0178 Slide – Georgia Supreme Court Leo Frank Appeals Documents, 1913, 1914

Here is the extracted text from the image:

absence of his own counsel, was evidence of guilt.

46. (j). Because the court permitted Miss Mary Pirk to be asked
the following questions and to make the following answers on
cross examination made by the Solicitor:

Q. You never heard of a single thing immoral during that five
years--that's true? (Referring to the time she worked at the
Pencil Factory)
A. Yes sir, that's true.

Q. You never knew of his (Frank's) being guilty of a thing that
was immoral during those five years--is that true?
A. Yes sir.

Q. You never heard a single soul during that time discuss it?
A. No sir.

Q. You never heard of his going in the dressing rooms there of
the girls?
A. No sir.

Q. You never heard of his slapping them as he would go by?
A. No sir.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Frank go back there and take Mary off
to one side and talk to her?
A. I never seen it.

Q. That never occurred?
A. I have never seen it.

Q. You never heard about the time that Frank had her off in
the corner there, and she was trying to get back to her work?
A. No sir.

Q. You didn't know about that?
A. No sir.

Q. That was not discussed?
A. No sir.

These questions were asked over the objection of the defen-
dant, because even if the Solicitor's questions brought out
that the witness had heard charges of immorality against Frank
that her answers there about would have been irrelevant and
immaterial in this trial of Frank for murder. The fact that Frank
might have been frequently guilty of immorality could not be
held against him on a trial for the murder of Mary Phagan. Nor,