album-art
00:00

Download Audio
Reading Time: 2 minutes [285 words]

The Atlanta Constitution,

Saturday, 10th October 1914,

PAGE 5, COLUMN 3.

Conley's Former Attorney Denies Stories to That Effect. Attorney William M. Smith, Jim Conley's former counsel, but now his accuser, stated to a reporter for The Constitution Friday afternoon that he did not intend, contrary to reports, to make an attack upon Solicitor Dorsey or upon the prosecution of Leo Frank.

He asserted that he had no secrets to expose, and that he did not propose to score the methods under which the man in the Tower was prosecuted. His plans, he stated, were to convince the people of Frank's innocence through evidence and through facts he had unearthed by an exhaustive study of the case.

"I have no secrets of the prosecution to lay bare," he declared, "and neither do I expect to arraign anyone connected with it. If I accused Frank's prosecution, I would accuse myself."

It was rumored Friday that Conley's former attorney has come into possession of a piece of evidence against the Negro in shape of a handprint which has been discovered on the back door of the basement of the pencil factory. It is reported that the print fits concisely with the Negro's hand and fingerprint.

Smith was non-committal in this respect. He would neither deny nor affirm the rumor, indicating, however, that he had been able to put in the hands of Frank's Counsel, evidence of this character.

The broken lock on the back door of the pencil factory basement was never satisfactorily explained. Conley swore that he had not touched it on the day of the murder. Frank was accused of breaking the hasp, in an effort to misdirect suspicion.

Related Posts