Archive for the ‘Christian’ Category

This Day in Jewish History, August 18, 1913, the Leo Frank Murder Trial Confession. “Patron Father” of the ADL of B’nai B’rith.

Once in a Lifetime

Something very unusual happened during the 29-day Leo Frank trial which was conducted within the courtroom of the Fulton County Superior Courthouse in the Summer of 1913. It was during that famous July term session of 1913, some would postulate that Leo Frank inadvertently revealed the solution to the contentious and controversial Mary Phagan “whodunit” “murder mystery”, when Leo Frank mounted the witness stand on Monday, August 18, 1913.

After Leo Frank sat down on the grand old witness stand to give orally his own carefully prepared, unsworn written statement to the court, it became one of the most dramatic climaxes within the case, because it was the moment everyone was waiting for, sitting on the edges of their seats, with great anticipation of what Leo Frank would say.

If ever in all the cosmos so many people became one focused eye of consciousness it was this moment.

Newspapers Announced its Coming.

The Leo Frank oral statement given to the court was made three weeks deep into the proceedings, it’s was significant because it was at that point near the tail-end of his own contentious Monday, July 28 to Tuesday, August 26, 1913, murder trial, the Monday, 18th of August speech was also just one week before the jury would render its verdict and final recommendation.

Which brings one forth to the single most important unanswered question over the last century by researchers, scholars, academics, southerners, northerners, lawyers, judges, court room staff, historians, revisionists and secondary sources concerning the Leo Frank trial:

Question to Answer After Studying the Leo Frank Case: After mounting the witness stand on Monday, the 18th day of August 1913, did Leo Frank during a segment of the latter half of his four-hour trial testimony divulge what amounted to an unmistakable virtual murder confession?

The “Leo Frank murder confession” was three fold and it was interpreted, threaded and articulated by the two state prosecution team lawyers, the Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey for the Atlanta Circuit and Special Assistant Solicitor Frank Arthur Hooper, as part of their closing arguments, and it was ultimately acknowledged as such unanimously by the 13-man empaneled collective-mind of Judge Leonard Strickland Roan and a Jury of 12 men.

Many neutral observers who put a magnifying glass upon Leo Frank’s trial testimony and are familiar with the three dimensional second floor layout diagrams based on the (see: State’s Exhibit A, Brief of Evidence, 1913) of the 1913 National Pencil Factory, ask: Did Leo Frank’s official trial testimony statement possibly suggest that he might have been in the time and place, the murder might have occurred? (See: Brief of Evidence, 1913, pages 185 and 186 of the official record)

To new independent scholars, observers and researchers interested in the Leo Frank Case: Only the official stenographed Leo Frank trial testimony, the National Pencil Company floor diagrams and an honest open mind without self-deception can answer the Leo Frank murder confession question definitively.

It is important that anyone who is interested in the Leo Frank case to ask the August 18, 1913 Leo Frank murder confession question and then to also ask themselves if there are possibly two other (for a total of three murder confessions) Leo Frank murder confessions according to the surviving documents of the official record.

Where There Three Leo Frank Murder Confessions?

Leo Frank Murder Confession Number One

Was the first Leo Frank Murder Confession given to James Conley (BOE, 1913) by Leo Frank at the factory on that infamous Day of Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913 (James Conley, Affidavits, May, 1913 and Trial Testimony, BOE, August, 1913)?

Leo Frank Murder Confession Number Two

Was the second Leo Frank murder confession given that same day to Lucille Frank in the evening inside their bedroom at the Frank-Selig residence (Minola Mcknight, State’s Exhibit J, June 3, 1913; Cremation request in the Notarized Final Will and Testament of Lucille Selig Frank, 1954)?

Three Total Leo Frank Murder Confessions

To answer the question of whether or not the surviving records indicate Leo Frank made three separate murder confessions, one should start with questioning “the third Leo Frank murder confession” which occurred on Monday, August 18, 1913 at the capital murder trial.

Monteen Stover vs. Jim Conley

For the last century, Frankites (Leo Frank Cult Members), Leo Frank partisans (people who take the side of Leo Frank), professional Leo Frank historical writers and the position of the Jewish community since 1913 to current, asserts that Jim Conley was the star witness not Monteen Stover, but was he really, or was she really?

What does the depth of the official record reveal?

The Depth of the Leo Frank Trial Reduced to its Nexus

21st century Leo Frank scholars who have read and studied more than 3,000 pages of the surviving official records in the case, understand everything in this case can be reduced to the “Trinity”, no religious reference applies here.

The Trinity is the Solution to the Mary Phagan Murder Mystery: Monteen Stover’s Testimony + State’s Exhibit B + Leo Frank Trial Testimony = Case Solved! That’s the Tight and Narrow of it!

Stitched Together…

Has Leo Frank inadvertently put himself in the metal room bathroom sometime between noon and 12:50, or possibly even “12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07” (State’s Exhibit B, Monday, April 28, 1913) with an “unconscious” bathroom visit to the metal room (BOE, August 18, 1913), deduced from the “triangle” of Monteen Stover’s official sworn testimony at the trial (BOE, 1913), State’s Exhibit B, and Leo Franks Trial Statement response to Monteen Stover on August 18, 1913 (BOE, 1913)?

