Reading Time: 19 minutes, [3478 words]
Georgia Public Broadcasting’s Leo Frank Lesson Gives Middle-School Students a Predetermined Narrative, Not Historical Inquiry.
Question to GPB Georgia Public Broadcasting (@mygpb)
Why does GPB consistently center Frank-sympathetic narratives and Jewish communal trauma while giving no comparable attention to Mary Phagan’s family, the prosecution’s case, the original trial evidence, the appellate courts, or Georgians who believe the 1913 conviction was supported by the record?
Why does GPB never present the views of the Phagan family, or the broader Georgia community of Gentiles, including Black, White or Christian families and descendants who have been affected by more than a century of Leo Frank rehabilitation narratives?
To GPB Georgia Public Broadcasting (@mygpb):
As a taxpayer-funded public broadcaster, GPB has an obligation to present controversial Georgia history with balance and rigor. Yet a review of GPB's coverage of the 1913 Leo Frank case reveals a persistent editorial pattern: the network consistently amplifies narratives sympathetic to Leo Frank and Jewish community trauma, while systematically excluding the victim's family perspective, the Gentile community (including Christians) and the prosecution's trial evidence.
Screen Capture Provided of MyGPB on X
Your own social media and website illustrate this imbalance. GPB has promoted content on Rabbi Rothschild and Jewish community isolation after the lynching, the musical Parade, and the novel "The Curators," all works that falsely assume Leo Frank's innocence or center his experience.
Pattern of Editorial Imbalance and Bias at GPB
There is no comparable GPB coverage examining the prosecution's physical evidence from the metal room, including blood on the floorboards and hair discovered on a lathe. The metal room was located opposite Leo Frank's office. The network has never presented the medical testimony of Dr. Harris that placed Mary Phagan's death between 12:00 and 12:15 p.m. after a sexual assault, a detail that sat at the heart of the state's timeline. The perspective of the Phagan family, who have maintained for more than a century that the trial evidence was sound and that the conviction rested on facts presented in court, remains entirely absent from GPB's programming.
Appellate Courts
GPB has also failed to report the full appellate history. Multiple courts reviewed Frank's case and rejected his appeals. The Georgia Supreme Court specifically affirmed that the evidence at trial was sufficient to sustain the guilty verdict. No tribunal that has ever reviewed this case has overturned his conviction or declared Leo Frank innocent.
Omissions of Monteen Stover and Jim Conley
The omission extends to the trial's central witness testimony and documentary evidence. GPB has not presented Jim Conley's account, in which the factory sweeper described being enlisted by Frank to move the body and wrote the so-called "death notes" at Frank's dictation to frame Newt Lee, the African-American nightwatchman. The network has ignored Monteen Stover's testimony that she arrived at Frank's office between 12:05 and 12:10 p.m. on April 26, 1913, and found it empty, directly contradicting Frank's own statement that Mary Phagan had entered his office during that exact window.
State's Exhibit B and Leo Frank's Unconscious Toilet Visit
GPB has never aired or analyzed Leo Frank’s April 28, 1913, police deposition, recorded as State’s Exhibit B, in which he placed himself with Mary Phagan at the critical time. Nor does GPB show how Frank’s account kept shifting, or how he placed himself at the scene when the murder was theorized to have occurred, while explaining part of that crucial interval with an “unconscious toilet visit.”
Leo Frank Tried to Railroad his African American Nightwatchman Newt Lee for the Mary Phagan Murder
Evidence Concerning the Attempt by Leo Frank to Incriminate Newt Lee: The network has also omitted, or left unaddressed, the evidence regarding the Black nightwatchman Newt Lee. A bloody shirt, suspected of being staged and planted, was discovered at Lee's home, and the prosecution argued it was a deliberate attempt to incriminate him. The time sheet for Newt Lee, which became a point of contention at trial, contained entries the prosecution argued had been altered to create a false window of opportunity (Defendant's Exhibit 1, Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence, Forged Time Card, Four Missing Stamps).
