650 Slide – American State Trials 1918 Volume X Leo Frank Document

618 X. AMERICAN STATE TRIALS.

‘wag not.’? After this, he accounts for himself by stating
that he was in the woods sitting on a log, on Clear Ridge.
‘When it remains necessary for a man to acconnt for where he
was the day before, if he gives different relations of what he
was doing, and where he waa, it is a circumstance against
him. You have heard how he seduced John to return to his
father’s on Saturday. You have heard the circumstances of
the tracks and the boota—the alleged blood on his hands—
his Inowledge of the guns—of the family—of the whole
ground—of the description of his person by Brown, as well
as all the other facts proved; and if, on the whole, they sat-
jefy you of his guilt, your duty is obvious, As yor cannot
hear the evidence ont, we will read it to you.

The counsel for the prisoner says that there are but three
circumstances upon which any reliance can be placed.

1, The testimony of Brown, alleging that he knew at the
time that it was the prisoner that shot at him.

2. The cireumatance of McConaghy’s aceount of where he
was that day.

3. The fact of his visiting John the day before, and seduc-
ing him home on Saturday.

‘We agree, these are the leading circumstances; but
there are many minor ones, which, if they accord, and
are consistent with these, will tend to their support
and weight. If the jury should find any of the
minor cireumstances to militate against these, it will tend
to weaken them. But do not all the minor facta and cireum-
stances support the leading onesf Do they not all tend to
establish the fact that Robert MeConaghy eommitted the °
erimes charged in the indictment? You are the judges of
this, We agree that suspicion is not proof; that a man ought
never to be convicted on probabilities; but that the cirenm-
stances which should satisfy a jury of guilt, should be fully
established; that the facta proven should be consistent with
the charge; and, lastly, that the circumstances should be of «
conclusive nature and tendency. We agree that the investi-
gation of the circumstances in this case has left every other