeville, GA?
Henry Alexander was the lawyer who represented Leo Frank during some of his later appeals, from the years 1914 and 1915 (after Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold bowed out in 1914), for Alexander to say Leo Frank didn’t have his trial yet, when he knew it occurred already in the summer of 1913, is objectively preposterous.
When and Where was the Leo Frank Lynching?
Leo Frank was not lynched on his way to trial in 1913, or lynched in late June 1915, on his way from Atlanta to Milledgeville, GA. Leo Frank was lynched on August 17, 1915 in Marietta, GA, at the “fork in the road” as it was described in 1915, or the place historically known as Frey’s Gin, now, 1200 Roswell Road at the edge of Marietta (That’s 170 miles away from Milledgeville).
Historical and Modern Scientific Analysis:
Recap: At the Leo Frank trial, none of the numerous Physician witnesses for the State’s prosecution team, or Leo Frank defense team, ever mentioned bitemarks on Mary Phagan’s neck and shoulder. None of the thousands of pages of newspaper reports on the Leo Frank case from 1913 to 1915, ever mention any bitemarks on Mary Phagan’s neck and shoulder. Nowhere in the 2,500 pages of surviving Leo Frank trial, appeals documents and decisions (1913 to 1986) does it ever mention visual or photographic evidence Mary Phagan had bitemarks on her neck and shoulder. None of these documents ever mentions any X-rays, sketches, photos, molds or anything of this nature, performed on Mary Phagan’s skin or Leo Frank’s teeth.
In reality if there had been bitemarks on Mary Phagan, they would have performed a simple cast mold of the teeth from Jim Conley and Leo Frank, and we would have heard about it in the period media and legal proceedings at the trial and appeals.
The Bottom Line on the 1964 Phagan-Frank Bitemark and X-ray Hoax is that it’s Poppycock: No X-ray evidence. No photographic evidence of teeth or bitemarks. No visual or reliable written reports of it either. Absolutely nothing to substantiate the claim is in the official records, but nearly every Jewish-American author who has ever written about the Leo Frank Case since 1964, has cited this fraud as factual evidence that indicates Leo Frank was framed and should be exonerated — even worse, that the State is culpable for the wrongful death sentence of Leo Frank. Since Jewish-Americans commit so much fraud concerning the Leo Frank case, it’s time for a 100 year audit and fact checking of every book written about anti-Semitism by Jewish-American’s in the last 100 years.
Could Someone Survive a Head-on Collision in 1922?
“My car was demolished, but I escaped without a scratch.” – Pierre Van Paassen describes driving his car and being forced out of his lane into a head on collision with another “fast moving” car, and he got away without a scratch in 1922, when there were virtually no safety features in cars. This defies the laws of physics, general commonsense and basic reason.
Sarcasm Alert: It sounds like the Indiana Jones wannabe was more than just a tabloid journalist-author, but really a Hollywood stunt daredevil, who jumped out of his car, tucked and rolled to safety in just the nick of time, without a scratch!
Dental Forensics and X-Ray Technology 1913
The science of Odont (Latin for dental) X-ray forensics in 1913 was virtually non-existent, because X-ray technology was in its infancy at the time, and unable to detect bitemarks on skin, and X-ray technology was never used in Georgia as a forensic tool on teeth or in any murder cases until long after Leo Frank was hanged in Marietta, and buried in the Mount Carmel Cemetery in NYC. It can’t be stated enough, it was not ever possible to X-ray bitemarks in 1913, and it is not possible today in 2013.
Embalmed, Autopsied, Exhumed and Autopsied Again and Again
Before Mary Phagan was embalmed at P.J. Bloomfield’s Mortuary, she was given an autopsy by the undertaker and later the Physicians Dr. Harris and Dr. Hurt, none of these experts who examined the body of Mary Phagan ever reported bitemarks on her neck and shoulder, or anywhere on her body for that matter.
Mary Phagan was exhumed when a rumor surfaced that a girl that looked similar to her appeared to have been on drugs, during the evening on the day of the murder, April 26, 1913. Another examination was conducted and still no bitemarks were ever reported anywhere on her embalmed body, during further examinations, or after exhumation on the morning of May 5, 1913.
The Official State and Federal Legal Records Survived into the 21st Century
No where in the several thousand pages of official legal documents concerning the Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, State, District or Federal Appeals is there any mention by the Prosecution or Defense about Bite Marks on Mary Phagan or Leo Frank teeth X-rays (See: https://www.leofrank.org/images/georgia-supreme-court-case-files/). The 1913 – 1915 Governor of Georgia, John M. Slaton’s commutation hearing documents, recently released, makes no mention of this evidence either. In 1955, Slaton released a memorandum about the Leo Frank case, shortly before he died, and he never mentions bitemarks on Phagan.
