Audio Information
File Name: 1914-04-22-lanford-declines-to-show-affidavits-to-detective-burns-the-atlanta-georgian.mp3
Modified Date: 2026-06-19 16:32:30
File Size: 11.2 mb
Duration: 00:12:13 (734 seconds)
Bitrate: 128 kbps
Codec: MP3
Reading Time: 13 minutes, [2314 words]
The Atlanta Georgian,
Wednesday, 22nd April 1914,
1st Edition,
PAGE 1, COLUMN 2.
BURNS MAKES FIRST REPORT
Detective William J. Burns, accompanied by Dan Lehon and a lawyer in the Frank case, called at police headquarters late Tuesday afternoon and held a five-minute conference with Chief of Detectives Lanford.
Mr. Burns asked Chief Lanford to show him the affidavits which the Chief is reported to have, charging perversion to Leo Frank. Chief Lanford told Mr. Burns that inasmuch as the case is coming up for a hearing Wednesday, and the perversion charges are not in evidence and have no bearing on the case at this time, to make the affidavits public at this time might have an effect on the decision, one way or the other. He told Mr. Burns that he would show him the papers any time after Judge Hill had disposed of the motion for a new trial.
Mr. Burns also called on Chief Beavers, but did not discuss the Frank case with him.
3rd Edition, PAGE 1, COLUMN 2
BURNS MAKES FIRST REPORT
3rd Edition, PAGE 1, COLUMN 6
A synopsis of the report of Detective W. J. Burns, in which Leo M. Frank will be declared to have had no part in the murder of Mary Phagan and no knowledge of it until he was informed by the detectives, will be made public Wednesday forenoon.
The most sensational features of the report, based on the detective's investigation of the murder mystery, will be his positive assertions:
That Jim Conley, described as a pervert of one of the lowest types, is the real murderer.
That Leo Frank neither had anything to do with the crime nor is he a pervert, as charged in the unprintable testimony of Conley.
That the mystery of the missing purse, hat ribbons and flowers has been cleared up by indubitable evidence.
That the explanation of the breaking open of the rear door of the pencil factory is simple in view of the other circumstances of the crime.
Only an outline of the Burns report will be made public Wednesday. The full report will come after Detective Burns has had further interviews with Chief of Detectives Lanford, Chief of Police Beavers, W. M. Smith, Solicitor Dorsey and the negro prisoner Jim Conley.
The detective, answering all of the expressions of skepticism that have been made, declared Wednesday that he would make no statement in his report which would not be supported by the evidence in his possession. A half-dozen or more negro witnesses are said to be ready to swear to Conley's perversion.
3rd Edition, PAGE 1, COLUMN 6
BURNS OFFERS $5,000 FOR FRANK EVIDENCE
Detective W. J. Burns, shortly before the hearing on the motions in the case of Leo Frank, was called Wednesday in the court of Judge Hill, increased to $5,000 his offer for any person or persons who would furnish to him definite and satisfactory information of the moral degeneracy of Leo Frank.
At the same time he entered into a severe criticism of the Atlanta police and detective departments for their attitude toward his investigation, which has been in progress more than a month. His strictures were occasioned by his visit Tuesday to Chief Lanford, Chief Beavers and Solicitor Dorsey.
It was thought early in the morning that the hearing in Judge Hill's court might be postponed several days because of the death of the mother of Herbert J. Haas, one of the lawyers for Frank. The hearing on the motions was set for 10 o'clock in the same chamber in which all of the trial of the condemned man was conducted.
Two Motions Set.
Two motions were set for hearing. One was a motion to set aside the verdict in the Frank case because the prisoner was deprived of his constitutional right to be present in court when the verdict was rendered. The other was an extraordinary motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence.
The first motion was filed by the law firm of Tye, Peeples & Jordan. The extraordinary motion was submitted by Attorneys Rosser, Arnold and Leonard Haas and Herbert J. Haas.