Death Notes and Their Contents
GPB has never addressed the trial testimony that Frank attempted to dictate the content of the murder notes in a way that would point suspicion toward Newt Lee. The notes describe his physiognomy.
Character for Lasciviousness Bad
Nor has GPB reported on the character evidence admitted at trial. At least ten young female employees testified that Leo Frank's character for lasciviousness was bad, describing unwanted advances, unwanted touching, and inappropriate conduct in the factory. The prosecution also introduced evidence of Frank's nervous behavior on the night of the murder (State's Exhibit J), including unusual phone calls to the factory, and the fact that Frank was the last person known to have seen Mary Phagan alive.
These are not peripheral details. They are central pillars of the 1913 prosecution's case, and their systematic absence from GPB's coverage transforms a contested historical trial into a one-sided morality play.
This matters because the history is far more contested than GPB presents. Leo Frank’s 1986 pardon was not an exoneration, not a finding of innocence, and not a suggestion that he did not commit the crime. It did not overturn the jury’s verdict, erase the appellate record, or declare the prosecution’s case invalid. It was a narrow posthumous pardon addressing Georgia’s failure to protect Frank while he was in custody and the state’s failure to prosecute the men who lynched him.
That missing context is crucial. Frank had already exhausted his state and federal appeals before his death, and no court ever overturned his conviction or declared him innocent. The men who lynched him called themselves the Vigilance Committee, not the “Knights of Mary Phagan,” and that committee did not become the revived Ku Klux Klan. The second Ku Klux Klan was separately organized by William J. Simmons in November 1915, in the atmosphere created by The Birth of a Nation and other racial and political currents of the period.
GPB’s lesson mentions the 1986 pardon, but it does not clearly explain how limited that pardon was. Instead, the broader framing nudges students toward the impression that the pardon somehow supports Frank’s innocence. That is misleading. The pardon addressed a failure of state custody and law enforcement after conviction. It did not reopen the trial, reverse the verdict, or absolve Leo Frank of Mary Phagan’s murder. These are documented facts, not matters of opinion.
The question for GPB is simple: Does Georgia Public Broadcasting plan to produce a serious follow-up program or classroom resource that presents Mary Phagan’s family viewpoint, the prosecution’s case, the original trial evidence, the appellate history, and the limited meaning of the 1986 pardon with the same rigor, sympathy, production value, and classroom reach it has given to Leo Frank’s exoneration narrative?
Will GPB examine the evidence the jury actually heard, including the testimony about the factory timeline, the physical evidence, the death notes, Newt Lee’s time record, Monteen Stover’s visit to Frank’s office, Jim Conley’s statements, State’s Exhibit B, and the character testimony admitted at trial?
Will GPB explain to students that Leo Frank’s conviction was reviewed through the courts, that his appeals failed, that no court overturned the verdict, and that the 1986 pardon did not declare him innocent?
Will GPB give Mary Phagan’s family, and the broader Georgia community that still regards the conviction as supported by the trial record, any meaningful place in its educational coverage? Or will GPB continue to present the case almost entirely through the lens of Frank’s supporters, Jewish communal trauma, antisemitism, Southern prejudice, and the later campaign to rehabilitate his image?
If GPB does not intend to correct the imbalance, then it owes Georgia’s taxpayers an explanation and a refund.
How does a publicly funded broadcaster justify teaching middle-school students a disputed historical case through a predetermined narrative while omitting major evidence, excluding the victim’s family perspective, and giving Frank’s innocence narrative the appearance of settled history?
Georgia students deserve historical inquiry, not a guided conclusion. They deserve the record, not a script.