Walk with Leo Frank Across the Second Floor From His Inner Office to the Metal Room Where the Bathroom is Located

Does Frank “unconsciously” put himself walking from his second floor inner office, through his outer office, into the hall way, then down the hallway, to and through the metal room door, into the metal room with his “unconscious bathroom” visit to the only bathroom in the metal room in response to Monteen Stover’s trial testimony?

In order to be able to answer this question, one must study the factory floor plans in the Brief of Evidence, which are available to review online in the 1,800 page Georgia Supreme Court Leo M. Frank case file in the online Leo M. Frank archive.

Please Review These National Pencil Company Factory Diagrams

1. State’s Exhibit A (Small Image) or State’s Exhibit A (Large Image)

2. Different Version: Side view of the factory diagram showing the front half of the factory

3. Bert Green Diagram of the National Pencil Company

Indisputable Acknowledgment Number One is Based on the Factory Diagrams: One has to go into and through the metal room door to get into the metal room where the ONLY toilet on the second floor exists, which is down the hall from Leo Frank’s office. Did Mary go to that toilet to use the bathroom? or did Mary Phagan go into the metal room to find out if the brass sheets had come in?

The Ultimate Blunder

Observers are wondering if Leo Frank lost his mind in placing himself in the very place the prosecution spent a month (29 days) trying to convince the Jury where the murder of Mary Phagan really occurred and ultimately between the time frame of 12:02 and 12:19? The reason observers ask this, is because Leo Frank told the 7-man panel lead by Coroner Paul Donehee, and the 6 man Jury of the Coroners Inquest, he (Leo Frank) did not use the bathroom all day long, not that he (Leo Frank) had forgotten, but that he had not gone to the bathroom at all. The visually-blind prodigious savant Coroner Paul Donehee with his highly refined bullshit detector was incredulous as might be expected. Who doesn’t use the bathroom all day long? It was as if Leo Frank was mentally and physically trying to distance himself from that place.

Why is the Leo Frank Murder Confession Question Important?

The importance of asking if Leo M. Frank made a near confession is an honest and genuine one; it is a question that has inexplicably not been touched by anyone since 1913 to 1915, and it is hoped that beyond 2013 with the centennial of the Mary Phagan murder, every contemporary writer would broach the subject of the August 18, 1913 “Leo Frank murder confession question” and comment on it after ignoring it for 100 years, but the likelihood is slim to none, because the super vast majority of people who produce works and treatments on the Leo Frank trial are members of the Cult of Leo Frank, known as the Frankites.

Bottom Line Can the ‘Question’ Be Answered by the Official Record?

So we will address and articulate the Leo Frank murder confession, here and now, in full, and hope the word gets out: Leo Frank made an unmistakable murder confession on August 18, 1913 at his own capital murder trial that he strangled Mary Phagan in the metal room on April 26, 1913, based on a commonsense interpretation of the official record.

The Leo Frank Murder Confession vs. Leo Frank was Scapegoated

The Leo Frank confession question is one that has puzzled scholars for more than a century and fair-minded observers are wondering why Leo Frank partisans, the Jewish Community, Jewish writers and film producers, and other Leo Frank activists keep dodging and avoiding the Leo Frank murder confession question that Leo Frank’s testimony suggests, since it was first delivered Monday, August 18, 1913.

Anti-Gentile Smear Campaign

From the Southerner Perspective, “Instead of discussing the Leo Frank confession question, why do Jews and Leo Frank partisans unilaterally resort to defaming the descendants of European-Americans with what amounts to unsubstantiated anti-Gentile blood libel, false accusations of conspiracy and scapegoatery, and bigoted anti-Gentile smears which still continue unabated to this very day.” Some Anti-Semitic Southerners think Jews are trying to instigate another civil war.

100 Years of Hate, Rebuked

For 100 years the Jewish community has been unraveling an unrelenting cultural and race war against Gentiles with the accusation of collective guilt, to wit: that collectively European-American pervasive anti-Semitic bigotry unilaterally inspired the anti-Jewish railroading, framing, conviction and assassination of an innocent Jew, the B’nai B’rith President Leo M. Frank, through the years 1913 to 1915.

Jewish-Gentile Tensions Smoldering Beyond Smears to a Final Global Conflict?

Even the average observer is wondering if these very loud and lopsided century old anti-Gentile smears made against European-Americans, coming from the Frankite side of the Leo Frank case, are part of a wider historical blame game by Jews against Gentiles. The Leo Frank case has become another example of the unforgivable instigation of conflict by Jews against Gentiles that remains mostly unchallenged today.

5,800 Years of International Jewish Cultural Terrorism Reaching a Boiling Crescendo

For European-Americans, the Leo Frank Case is not a Jewish-Gentile conflict, but simply a grizzly murder case involving an infatuated boss who is high functioning despite some very serious psychological, behavioral and emotional problems “hidden under the surface”, who couldn’t handle rejection and felt frustrated, scorned-spurned, rejected and thus became ever more aggressively persistent to the point of violent rage.

Because Jews are stacking up fabricating pathological lies and falsifying everything about the case, using the case as part of their wider culture war against Gentiles and Western Civilization, it is artificially turning up the heat concerning Jewish-Gentile tensions, that could lead to a boiling crescendo.

