Audio Information
File Name: 1913-08-19-franks-statement-is-best-plea-presented-in-his-defense-so-far-the-atlanta-georgian.mp3
Modified Date:
File Size: 6.67 mb
Duration: 00:07:16 (
Bitrate: 128 kbps
Codec: MP3
Reading Time: 8 minutes, [1394 words]
The Atlanta Georgian,
Tuesday, 19th August 1913,
PAGE 13, COLUMN 1.
PAGE 45, COLUMN 1
PAGE 61, COLUMN 1
PAGE 79, COLUMN 1
By JAMES B. NEVIN.
So far, unquestionably, to my way of thinking Leo Frank himself has made the best and most appealing plea in behalf of Leo Frank.
His statement in the recital thereof was as clean cut, as dignified, as dispassionate and as convincing as any statement I ever heard from the witness stand, and I have heard hundreds.
Regardless of its merits-or, at least, aside from that-the defendant acquitted himself with credit, and that much may be said of him ungrudgingly and in the frankest fairness to all parties concerned.
Of course, had Frank been nervous, hesitating, "fidgety," or seemingly in any wise disconcerted, there would be those, perhaps, who would have seen in that great evidence of his guilt-and by the same token, in that he was calm, poised, self-possessed, even smiling at intervals, there will be those who see in that evidence of a monstrous coldness and unfeeling design.
The vast majority of those who heard that remarkable statement, however, must have been impressed by, at least, the apparent sincerity of it and the seeming inclination in the defendant to hold back nothing.
In its recital the statement of Leo Frank was wonderful-in its written form, stripped of the man's personality, it still is a human document of intense and absorbing interest.
It impressed me, too, as being in many ways characteristic of Frank as I have come to know him of late-and I never spoke one word to him in all my life.
I have come to know him as the prisoner sitting over there between the two women in the courtroom-the slight, spectacled party, a seat or two beyond Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold.
I have come to know him, in my way of knowing persons charged with grave crimes, not by way of personal touch so much as by constant observation of him under fire.
Repression Makes the Story.
All that was dramatic in Frank's statement was repressed-the dramatic touch was there, to be sure, but the red fire and the usual accompanying stage tricks were not.
If Frank should undertake to sell me a gross of pencils, I should expect him to tell me the truth about the pencils, and nothing but the truth-but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.
His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.
To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth and nothing but the truth of the Mary Phagan murder, as he knows the truth-and to tell it at a profit to himself.
That is the best and the worst that I can say of Leo Frank's statement, as it appealed to me.
True, in a transaction involving a mere gross of pencils, there would be lacking all the great elements that entered into the statement Frank made on Monday-and yet, at that, neither subject matter is, in its final analysis, anything more or less than something about which the simple truth should be told.
Frank looked the jury fairly and squarely in the eye when he was making his statement-and not once did he hesitate or falter in stating his plea.
Contrast the statement of the defendant with the statement of the negro-the star witness summoned against him.
Frank's Day in Court.
Now, Monday was Frank's day in court, and it is square and right that Frank's showing should be criticised freely and frankly-it is right that his statement should be praised, if it seemed to deserve praise, just as it should be condemned, if it seemed to merit that melancholy fate.
Contrast it, therefore, with the statement of Conley!
Argue the matter with yourself.
Certainly, Frank has behind him a long period of decent life, good reputation, business integrity, and home happiness-and Conley has, what?
Take the two stories-and upon these two stories the verdict in the Frank case must turn eventually-and weigh them, side by side, honestly, without prejudice, and in the light of a clean conscience.
What is your answer?
What will be the jury's answer?
The field of speculation thus opened is most engaging, and it will, if one but undertake to enter it seriously and with open mind, be well worth the entering.
In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.
He was willing to be cross-examined on his statement. He himself insisted that his general character be put in issue. He furnished the State with the first information it ever had that Conley could write.
All the way through, his statement rang with confident challenge, and a dare to the State to prove anything vile in him whatever!
Now, then, people will differ as to the EFFECT Frank's statement will and ought to have on the jury.
Maybe it is a clever evasion of a grave issue-maybe it is possible of rebuttal, and maybe it will be broken down.
Impressively Delivered.
The fact remains that it was most impressively delivered, and carried with it every emphasis of apparent truth and straightforwardness!
It is my opinion now that the State has in Frank's statement the hardest thing to get away from that yet has been tendered to it.
It contradicts the State at points that the defense has been able to fortify abundantly with facts.
It makes more necessary than ever before the complete success of the State's efforts to break down Frank's good name.
For I think it safe to predict that unless the State DOES demolish Frank utterly, the wonderful statement he made on Monday more than likely will serve in connection with the other things set up-to clear him of the charge of murdering Mary Phagan!
It matters not, so far as this article is concerned, moreover, whether the statement ought to clear him-the prospect is that it WILL clear him unless the State can batter it down and collapse it entirely!
The defendant touched upon every phase of the State's case against him-the happiness of his home, his nervousness on the morning of the murder, his movements on the day of the crime, and the day before, and the day after, his family's financial resources, his disinclination to talk to Conley, although he at first talked freely to the police officers, his alleged peeping into the girls' dressing room, his lack of knowledge of or acquaintance with the impeached Dalton, his non-association with loose characters, male and female.
There was not a point he failed to touch, even though he seemed to touch points now and then with a measure of fine scorn!
Is there a gap that Frank MIGHT let down that he has FAILED to let down?
Is there a point involved that Frank has not invited investigation of?
Hard to Find Gaps.
It is rather hard to locate any such gaps or points, if they are there.
And yet they may be there! That is for the State yet to demonstrate!
The State has the full right of rebuttal, as applied to Frank's statement, that it enjoys in respect of other evidence. There may be weak points in his story-just as there were weak points in Conley's.
The point is that they are not nearly so apparent upon the surface of things in the Frank statement.
For one thing, Conley made four sworn statements, all contradictory, before he got one finally landed, and Conley admitted freely from the stand that he had lied time and again.
On the other hand, Frank's statement is the first and only sustained and sequenced utterance as to the details of his story yet falling from his lips.
It must stand in its entirety or fall in its entirety.
Whatever may be the effect of that statement in the end, it will go down in the criminal history of Georgia as one of the most remarkably clear and apparently convincing statements ever falling from a defendant's lips.
When the State gets through with it, the statement may be shot to pieces and rendered utterly ineffective.
As it stands to-day, however, I hardly think a dozen people who heard it will deny the profound impression it made, and the present probability of its determining effect upon the minds of the jury.
The defense has played its best card in Leo Frank's statement.
It remains yet to be seen, however, whether that card is sufficient to win the case!