Wednesday, 8th April 1914: Burns And Dorsey Meet And Discuss Leo Frank’s Case, The Atlanta Journal

Search for:

Reading Time: 5 minutes [829 words]

Detective William J. Burns, after being shown physical evidence by Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey, asserts that a pervert killed Mary Phagan and that Negro Jim Conley will be branded as the slayer. In his report, Burns will declare Leo M. Frank innocent of the crime for which he has been convicted.

The much-heralded conference between Burns and Dorsey took place in the latter's offices on Wednesday. Burns called on the solicitor to examine the physical evidence in the case, and nothing else was discussed, according to both gentlemen. When asked if Burns had convinced him of Frank's innocence, Dorsey smilingly answered, "He didn't even try."

After the conference and examination of the physical evidence, including the notes and the clothing worn by the slain girl, Burns asserted that he was more firmly convinced than ever that the crime was committed by a pervert. This means that in his report, Burns will declare Frank innocent and brand Conley as the real murderer. Burns has repeatedly stated that Frank is not a pervert but a normal man.

During the past twenty-four hours, six physicians, including specialists on nervous diseases, made thorough physical examinations of Frank. While the physicians refuse to discuss the visit to Frank's cell, it is said they made the examination for Detective Burns. The physicians who conducted the examination are Dr. J. Cheston King, Dr. J. A. Mc Cleay, Dr. W. A. Gardner, Dr. L. M. Gaines, Dr. James N. Brawner, and Dr. Hansell Crenshaw.

Although Burns has never explicitly stated it, it is known that the men working on his theory that the crime was committed by a pervert and that Frank is normal have been collecting evidence which tends to show that Conley himself, not the man he accuses, is abnormal. Burns has declared in interviews that when a man is not normal, the fact can always be established by the proper sort of investigation.

Accompanied by Dan S. Lehon, one of his lieutenants; C. W. Burke, a detective in the employ of Frank's defense; and Harry A. Alexander, an attorney interested in the case, Burns called at the solicitor's office in the Thrower Building shortly before noon on Wednesday. After conversing for a few moments, the entire party left for Dorsey's Kiser Building office, where the exhibits in the case are kept. They remained in conference until 1 o'clock.

On leaving the conference, Burns told a reporter, "We called on the solicitor simply to see the various exhibits in the case. Mr. Dorsey received us very courteously and readily showed us the physical evidence and gave us the information we came to get." After examining the clothing worn by Mary Phagan when she was murdered, Burns said he was more fully convinced than ever that the crime was committed by a pervert. "In fact, that is one point the solicitor and I agree upon," he added, smiling. "We are one step nearer the end, and everything is working to establish my theory. I am absolutely confident of my success."

Burns has secured evidence to contradict the statements made by Monteen Stover at Frank's trial, as indicated by his declaration on Wednesday that he does not believe the girl's story. Stover was one of the state's best witnesses at the trial, and if Burns has found a way to disprove her story, it would be an important point for the defense in the extraordinary motion.

Stover testified at the trial that she went to Frank's office at 12:05 on the day of the murder and failed to find Frank there. Dorsey argued that Frank was then in the metal room strangling Mary Phagan to death. Recently, Stover, her mother, and her stepfather, Homer Edmondson, were called to the office of Attorney Samuel A. Boorstein. Burns states he was telephoned that they were there and went over immediately to see the girl. As he walked into the office, Boorstein remarked, "Hello, Mr. Burns," and Stover and her mother, as if frightened at the name, jumped up and ran from the room. Burns then remarked to Edmondson, who had remained, that he didn't believe the girl's story and asked him if he thought she visited the factory on the day of the tragedy.

Burns was incensed at a published version of the incident, which made it appear as if he was "putting up a job" on the girl. "I am trying to get the truth," says Burns, "but I am not trying to talk to anyone who is not willing to talk to me. It's not necessary in the case, and I am not going to do it." He said as much to Edmondson when the girl and her mother ran out of the room and also told him he didn't believe the girl's story. Edmondson is quoted as saying the detective told him he knew the girl was not telling the truth.