Friday, 24th April 1914: Battle For Life Of Leo M. Frank Begins In Court, The Atlanta Constitution

Search for:

Reading Time: 7 minutes [1052 words]

It is rumored that the defense will present today the full report of Detective William J. Burns on the case. C. W. Burke, a private investigator employed by counsel for Leo M. Frank, is reportedly set to be the target of a scathing attack by Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey when the prosecution begins its counter-argument in the retrial hearing before Judge Hill. Mr. Dorsey, while not willing to speak publicly, has strongly hinted that a substantial amount of evidence has been gathered by detectives against Burke. Burke has been a key figure in the investigation into the Mary Phagan murder mystery, spearheaded by Frank's counsel in their push for a new trial. He was responsible for obtaining the majority of the affidavits that represent newly-discovered evidence, which were included in the new trial motion filed by Frank's defense on Thursday.

The first day of the extraordinary motion for a new trial before Judge Hill was relatively calm, but it set the stage for the anticipated fireworks when Solicitor Hugh Dorsey launches his opening arguments to counter the newly-discovered evidence presented by Frank's attorneys. The hearing, which commenced at 10 o'clock in a committee room of the state library in the capitol, saw rapid progress. By 4:40 PM, the defense had submitted all nineteen grounds for a retrial, after which Frank's counsel requested an adjournment to consider additional matters they had previously withheld.

There were persistent rumors that the defense might present Detective William J. Burns' report at the morning session. However, Frank's lawyers indicated that this was unlikely, as they intended to keep the report hidden from the police, whom they accused of using underhanded tactics. Hugh Dorsey is expected to reveal the sensational evidence he has been holding back. He is reportedly fortified with numerous affidavits from witnesses who have also provided affidavits for the defense. Dorsey is also expected to submit a report from a private investigation into how the defense obtained several of their affidavits.

Mr. Dorsey, surrounded by eight of the best detectives from headquarters, has been leading the bulk of the solicitor's investigation. These detectives include John Black, Bass Rosser, Jim Doyal, Pat Campbell, John Starnes, Bob Waggoner, Ben Gillespie, and M. Mc Gill. Dorsey has strongly indicated that he will vigorously attack various aspects of the newly-discovered evidence presented by the defense. At one point, he insisted on obtaining the address of J. O. Knight, a notary who had attested an affidavit sworn by Ruth Robinson, a witness for the prosecution who now repudiates her testimony. It is rumored that the Robinson girl has provided an affidavit to the solicitor, which will form the basis of his counter-argument. Although the notary's address was not provided, as Frank's counsel claimed they were unaware of it, Dorsey assigned a detective to find it. "I want to get this notary public to face Ruth Robinson," Dorsey explained, though he offered no further details.

A surprise came when the defense introduced an affidavit from J. W. Boozer, a collector for a tailoring firm on Peters Street, who testified that he met Jim Conley on Peters Street between 4 and 4:30 PM on the day Mary Phagan was murdered. Boozer stated in his affidavit that he had known Conley for some time and had made repeated collections of weekly installments on a watch Conley had purchased from Boozer's employer. On that particular Saturday, Boozer asked Conley to pay his regular installment, to which Conley responded that he could get the money from Leo Frank, as he had done previously. Boozer stated that Frank had frequently paid Conley's weekly dues of $1. This piece of evidence had not been made public until now.

Mr. Dorsey's counter-motion was not filed on Thursday, despite a demand from the defense to Judge Hill at the opening of the hearing. The judge informed Frank's counsel that the solicitor had not yet filed any counter-argument.

The contents of the extraordinary retrial motion have been gradually made public. They were read individually before Judge Ben Hill and included nineteen grounds, each representing newly-discovered evidence. Key pieces of evidence included the Mary Rich document, in which she claims to have seen Conley emerge from the alley behind the pencil factory around 2:15 PM on the day of the tragedy and then return. Other significant affidavits were from Dewey Hewell, Ruth Robinson, and C. Brutus Dalton, who repudiated their previous testimony; Mrs. Ethel Harris Miller and Mrs. M. Jaffe, who claimed to have seen Leo Frank at Whitehall and Alabama streets at 1:10 PM on April 26; Dr. H. F. Harris, involved in the hair analysis aspect of the mystery; and Professor G. Bachman, a professor of histology and anatomy at the Atlanta Medical College, who provided an expert analysis on human hair and stated that tar soap does not alter its texture. Dr. J. W. Papez, another professor of histology and anatomy, corroborated Bachman's findings.

The affidavit of J. E. Duffy, a state witness who renounced his testimony, was also submitted, along with a similar document from Ivy Jones, a negro witness who claimed to have seen Jim Conley on the day of the murder but now denies his story. An affidavit from H. F. Becker, dealing with new developments in the mystery of the murder notes, was also introduced. Affidavits from F. J. Paxon and Miss Mae Edwards testified to the character of Mrs. Ethel Harris Miller. Perhaps the most sensational documents were those related to the story of Mrs. J. B. Simmons of Birmingham, who told the solicitor before the Frank trial that she heard screams from the basement of the pencil factory around 3:30 or 4 PM on the day Mary Phagan was killed.

Throughout the session, much emphasis was placed on allegations of prejudice and demonstrations during the Frank trial. Mrs. Simmons claimed that fear prevented her from sharing her story with Frank's attorneys. Others reported similar experiences in their affidavits.

Only officials directly involved in the hearing were allowed in the small room where the motion was being discussed. Stalwart doorkeepers were on duty all day, keeping out scores of curious onlookers. The duration of the hearing remains uncertain, but it is generally expected to continue into Saturday.