@ashlyn_supper @TessHammock @RealCandaceO @TuckerCarlson @NPR @PBS
Video Source
Georgia Public Broadcasting. (2026, May 26). Justice or prejudice? The Leo Frank trial explained [Video narrated by Tess Hammock]. Georgia Stories (Education, Social Studies, grades 6 through 8). https://www.gpb.org/education/georgiastories/the-leo-frank-trial-explained
Appendix: Transcript | Justice or Prejudice? The Leo Frank Trial Explained
Word Doc Last Updated by Ashlyn Supper, May 26, 2026
On a spring afternoon in 1913, a 13-year-old girl named Mary Phagan walked into a factory in Atlanta to collect her paycheck. She would never be seen alive again. What followed shocked Georgia divided the nation and revealed how fear and prejudice could outweigh justice during a time when the South claimed it was moving forward. This is the story of Mary Phagan's murder, the trial of Leo Frank, a Jewish factory manager accused of the crime and what the case reveals about attitudes during the new South era. Mary Phagan was the daughter of poor tenant farmers who had moved to Atlanta hoping for a better life, just like many families during the New South. On April 26th, 1913, Mary went to her employer, the National Pencil Company, to collect her paycheck of $1.20. She picked up her pay from the factory's manager, Leo Frank, and supposedly left. But later that night, Mary's beaten and strangled body was found in the factory basement.
Newspapers quickly reported rumors that she'd been sexually assaulted and public anger exploded. People demanded quick justice. Initially, police focused on three main suspects, Newt Lee, the night watchmen who found Mary's body, Jim Conley, the Black Janitor, and Leo Frank, the Jewish factory manager. To really understand why Frank became such a central figure in this case, it helps to know a bit about him and why his background mattered during the era of the New South. In 1908, Leo Frank moved from New York to Atlanta for work. He was Jewish, well educated, and ran a factory owned by Northern business interests. During the New South era, Georgia was trying to modernize and grow its industry, but many people still distrusted Northern influence. And to some, Leo Frank came to symbolize that tension. Okay, so back to the investigation. Witnesses said both Frank and Phagan had been at the factory before her death, so police questioned him right away.
Frank seemed nervous and some coworkers said his timeline didn't match theirs. All of this made the police suspicious. But Jim Conley was also a strong suspect. He was seen washing red stains from his shirt and gave the police four different stories about helping Frank move Mary's body. Despite these contradictions, police and prosecutors relied heavily on Conley's statements. At the time, racial prejudice shaped the investigation. Many white Georgians believed that a black man like Conley could not have planned the crime on his own and instead accepted his story that Frank was responsible. The trial of Leo Frank took place only a few months later, surrounded by intense public pressure and anger. Crowds packed to the courtroom and newspapers continued to fuel outrage. During the trial, the prosecution's case was built largely on Jim Conley's testimony and allegations about Frank's improper conduct toward young female workers with little physical evidence to support it.
These accusations combined with antisemitic or anti-Jewish stereotypes made the jury and public more likely to believe he was guilty. After a 25-day trial, Leo Frank was convicted of Mary Phagan's murder and sentenced to death. Across the country, many people, including Jewish organizations, protested the verdict saying the trial was unfair. Frank appealed his conviction all the way to the Supreme Court, but the courts refused to overturn the verdict. In a last ditch effort, Leo Frank's attorneys sought a commutation or a lesser punishment from Georgia's governor, John M. Slaton. Slaton himself reviewed the case. After studying thousands of pages of evidence, Slaton believed Frank was innocent. Going against public opinion, he reduced Frank's sentence to life in prison. This decision enraged many Georgians, including Tom Watson, a former Georgia politician and newspaper editor who used his platform to intensify the public's anger. Protests broke out and Governor Slaton had to declare martial law.