Atlanta Newspaper Reports?
Nothing is mentioned about bite marks on Mary Phagan or X-rays performed on Leo Frank’s teeth in the three local Atlanta newspapers, the Atlanta Journal, the Atlanta Constitution and Atlanta Georgian, as these three press organs competed for coverage over the Mary Phagan murder investigation, Coroner’s Inquest, Grand Jury, Leo Frank trial, appeals and commutation from 1913 to 1915 (See: Leo Frank Newspaper Section: https://www.leofrank.org/newspapers).
Pierre van Paassen, Egomaniac Tabloid Journalist Extraordinaire
From beginning to end Pierre Van Paassen’s book is filled with epic narcissistic stories, fantastic lies, and hoaxes. Yet numerous Jewish-American authors, have written about the Leo Frank case, repeating every known fraud, from every unreliable source, as long as it benefits Leo Frank, in an attempt to deceitfully exonerate him and rehabilitate his image in the popular culture and wage a culture war against Western Civlization.
This Pierre van Paassen fraud and many other Leo Frank hoaxes are perpetuated by these spineless cowards, unwilling to mention Leo Frank made what amounted to 4 separate, distinct admissions that amount to unmistakable murder confessions, when all the facts of the case are considered.
Sources and References Bibliography:
Look at the sketches in the Atlanta Journal of the hair found on the handle of a lathe in the metal room.
To Number Our Days, Published in 1964 By Pierre Van Paassen. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-13633. 404 Pages.
Further Review: National Pencil Company Diagrams
Jim Conley reports at the behest of Leo Frank finding Mary Phagan in the metal room around the bathroom area: State’s Exhibit A, The 3D map of the factory
Leo Frank’s Defendants Exhibit 61, Ground Floor and Second Floor 2D Birds Eye View Maps of the National Pencil Company: https://www.leofrank.org/images/georgia-supreme-court-case-files/2/0125.jpg. Plat of the First and Second Floor of the National Pencil Company.
Four Separate, Different and Unique Leo Frank Murder Confessions:
Leo Frank Murder Trial Admission Amounting to a Murder Trial Confession: Begin with #3 by studying State’s Exhibit B originally created on Monday morning, April 28, 1913: https://www.leofrank.org/states-exhibit-b/, pay special attention to when Leo Frank claims Mary Phagan entered his office (12:05 p.m. to 12:10 p.m., maybe 12:07 p.m.), compare it to the trial testimony of Monteen Stover and Leo Frank’s unsworn August 18, 1913, trial statement, responding to Monteen Stover about why his office was empty between 12:05 pm and 12:10 pm with a supposed “unconscious” bathroom visit to the metalroom. Pay special attention to the time Leo Frank said Mary Phagan entered his office when asked by police at the National Pencil Company on Sunday, April 27, 1913.
Leo Frank Murder Confession #1 on April 26, 1913, Affidavits and Testimony of Jim Conley: https://www.leofrank.org/jim-conley-august-4-5-6/
As described above, Leo Frank Murder Confession #3 at the Leo Frank trial on August 18, 1913, after 2:15 PM: https://www.leofrank.org/confession/
Leo Frank Murder Confession #4, The Jailhouse Admission that Amounted to a Murder Confession: Leo Frank Answers List of 17 Questions Bearing on Points Made Against Him, Atlanta Constitution, March 9th, 1914. You can’t understand the Leo Frank jailhouse re-affirmation that amounted to a murder confession, unless you fully understand the Leo Frank murder trial confession.
Tom Watson’s articulation of the Leo Frank murder confessions in the Jeffersonian Newspaper on Leo M. Frank 1914, 1915, 1916, & 1917: http://leofrank.org/images/jeffersonian/. Also see Watson’s Magazine issues August, September and October, 1915.
If you want to ask one of the worlds foremost Leo M. Frank scholar questions about the Leo Max Frank case, contact Professor Allen Koenigsberg. Post your public questions on his Leo Frank Yahoo Discussion Forum: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LeoFrankCase/. The Leo Frank Case Library and Archive (www.LeoFrank.org) is not affiliated with Allen Koenigsberg and the Leo Frank Yahoo Discussion Group. The Leo Frank Yahoo Group is the best place to discuss the Leo Frank trial and appeals without politically correct censorship.
Last Updated: April 26, 2013, The Centennial of the Murder of Little Mary Phagan.
Word Count 6450