"I was very much disappointed by the attitude of the detective department," said Detective Burns, in commenting on the outcome of his visits of the day before. "Chief Lanford had told Dan Lehon, who has assisted me all through the Phagan case, that he would turn over to me those two affidavits charging perversion against Frank. I went down there to get them."
"You may imagine my astonishment when Chief Lanford not only refused to give them to me, but made the astounding statement that perversion never had been brought into the case except by the defense; that it never should have been brought in at all, and that it had no bearing on the crime itself."
Beavers Surprises Him.
"I told him that he was mistaken in his statement that the subject of perversion had not been brought in except by the defense, and I added that it had figured very largely in the conviction of Frank. Chief Lanford ended by saying that he couldn't give me the affidavits, at least until after the hearing on the extraordinary motion."
"I was rather surprised that Chief Beavers was even more guarded in his conversation. I said, 'I suppose you wouldn't care to discuss the case either?' and he was reluctant even to answer that question."
"My visit with Mr. Dorsey was hardly as satisfactory as I expected. I went there primarily to make an appointment with him for today. He said all right, if the hearing didn't occupy his time. He mentioned that he had an affidavit for Dan Lehon and myself to sign, and I told him that I would be glad to sign anything of which I had knowledge. I asked him the nature of the affidavit, and he told me that he thought it was better not to tell me at this time."
"The Solicitor then remarked that he had read that my report was completed, and that it was to declare that Frank was innocent. I told him that this was not strictly true as to the report being completed, but that I was willing to anticipate by saying that the conclusion reached was that Frank had nothing to do with the crime."
Burns' Version of Incident.
"'Then there is no further need of discussing it,' he said. "'Yes, there is,' I told him. "'Well, not to-day, at any rate,' he replied; and at this time we were walking out of his office into the hall. Although he had said that there was no need to discuss the matter when he saw a bunch of city detectives in the hallway he raised his voice and continued the discussion."
"'You are the man brought here by Frank's friends to upset the verdict,' he said. 'If you can convince me, all right, but I'm not going to try to convince you.' I remarked that I thought he had decided to drop the matter for the time, and he said he just wanted to make his position plain before I left."
4th Edition-PAGE 1, COLUMN 1
BURNS SAYS CONLEY IS SLAYER OF GIRL
Detective Definitely Announces
His Belief in Frank's Innocence and Negro's Guilt.
With the hearing on both the extraordinary motion and the constitutional grounds for a new trial for Leo M. Frank postponed by Judge Ben Hill, Wednesday marked one important development in the case when William J. Burns definitely announced his belief that Frank is innocent and Jim Conley guilty.
Solicitor Dorsey announced that he was not ready to go ahead on the motion to set aside the verdict, as he had been devoting all his time to the extraordinary motion for a new trial. Judge Hill thereupon postponed the hearing on the first motion until a week from Friday May 1.
The hearing on the extraordinary motion was postponed until Thursday morning because of the death and funeral of the mother of Herbert Haas, one of counsel for Frank.
The hearing before Judge Hill was held at the Capitol and postponement was decided upon a moment after it opened. Before it got under way Burns, in a letter to Frank's lawyers, announced that he had not quite finished his report, but stated the conclusions he had reached from his investigations. Here is his letter:
April 22, 1914.
Messrs. L. Z. Rosser, Reuben R.
Arnold, Henry A. Alexander,
Herbert J. Haas, Leonard Haas,
Attorneys for Leo M. Frank.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dear Sirs:
I hoped to be able to furnish you to-day with my complete report showing the results of my investigation of the murder of Mary Phagan.
Investigation Complete.
My investigation is about complete, with the exception of a few details which I have as yet been unable to cover. In addition to these, I had also expected to secure to-day from Chief of Detectives Lanford, according to a promise he had made while I was out of the city, certain affidavits bearing on the case, which were extremely important, in view of the fact that I had offered a reward of $1,000 to any person furnishing evidence of Leo M. Frank's immorality, and the only response thereto was from Chief Lanford, who had stated, through the public press, that he would turn certain affidavits over to me upon my return to the city which would prove this.