When his term ended only a few days later, Slaton secretly left the state for his own safety. But the public's outrage wasn't only directed toward Governor Slaton. Many were still angry with Leo Frank. In August 1915, a group of powerful men from Mary Phagan's hometown called themselves The Knights of Mary Phagan. They drove to the prison, kidnapped Leo Frank from his cell and lynched him near Marietta. Crowds gathered to see the body, some even posed for photographs. Soon after the lynching, members of the Knights of Mary Phagan formed the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan, a white supremacist group that used violence to intimidate Jews, Catholics, Black people, immigrants, and anyone who challenged their views. In the wake of Leo Frank's lynching, about half of Georgia's Jewish population left the state out of fear and concern for their safety. The Leo Frank case was significant because it exposed major issues in Georgia during the New South era, including antisemitism or hatred toward Jewish people, fear of northern influence, anger toward big business and industrialization, and resistance to fairness and equal justice under the law.
Although Georgia's economy was modernizing, many people resisted social change and prejudice often overpowered truth. Decades later, in 1986, the state of Georgia officially pardoned Leo Frank, based in part on testimony from an eyewitness who claimed that Jim Conley, not Frank, was responsible for Mary Phagan's murder. The pardon didn't declare Frank innocent or guilty, but it acknowledged that he had not received adequate protection while in custody. In the end, the Leo Frank case shows that while Georgia's economy was changing during the New South era, many social attitudes were not. This case helps us understand how discrimination influenced the justice system, public opinion, and life in Georgia, even during a time of growth and progress.
Video Source
Georgia Public Broadcasting. (2026, May 26). Justice or prejudice? The Leo Frank trial explained . Georgia Stories, Education, Social Studies, grades 6 through 8. https://www.gpb.org/education/georgiastories/the-leo-frank-trial-explained
References
Ashlyn Supper. (2026, May 26). Justice or prejudice? The Leo Frank trial explained [Video transcript, prepared by Ashlyn Süpper]. Georgia Stories. Georgia Public Broadcasting Video Transcript. https://www.gpb.org/education/georgiastories/the-leo-frank-trial-explained
Tess Hammock. (2026, May 26). Justice or prejudice? The Leo Frank trial explained [Video narrated by Tess Hammock]. Georgia Public Broadcasting Video Presentation Georgia Stories. https://www.gpb.org/education/georgiastories/the-leo-frank-trial-explained
Supporting Materials For Middle School Students
Teaching Tips
Justice or Prejudice? The Leo Frank Trial Explained
Essential Question
How did the Leo Frank case reflect the social, religious, and racial tensions of Georgia’s New South era?
Supporting Questions
How did the combination of anti-Semitic stereotypes and racial prejudices influence the investigation and the final verdict in Leo Frank’s trial?
How did Leo Frank’s personal, regional, and religious background symbolize the friction between Georgia’s rural past and its “New South” industrial future?
Historical Thinking Skills
This resource gives students the opportunity to practice the following historical thinking skills:
Analyzing multiple perspectives
Interpreting cause and effect
Use the following before-viewing, while-viewing, and after-viewing suggestions to help students engage with the video and related classroom activities.
Before Viewing
Students should be familiar with the following terms and historical concepts:
New South era; goals and outcomes of the Ku Klux Klan; discrimination; racial prejudice; resistance to racial equality; anti-Semitism; lynching; pardons.
While Viewing
Have students watch and listen carefully for key points in the video that help answer the questions below.
Students may watch the video more than once and read the transcript as needed.
Who was the victim, and where was she last seen alive?
Who were the three main suspects the police initially focused on?
What three things about Leo Frank’s background made him a symbol of tension in the “New South”?
How did racial prejudice influence who the public chose to believe?
What was the main piece of evidence used against Frank, and what was missing at trial?
Why did Governor John M. Slaton decide to reduce Frank’s sentence?
What did the governor have to declare in order to handle angry protestors?
What happened to Leo Frank after he was kidnapped from prison?
What hate group was reborn shortly after Leo Frank’s lynching?
How did the Leo Frank case affect Georgia’s Jewish population?
Why did the state officially pardon Leo Frank in 1986?
After Viewing
Review student responses to the “While Viewing” questions above.
To develop student inquiry and deepen understanding, ask students the following questions and discuss them as a class:
How did Leo Frank’s identity as a well-educated Jewish man from New York make him a symbol of New South tensions and a target of public anger?