Not Even the Most Prominent Frankite Would Even Dare Broach the Subject

The Leo Frank scholar Steve Oney, the seasoned tabloid virtuoso and Jewish Frankite Cult Rock Superstar, does not even dare to address the “Leo Frank Confession Question” in his egoist and pretentiously biased, but well written 2003 book, ‘And the Dead Shall Rise: The Murder of Mary Phagan and the Lynching of Leo Frank’.

Back to the Ignoring of the Leo Frank Confession Question by Frankites

Observers are wondering why no contemporary Frankite (Leo Frank partisan) writers have ever analyzed or offered their spin on this very reasonable “Leo Frank Confession Question”? Why won’t they even peep a single word about it?

Answer:

Is it because it might be wasteful for any contemporary writer in the Frank partisan camp to touch this subject, as it would wipe out a century long racist blame game by a large and vocal segment of the Jewish community and Frankites, a defamation campaign by Jews which have been perpetuating the Leo Frank anti-Semitic blood libel hoax for more than 100 years?

From the Prosecution Side of the Equation – The Age of Enlightenment: 2012 and Beyond

The Leo Frank anti-Semitism hoax came to its end with the centennial of the strangulation of Mary Phagan and Leo Frank between 2013 to 2015 as the Leo Frank subject went viral and more people reviewed the primary source materials than ever before in history! It is hoped that the smears and slanders directed at Hugh M. Dorsey, Southerners and European-Americans as a collective will eventually die off, or there is likely to be an exacerbation of fighting words and increased conflict between Jews and Gentiles between 2013 and 2015.

The Last Man to Articulate the Leo Frank Murder Confession

The last man with enough fiery brass to address this question superbly was the ginger headed genius Tom Watson in 1915, published through his Jeffersonian Publishing Company in Watson’s Magazine 1915 issues January, March, August, September and October and his 1914 / 1915 Jeffersonian newspapers (Watson, 1914 & 1915). Before Watson, Hugh Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper in late August 1913 both threaded and incorporated the Leo Frank murder confession as part of their long closing arguments (American State Trials Volume X 1918, “Closing Arguments of Hooper and Dorsey August 1913”)

The Best Articulation of the Leo Frank Murder Confession

Tom Watson does not get original credit for making this analysis about Leo Frank’s statement being a near murder confession, but he does articulate it better and more colorfully than Mr. Hooper and Hugh M. Dorsey. True or False?

Compare the three by reading: Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey, followed by The Argument of Mr. Frank Hooper where they both elucidate in their final closing arguments what sounds like a near confession being made by Leo M. Frank. Compare Hugh M. Dorsey’s and Mr. Hooper’s articulations of Leo Frank’s bathroom statement together against Tom Watson’s version published August and Sept 1915 in Watson’s Magazine. It reveals this case centers around Monteen Stover more than it does James Conley aka Jim Conley.

Which Closing Argument is More Convincing Neutral Observers? The closing argument of Dorsey or Hooper? How does former Senator and Attorney Tom Watson’s post trial testimony analysis?

A POWERFUL Historically Significant Question Emerges From the Testimony of Leo Frank

One hundred years after Leo Frank gave his trial testimony on August 18, 1913, dispassionate researchers, revisionists and neutral scholars who meticulously studied the Leo Frank case began asking a much grander scale and historically intriguing question:

How many times in United States history has the prime suspect and defendant made what amounts to a virtual confession at their own capital murder trial?!

It is a question that has never been publicly asked before until here and now.

Don’t take our word on it…

Independent Reader: Can You Solve the Leo Frank Confession Equation With the Trial Testimony?

Let’s begin with opened minds.

The Detailed Approach To the Leo Frank Murder Confession, August 18, 1913:

First

Before first independently undertaking the task and then answering the Leo Frank murder confession question, one must be very familiar with several separate elements of the official record: one must first read Leo Frank’s State’s Exhibit B, pay special attention and note the time Leo Frank said Mary Phagan had arrived at his office. State’s Exhibit B is concerning a lawyer and police witnessed, stenographer captured, statement made on the morning of Monday, April 28, 1913, by Leo M. Frank about Mary Phagan entering his office between 12:05 and 12:10, with a “maybe” 12:07.

Nothing about a bathroom visit is mentioned in State’s Exhibit B or the inquest testimony given by Leo Frank, but it is finally revealed at the trial after Monteen Stover, the Star Witness, gives her testimony. Even more startling is Leo Frank told the inquest that he did not use the bathroom all day, not that he forgot, but that he didn’t use it. He was trying mentally and physically to keep himself away from that side of the building on his floor.

Second

Read and study the trial statement of Monteen Stover, about her arriving in Leo Frank’s inner and outer office at 12:05 and looking for him and waiting for him for five minutes based on the big clock on the wall in Leo Frank’s office, until she eventually leaves at 12:10; followed by the testimony of Leo Frank defense witness Detective Harry Scott, then the Assistant Superintendent of the Pinkerton Detective Agency, see: Leo Frank murder trial testimony for both statements (BOE, 1913).