I called on Chief Lanford to-day and requested to see the affidavits he had, but he declined to let me see them, and made the astounding assertion that the charge of perversion did not enter into the case and had simply been injected by the attorneys for Frank.
This being, as stated, the only response made by any person to my offer of reward for evidence of Leo M. Frank's immorality, I am, of course, very anxious to see these affidavits, and until I do see them it will be impossible for me to render my final report.
I must, therefore, ask your indulgence in the matter until I can get free and complete access to
Continued on Page 3, Column 6.
4th Edition, PAGE 3, COLUMN 6
FRANK INNOCENT CONLEY GUILTY, SAYS BURNS
Detective, in First Report, Declares He Has Proof of Negro
Slaying Girl.
Continued From Page 1.
all evidence bearing upon the case.
Increases Reward.
It is my intention to-day to immediately increase the offer of reward for such information as I have previously mentioned to the amount of $5,000.
I am now engaged in drawing up my formal report, which will be submitted to you as soon as the same has been finally completed. I desire, however, to anticipate the same in these respects:
1. The murder was unquestionably the crime of a pervert of homicidal tendencies of the most pronounced type.
2. That Leo M. Frank is not a pervert, and is innocent of the murder for which he has been convicted.
3. That James Conley and he alone is guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, and further, he is a pervert of the type heretofore described.
All of which I am prepared to prove.
WILLIAM J. BURNS.
Burns Wednesday made severe criticism of the Atlanta police and detective departments for their attitude toward his investigation, which has been in progress more than a month. His strictures were occasioned by his visit Tuesday to Chief Lanford, Chief Beavers and Solicitor Dorsey.
Two Motions Set.
Two motions were set for hearing. One was a motion to set aside the verdict in the Frank case because the prisoner was deprived of his constitutional right to be present in court when the verdict was rendered. The other was an extraordinary motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence.
The first motion was filed by the law firm of Tye, Peeples & Jordan. The extraordinary motion was submitted by Attorneys Rosser, Arnold and Leonard Haas and Herbert J. Haas.
"I was very much disappointed by the attitude of the detective department," said Detective Burns, in commenting on the outcome of his visits of the day before. "Chief Lanford had told Dan Lehon, who has assisted me all through the Phagan case, that he would turn over to me those two affidavits charging perversion against Frank. I went down there to get them."
"You may imagine my astonishment when Chief Lanford not only refused to give them to me, but made the astounding statement that perversion never had been brought into the case except by the defense; that it never should have been brought in at all, and that it had no bearing on the crime itself."
Beavers Surprises Him.
"My visit with Mr. Dorsey was hardly as satisfactory as I expected. I went there primarily to make an appointment with him for to-day. He said all right, if the hearing didn't occupy his time. He mentioned that he had an affidavit for Dan Lehon and myself to sign, and I told him that I would be glad to sign anything of which I had knowledge. I asked him the nature of the affidavit, and he told me that he thought it was better not to tell me at this time."
"The Solicitor then remarked that he had read that my report was completed, and that it was to declare that Frank was innocent. I told him that this was not strictly true as to the report being completed, but that I was willing to anticipate by saying that the conclusion reached was that Frank had nothing to do with the crime."
"There was at no time any refusal to let Mr. Dorsey see my report," added Burns. "On the contrary, when he asked me for it, I told him that he ought to have it, and that I would be perfectly willing to turn it over to him, but that this matter lay in the discretion of Frank's lawyers."
Burns Scores Police.
"The Solicitor turned to Harry Alexander, who was with me, and asked him how about it. Mr. Alexander said that he agreed with me, but that he did not care to take the responsibility. I have no doubt that Mr. Dorsey will get the full report the day it is completed."