In your own words, explain how prejudice outweighed the truth in a trial where the prosecution relied on stereotypes and the belief that a Black man was not “smart enough” to plan a crime alone.
What do the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan and the claim that many Jewish residents left Georgia suggest about the atmosphere in the state after Governor Slaton commuted Frank’s sentence?
Why is it important for a state to acknowledge when the justice system fails to protect someone, as noted in the 1986 pardon of Leo Frank?
Taking It Further
Activity 1: Two Front Pages
Students will work in pairs to create two different front-page headlines and short newspaper articles about the Leo Frank case.
Side A: Write from the perspective of a 1913 newspaper using stereotypes, rumors, or public fear to create “public pressure.”
Side B: Write from the perspective of a reporter examining the evidence reviewed by Governor Slaton.
Afterward, ask the class:
How does the way a story is told change whether someone receives a fair trial?
Activity 2: “Progress” and “Prejudice” Seesaw Poster
Students will create a “Seesaw” poster. Label one side “Progress” and the other side “Prejudice.”
On the “Progress” side, students should list examples that show how Georgia was changing during the New South era, such as modern industry, new factories, urban growth, and people moving to cities in search of better opportunities.
On the “Prejudice” side, students should list the social tensions mentioned in the video, such as anti-Semitism, racial prejudice, and distrust of Northern influence.
Students should then write one sentence explaining how the “Prejudice” side eventually outweighed justice in the Leo Frank case.
Activity 3: Justice Review Board
Students will role-play a “Justice Review Board.”
First, students should read why the state granted Leo Frank a pardon in 1986. The pardon was based on the state’s failure to protect Frank while he was in custody, rather than a full declaration of innocence.
Then, students should write a short response to the following question:
Why is it important for a government to admit when its justice system fails, even if that failure happened many years earlier?
*End of Agitprop Regurgitation Questions for Students*
* * *
Based on the official documents from Georgia Public Broadcasting (GPB), here are the leaders and executives:
Georgia Public Telecommunications Commission
The commission is the state governing body that oversees GPB. As of September 2025, the board members are:
Mark Parkman — Board Chairperson (Atlanta, GA)
Jeffry Dantzler — Board Vice Chairperson (Athens, GA)
Chris Brown (Canton, GA)
Gregg Garrett (Atlanta, GA)
Mary Ellen Imlay (Atlanta, GA)
Stephen Lawson (Brookhaven, GA)
George Levert (Atlanta, GA)
Amanda Shailendra (Atlanta, GA)
Donna Sheldon (Dacula, GA)
Foundation for Public Broadcasting in Georgia, Inc.
This is the nonprofit fundraising arm of GPB. As of September 2025, the foundation board members are:
Jeff Dantzler — Chairperson (Atlanta, GA)
Mark Parkman — Vice Chairperson (Atlanta, GA)
C. Scott Akers, Jr. (Atlanta, GA)
Gail Evans (Atlanta, GA)
Bert Wesley Huffman — Ex-Officio (Atlanta, GA)
Executive Leadership
Bert Wesley Huffman — President & Chief Executive Officer of GPB, and President of the Foundation for Public Broadcasting in Georgia
Huffman was appointed CEO in August 2023 and has been with GPB since 2014. He previously served as Senior Vice President of External Affairs and President of GPB before his promotion to CEO.
Enclosed on X:
1. Screen capture of GPB X account with the search term "Leo Frank" (@mygpb)
2. Jim Conley Affidavit of May 28, 1913 (one hundred and thirteen years ago today) lip-sync video AI from Leo Frank trial brief of evidence transcript.
3. Jim Conley Affidavit of May 29th, 1913 (one hundred and thirteen years ago) lip-sync video AI from Leo Frank trial brief of evidence transcript.
4. Jim Conley Trial Testimony of August 4, 5, 6, 1913, at the Trial of Leo Frank, lip-sync video AI from Leo Frank trial brief of evidence transcript.