Third

Then read the Leo M. Frank Murder Trial Testimony, where Leo Frank says two very intriguing things to counter the testimony of Monteen Stover as he slips in two interesting defenses. First, Leo Frank does not mention seeing Monteen Stover in his office or at all, and pay very close attention to what Leo Frank then explains where he might have “unconsciously” gone on the second floor of the National Pencil Company between 12:05 to 12:10 as the reason he was not seen by Monteen Stover in his office and second, Leo Frank says the reason Monteen Stover couldn’t see him [Leo Frank] in his office was that the safe door was open and blocked off the door in the inner office out of view. Both of these statements were newfangled revelations for the purpose of creating two doorways or possible alibis countering Monteen Stover’s testimony concerning Leo Frank’s whereabouts between 12:05 and 12:10 – both of Leo Frank’s defenses, “the safe door” and the “unconsciously” going to the bathroom in the metal room were totally shocking revelations, because one put him at the scene of the crime and the other was a complete fabrication – Monteen Stover was very motivated and wanted her paycheck (this was never disputed) and thus she checked both of Leo Frank’s inner and outer offices and saw the time on the clock in Leo Frank’s inner office from 12:05 to 12:10.

Monteen Stover even looked down the hall and saw the door to the metal room closed shut. Frank was presumably on the other side of that shut door finishing off Mary Phagan.

Fourth

If you need even more help in solving the Leo Frank confession question, see what prosecution team members Hugh Dorsey and Frank Hooper have to say about Leo Frank’s “unconscious” bathroom admission (The August 1913, Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey, Published 1914; The August 1913, Frank Arthur Hooper, Closing Arguments, American State Trials Volume X, Published 1918). In other words, start by first seeing if you can connect the dots between these three people: Harry Scott, Monteen Stover and Leo Frank, via their own official trial testimony and statements.

If you want more definitive explanations of the Leo Frank confession question, add two more people at the trial to help articulate it, Hugh Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper, that is if you need five people (Dorsey, Hooper, Harry Scott, Monteen Stover and Leo Frank) to help you make a stronger connection than the three witnesses.

If you want to save time you can read the best analysis ever written on the Leo Frank case. Tom Watson’s reviews of the case provide the best analysis, they are published in Watson’s Magazine August and September of 1915.

Closing Arguments August 1913

Prosecution team leader Hugh Dorsey and prosecution team member Mr. Frank Arthur Hooper would later interpret in their closing arguments, the exact words Leo Frank said during the very specific exultation in his testimony, as a very strong admission of guilt, but they were both careful to not focus too much on it, but instead bring each point of evidence together to concatenate the circumstantial chain of evidence around him. The strategy of the State’s prosecution resembled “death by a thousands wounds”, rather than a single death blow, even though the Leo Frank virtual murder confession amounted to virtual suicide.

Over 2 dozen impartial men, half of them Juryman and the other half Judges, from 1913 to 1915, all called to review the case affirmed the guilty verdict by not disturbing it and they certainly didn’t miss the Leo Frank murder confession either.

“The Lone Jurywoman”

Lucille’s will notarized in 1954 (The Will of Lucille Selig Frank, 1954) specifies she wanted to be cremated instead of being buried next to Leo Frank (Stern-Frank plot #2) at the Mount Carmel Cemetery in Queens NY in Stern-Frank plot #1 which was reserved for her, it was a smidgen odd, but tends to add another powerful undeniable vote of guilt against Leo Frank by the the only “Jurywoman”, Lucy Selig Frank. The cremation tends to vindicate Leo Frank murder confession #2 known as State’s Exhibit J (Minola McKnight, June 3, 1913).

Fifth

Tom Watson’s Fire and Brim Stone Articulation

If you want a better understanding and historical perspective of the Leo Frank Murder confession, you can also read Watson’s Magazine’s five magazine issues which cover the Leo Frank trial within the January, March, August, September and October of 1915. The “unconscious” bathroom visit is also covered in some of the issues of the Jeffersonian newspaper as well 1914 and 1915. To cut to the chase though, skip Watson’s Magazine Jan and March 1915, the magazine issues that cover the Leo Frank murder confession the best are the August and September issues of Watson’s Magazine – start there.

The Shocking Blunder

How it all began in more specific details: SOME PEOPLE COMPLETELY MISSED IT!

On August 18th, 1913, Leo Frank mounted the witness stand at his murder trial and while giving testimony to the Court and Jury, throughout his half-chronological, half-rambling, and mostly mind numbing and brain bending four-hour speech he revealed the solution to the Mary Phagan Murder Mystery. It was revealed like this, After putting the courtroom to sleep during his Bueller-Bueller-Bueller Bueller-Bueller-Bueller (Ferris Buellers Day Off) four hour speech, like a foxman, he snuck in some very specific statements about his “unconscious” whereabouts in the shuttered and nearly empty pencil factory during the specific time frame of the Mary Phagan murder, but he was careful not to be too tight and narrow, so he softened it by widening the time spectrum on it, but he also made another mistake to immediately explain why Monteen Stover did not see him with a supposed safe door blocking his view. The two explanations were shocking.

It was the first time in all of his numerous statements that he revealed his “unconscious” whereabouts after noon on 4-26-1913. Though the slipped in testimony might have been missed by the average Joe Cracker and Sally Whitebread, it absolutely wasn’t missed by the lucid Prosecution team members, who made a point to articulate it in their closing arguments as a single thread woven amongst numerous other threads into a hang mans noose. The prosecution closing arguments were remarkable, they were presented on a silver platter to the conscientious Judge and highly attentive Jury.

