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

696 X. AMERICAN STATE TRIALS.

the voices of law and fact, as determined hy the evidence.
Any juror who listens to any other voice dishonors his posi-
tion, disgraces the state and destroys the purposes of trial by
jury. The indictment charges Mrs. H. H. Hirsch and W. J.
Cook with blackmail and of verbally accusing Asa G. Candler,
Sr., of adultery with Mrs. Hirsch with intent to extort money.
The second elause in the indictment charges them as guilty of
verbal blackmail in that they did threaten to accuse Aga G.
Candler, Sr., of adultery with Mra. Hirsch with Intent to
extort money, The third count charges that W. J. Cook and
Mrs. H. H. Hirsch on Febraary 6, 1918, did verbally accuse
and did threaten to acense Asa G. Candler, Sr, with at-
tempting to commit the crime of adultery and with the actual
erime with said Mre. H. H. Hirsch, and threatening to expose
that crime unless that money was paid.

In substance these charges are simply blackmail. There
are two ways to commit the erime of blackmail, either by
direct accugation or by threats to charge with the crime.

Mrs, Hirsch is on trial alone. She has entered a plea of
not guilty and the burden of proof of her guilt is upon the
State to establish beyond a reasonable doubt.

Tn the first place, the proof of conspiracy, an agreement to
violate the law between two or more persons devolves upon
the State as the basia of their charge. Conspiracy is a subtle
thing that cannot be seen as it exists in the mind and can
only be determined by the conduct and declarations of the
alleged conspirators.

Hf the jury believed such a conspiracy existed in this case
and that this was part of the threat to expose, then, if the
jury believed such conspiracy existed everything done and
said by one principal is chargeable to the other and each is
responsible for the other. If either one directly or indirectly
threatens to accuse to get money and if the jury believes a
conspiracy originated by them existed it is their duty to find
Mrs. Hirsch guilty.

Mere suspicion is not sufficient for a verdict, there must be