High Society

The Leo Frank murder confession was not missed by the social and political elite, the highest legal minds of Georgia who were incensed by the illegal shenanigans and black handed tactics of the criminal bribery scandals created by the Leo Frank defense team that unraveling from 1913 to 1915.

The upper strata of Georgia would respond to Leo Frank defense team successful bribery efforts, extensive witness tampering and chicanery, by finally orchestrating one of the most nervy and ballsy commando raids, it has been described as one of the most audacious prison breaks in U.S. history and thus de facto overturning the criminal-traitorous John M Slaton’s toady and cronyesque commutation.

The elites of Georgia delivered hanging justice for Leo Frank in favor of the Jury which consciously chose the determination of Guilt without recommendation of mercy. The Jury collectively and specifically voted for a hanging as the just payment of the guilty verdict in other words. In the eyes of the prosecution side of the Leo Frank case the Jury was ultimately vindicated by the aristocratic minds of high society Marietta and Georgia.

Take off the blinders Frankites

True modern Leo Frank scholars didn’t miss the Leo Frank confession either and are now asking Frankites “how about it?”

Now Test Your Intuitive and Detective Mind

Take a deep breath and read the mind-numbing trial testimony of Leo Frank and see if you can figure it out yourself, before referring to Dorsey, Hooper and Watson. However if you can’t figure it out on your own without Dorsey, Hooper and Watson, keep on reading here for the deeper analysis and details, then check the original sources of the Leo Frank case on your own to confirm their veracity and truth.

Frank Arthur Hooper Made His Final Closing Argument Before Dorsey in Late August 1913

In the concluding days, Mr. Frank Hooper of the Leo Frank prosecution team in his final closing argument would correctly suggest to the Jury that Frank’s statement about an “unconscious” bathroom visit, was the first time Frank mentioned it (Frank denied using the bathroom previously at the Coroners Inquest). Hooper asserts, Frank’s statement put him on the other side of the building, directly in the metal room where the bathroom was, the alleged area of the crime scene (Hooper, August 1913).

Frank Arthur Hooper was indeed correct, because Leo Frank told Harry Scott witnessed by another police officer name Black, he [Leo Frank] was in his office every minute from noon to half past noon, and in State’s Exhibit B, Leo Frank never mentions a bathroom visit all day which seems odd. At the Coroner’s inquest Coroner Paul Donehoo was incredulous as he should have been that Leo Frank claimed he had not used the bathroom at all that day – it was unbelievable and raised red flags.

An Excerpt from Mr. Hooper’s Final Argument

There was Mary. Then, there was another little girl, Monteen Stover. Frank never knew Monteen was there, and Frank said he stayed in his office from 12 until after 1, and never left. Monteen waited around for five minutes. Then she left. The result? There comes for the first time from the lips of Frank, the defendant, the admission that he might have gone to some other part of the building during this time, he didn’t remember clearly. (August, 1913)

The other part of the building Mr. Hooper is referring to is the metal room, which is just down the hall from Leo Frank’s office and the place that all the evidence suggests Mary Phagan was really murdered. Review the original references listed below and make your own conclusion about whether Leo Frank was guilty or not.

Analysis of Hooper

Indeed, for the first time, in 3 months, it was only after Monteen Stover said Leo Frank’s office was empty from 12:05 to 12:10 when she went to get her pay on April 26, 1913, that’s when Leo Frank for the first time came up with his “unconscious” bathroom visit to the metal room – a shocking revelation interpreted as the Leo Frank murder confession.

What was so shocking about the metal room bathroom revelation is that Leo Frank had more than 3 months to prepare a statement for the court and jury, and for the first time at the trial mentions an “unconscious” bathroom visit to the very place the prosecution had spent 4 months building a case trying to prove the metal room was the REAL scene of the crime (not the basement where Mary had been dragged and dumped).

The virtual murder confession left people who had hoped for a good fight scratching their heads and disappointed, wondering why Leo Frank would “tip his hand” and drop a such a bombshell spoiler, by say something so ineluctably and irreversibly incriminating at the trial.

It was an absolute total let down, after all everyone was hoping for a good fight, not even Frankite spin could re-engineer this ugly debacle Leo Frank unveiled with remarkable stupidity, so the Frankites simply ignore it, knowing 99 times out of 100 the average person is never going to take the time to read and study the official record known as the 1913 Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence.

Tom Watson’s “Frank Entrapped Himself Beyond Escape”

Tom Watson would describe Frank’s “unconscious” metal room bathroom revelation, colorfully saying Frank had implicated and entrapped himself BEYOND ESCAPE (Watson, Sept 1915). Watson, like most legal observers, considered it an inescapable confession that Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan in the metal room, because Frank by his own words put himself in the metal room toilet during the approximate time span of the murder. More specifically, Frank stated Mary Phagan was in his office between 12:05 and 12:10, maybe 12:07 on Saturday, April 26, 1913 (State’s Exhibit B, 1913). Most observers could easily consider the “Maybe 12:07” in State’s Exhibit B as the moment Leo Frank was sure Mary Phagan was dead or that Mary Phagan made her last breath, because the words rung vividly indicating an engram of exultation and truth. If Frank said in State’s exhibit B that Mary arrived between 12:05 and 12:10, and that he was “unconsciously” in the metal room bathroom in response to Monteen Stover’s testimony, it created the most tight and narrow admission of guilt possible without outright coming out and admitting it in a full confession.

Leo Frank Murder Confession? August 18, 1913. Yes, No or Maybe? None of the Above?

What about the other side of the Leo Frank confession question? Let’s Give Leo Frank the “Benefit of the Doubt”.

Though to be fair, the original confession question itself sounds loaded, like it presumes Leo M. Frank makes a near confession about murdering little Mary Phagan. The confession or near confession is one interpretation by 3 published principles and attorneys, Dorsey (Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey, 1914), Hooper (American State Trials Volume X, 1918), Watson (Jeffersonian Newspaper, 1914, 1915; Watson’s Magazine, 1915), others might interpret it as just a harmless visit to the bathroom in the metal room at about the same time the murder occurred. In fact, Leo Frank might have been in the bathroom in the metal room, while Phagan was being killed on the first floor by Jim Conley.

The only problem with the Jim Conley murder theory is that there is little to no evidence to support it and Leo Frank made a blunder saying Lemmie Quinn came to his office at 12:20, making such an attack on the first floor impossible unless Lemmie walked in on it. At the trial Leo Frank changed his story and said Mary Phagan arrived in his office 10 to 15 minutes after his stenographer left at 12:02, putting Mary Phagans arrival at his office from 12:12 to 12:17 (his 4th different version of her arrival), and her staying in his office for 2 minutes meant she should have nearly bumped into Lemmie Quinn.

The Lemmie Quinn revelation made the murder on the first floor hard to believe, without Lemmie Quinn walking in on it. Most historians though, think the Lemmie Quinn revelation was likely a lie and a blunder. What made the first floor “Jim Conley theory” even less plausible is the fact Leo Frank was less than 35 feet away, he would have certainly heard a scream in the silent building.

Making Matters Worse

The Leo Frank defense only made a confusing half-hearted attempt to blame Jim Conley at the trial that came off as insincere, insecure, half-baked, hokey and desperate. True or False? What does the official record say concerning the failed blame Jim Conley attempts by the defense team, which was partly abandoned and changed through the trial, for a different version of events, making it seem phony and disingenuous? The defense version of the murder will be discussed in greater detail in another section of the Leo Frank web site.

The Defense Version of the Murder

The Leo Frank defense team would claim the murder of Mary Phagan happened when she went downstairs to the highest traffic point in the Factory, the front entrance and in their version, Mary Phagan was accosted by the sweeper Jim Conley for her paltry $1.20 so he could buy booze – a pretty good plausible attempt, but there is one problem with it. Why would Jim Conley be waiting around in the factory all morning long, when he was paid $6 the evening before, shouldn’t he be at the bar drinking 15 cent pitchers or 5 cent pints of beer?

Zero Evidence on the first floor

Though the police found no blood, or evidence of such a struggle near the entry or first floor lobby, and because it was the highest traffic spot in the factory and Jim had been sitting there all morning according to Alonzo Mann, and other people had seen Jim Conley sitting there during the late morning like Mrs. White, it was more likely the truth that Leo Frank asked Conley to be his look out, rather than Jim Conley had come to work to rob factory employees. Observers are wondering when in the history of the 13 billion year old universe, does a negro come to work on a Saturday holiday when he doesn’t have to. It was more likely the truth, that Jim Conley was called to come to work by Leo Frank, who would have the factory all to himself in the afternoon and would need a look out for his usual Saturday whoring. Something else happened instead on that infamous April 26, 1913.

The defense also suggested Jim Conley dumped Phagans body down the scuttle hole, and if that were the case her 120lb body would have hit the ladder all the way down during the 14ft drop and would have broken, bruised, cracked or bled on the ladder – the autopsy showed no indications of a 14ft fall against a ladder. The other problem with the scuttle hole theory was that there were drag marks noted coming from the front of the elevator shaft leading to the pile Mary had been dumped onto and there is no record of evidence showing Phagan had any broken or cracked bones or had bruises from that kind of fall either (elevator shaft fall). Phagan would have at least bruised. The defense then abandoned the scuttle hole dump theory, and claimed Conley threw her down the elevator shaft, there were no bruises to indicate she had been thrown down the elevator shaft and if she had, why didn’t she land on Steve Oney’s “Shit in the Shaft”?

Defense Version

National Pencil Company Factory Diagram 1, 1913
National Pencil Company Factory Diagram 2, 1913
Stages of the Defense Version of the Mary Phagan Murder

The Leo Frank Case Open or Closed?

When did Mary Phagan Arrive and When Was She Killed?

According to Leo Frank: The answer is sometime between 12:02 and 12:17 according to Leo Frank at various times, at different times he said Mary Phagan arrived: 12:02, 12:03, 12:05 to 12:10, Maybe 12:07, or 12:12 to 12:17, or 12:02 to 12:03, which answer of Leo Frank’s do you believe? He gave more than 4 during different times in total concerning when Mary Phagan stepped into his office. Immediately after the murder, the time Leo Frank gave, was very close to noon, minute or two after noon, but as time went by, the arrival time moved away from noon toward a quarter after noon and more.

Time Shift Summary of Leo Frank

On Sunday, April 27 1913, Frank told police officers that Mary had arrived in his office at about 12:02 to 12:03. Monday, April 28th 1913, it turned into 12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07, at the Coroners inquest Jury it would turn into 12:10 to 12:15 and at the murder trial it would be 12:12 to 12:17 when Frank made a four hour statement to the Jury on August 18, 1913 – the day he made his virtual murder confession. For some reason the time shift seems to be away from the time it most likely really happened to a much latter time.

Who Received the Different Versions?

Leo Frank had given numerous and different accounts of when Mary Phagan had arrived at his second floor office to: Detective Black; Chief of Detectives Newport A. Lanford; Defense witness Detective Harry Scott of the Pinkerton Detective Agency; The 7 men of the Coroner’s Inquest Jury; and lastly at the Murder Trial Jury of Thirteen Men (Judge + 12 Jurymen).

Let’s Review: What do the following details reveal?:

Sunday

1: On Sunday April 27th 1913, Frank told police officers, Mary Phagan arrived minutes after miss Hall left his office at noon on April 26th 1913. Minutes after translates into 12:02 or 12:03, given that Miss Hall left at noon.

Monday

2: On Monday, April 28 1913, Frank made a “statement” to Police Chief of Detectives Newport A. Lanford in front of numerous other police officers and a stenographer. Leo Frank said that Mary Phagan arrived at the second floor office of the factory between “12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07” (as documented in State’s Exhibit B). thus the arrival time increase by 3, 5, 8 minutes from 12:02 to 12:03 to 12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07. The “maybe” 12:07, some feel indicates some kind of mental revelation as the exact time, Phagan’s strangled body stopped struggling and breathing.

Inquest

3: At the Coroners Inquest Jury of 7 jurists (Coroner Donehoo plus 6 jurymen), Frank said Mary Phagan had arrived between about 12:10 and 12:15. Now the time moved past his 2 other statements, by 8 to 13 minutes, presumably to be much closer to when “Lemmie Quinn arrived” in his office at 12:20 to 12:25 to make it seem like he didn’t have enough time to strangle Phagan.

Murder Trial (July 28 to August 26 1913), August 18, 1913 – Confession Question

4: On August 18, 1913, Leo Frank said Mary Phagan arrived between 12:12 to 12:17. More specifically, during his murder trial Frank said that Mary Phagan came into his office 10 to 15 minutes after Miss Hall left (Miss Hall testified she left immediately to a minute after noon) his office just after noon, putting Mary in his office in this changing version from as early as 12:10 through 12:12 to as late as 12:15 through 12:17 (assuming Miss Hall left at 12:00, 12:01 or 12:02).

Leo Frank Gave At Least Four Different Versions of Mary Phagan’s Arrival Time. Observers want to ask Leo Frank: so which one is it Leo? and why are all four so numerically precise and so disparate?. Observers are asking why Leo keeps moving the time forward into the future? Knowing the answer is to likely distance himself from when the crime occurred. The Frankites over the last 100 years give very poor analysis of these vastly different times Leo Frank gave for obvious reasons.

The Big Fat Office Clock in Front of Leo Frank

The problem is that Leo Frank had a big clock right there in his office which was an important part of his 5 years employment at the pencil manufacturing plant, so people are only half-wondering why the time of arrival keeps changing, when the clock was ticking so steadily and smoothly. Clock accuracy was only off by a minute or few, either way, 100 years ago, adding another intriguing dimension to the time factor, but irregardless, Frank knew the exact time Phagan arrived in his office, but he changed it 4 times.

The bottom line concerning the time: Frank repeatedly changed when Mary Phagan arrived and his whereabouts thereafter.

In What Way Did the Time Leo Frank Gave About Phagan Arriving Change?

Each time Frank gave a slightly different version of when Mary Phagan had arrived that inched forward by minutes, sometimes he used exact clock times, other times he used slightly more vague terms, putting the arrival time in terms in reference of when other people left (like when Hattie hall and alonzo mann left) or arrived (Lemmie Quinn). How come every time Leo Frank is asked when Mary Phagan arrived the time changes completely. People are wondering why a precise accountant who logs the exact time, numbers and money so precisely can’t seem to give a precise answer when a big clock was right in front of him at the time. Watson says Leo Frank repeatably lied about his whereabouts and that of Mary Phagan, because Leo Frank’s statements were contradicted by others and himself (Watson, 1915).

The Ever Widening Time Spectrum

The ranges of time Leo Frank said Mary Phagan had arrived in his office and left according to the different statements he made varied from as early as 12:02, 12:03, 12:05, 12:07, 12:10, 12:12, 12:15 to 12:17. The problematic nature of this 15+ minute time range is that Leo Frank is unaccountable during this period in terms of their being a single witness to testify as to having seen Franks exact whereabouts.

The hypothetical

If Mary Phagan had come after Monteen Stover at 12:11 or 12:12 (wouldn’t they bump into each other?), instead of the other way around which really happened (Mary Phagan came before Monteen Stover), Leo Frank would put himself in the metal room bathroom alone without Mary Phagan and thus Monteen Stover would wait in Leo Frank’s office while Leo Frank was making #2 in the metal room toilet, because if he was making #1 instead in the metal room bathroom, he would have been back within the 5 minute time span that Monteen Stover waited for him in his office from 12:05 to 12:10. Applying the common sense test: In general, no man pees for 5 minutes or more. It would mean Frank was making #2, and he came from the toilet into his office when Mary arrived. This is what Leo Frank is postulating as his defense. Leo Frank is changing his testimony to account for Monteen Stovers testimony.

Newfangled: Leo Frank Forgot Lemmie Quinn for One Week

Frank also seemed to have forgotten Lemmie Quinn for nearly a whole week after the murder and because Frank waited so long to bring him up, it was considered suspicious and highly questionable as to whether it really happened or not. Both Leo Frank and Lemmie Quinn, say that Quinn arrived between 12:20 to 12:25 at Frank’s office, and mention this at the coroners inquest and again at Leo Frank’s murder trial, but not before both of these events.

The coroner wanted to know why Leo Frank had waited so long to bring this new evidence forward, even after he remembered it before the Coroners Inquest. Why did he wait to bring it up at the Coroners Inquest and not tell the police sooner (Oney, 2003).

Two employees would testify that they saw Lemmie Quinn leave the building area at around 11:30 to 11:45, putting Quinns testimony about coming to Franks office at 12:20 in question as possible perjury and a poorly concocted arrangement to make it seem like Frank did not have enough time to kill Mary Phagan.

Lemmie Quinns Affidavit Contradicted His Testimony

The affidavit in the Leo Frank brief of evidence by Lemmie Quinn makes it even more impossible that he might have come back to the office to visit Frank and ask about speaking with Schiff at the factory – on a holiday.

Schiff Never Missed Work For Five Years

Schiff who was not supposed to even be at the factory that day, broke the whole Lemmie Quinn visit apart. Schiff prided himself on never missing a day of work in five years, why on August 26,1913, did he suddenly break this 5 year perfect record? He was never supposed to come to work on that holiday.

The whole Lemmie Quinn and Leo Frank 12:20 to 12:25 breaks down under the common sense test.

Frank couldn’t even manufacture it with Lemmie Quinn at 12:20.

Since the whole Lemmie Quinn thing is a bunch of hokey malarkey — manufactured evidence, why didn’t Frank have Lemmie visiting him earlier to account for him? Because it would have pushed the murder time closer to when the murder really started and happened which was around 12:03PM . Not only that, it would mean that defense would inadvertently shrink the time Jim Conley had to “commit the crime” if Lemmie came earlier than 12:20 to 12:25, because according to the defense, Mary has to walk down the stairs first before she can get assaulted by Jim Conley. Leo Frank admitted Mary Phagan was in his office for about 1 to 2 minutes.

 

 

Debunking Lemmie Quinn and his Contrived Testimony in three steps

Back to Witness Lemmie Quinn who puts Leo Frank in his office after the murder supposedly already occurred, but Lemmie Quinn’s newfangled testimony (Read Leo Frank’s account of it and read Lemmie Quinns version in the official record) sets off the highly refined bullshit detector of Coroner Donehoo and others had an orange alert on the Frank-Quinn matrix and so did the prosecution and thirteen man Jury at the murder trial

First

Two female witnesses would testify and make statements that would put Lemmies testimony into doubt, saying Lemmie had already come at 11:30 to 11:45, come and gone.

Second

So would Lemmie Quinns early affidavit (Brief of Evidence, 1913) also contradict his testimony at the trial, which has him at another part of town.

Third

Finally Schiff was never meant to be at work that day. Check out Lemmie Quinns Affidavit in the Brief of Evidence and compare it with his testimony and schiffs statements. Do you believe Lemmie Quinn? Look at his picture, what’s your gut feeling on this one?

Monteen Stover vs. Leo Frank:

One witness for sure, Monteen Stover, confirms that Leo Frank was not in his office during 12:05 to 12:10 which makes Leo Frank’s statement to Chief Lanford in State’s Exhibit B a strong piece of evidence of Frank’s guilt, because it was when Frank said Mary Phagan arrived 12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07 (States Exhibit B, April 28, 1913), that created one persons word against the other, but it also put Leo Frank in the metal room, the only other place he could have been, because Frank made a statement affirming his “unconscious” whereabouts.

Ironically, Monteen Stover was a Character Witness for Leo Frank

The irony is this, Monteen Stover actually liked Leo Frank, she had nothing bad to say about him concerning licentious or lascivious behavior at the factory. She acted as a character witness on behalf of Leo Frank and the defense were unable to impeach her claim of coming to the Pencil factory to get her weekly pay and waiting between 12:05 to 12:10 on April 26, 1913, in Leo Frank’s second floor office.


Jim Conley’s Version

Jim Conley saw Mary Phagan enter, also said he heard Leo Frank and Mary Phagan walk towards the metal room, as the wooden floor boards reveal the direction people walk, followed by a scream (Conley, 1913). After the scream, Jim Conley saw a girl with tennis shoes walk up the stairs and wait a little while and then leave. Jim Conley did not know the girl was Monteen Stover, but he described her clothes exactly. Monteen Stover was discovered around or before May 10th, 1913 in a twist of luck through the extended interview process of associates, employees and principles in the case.

Jim Conley’s story was corroborated because of this intricate detail.

Another thing that corroborated Jim Conley’s story that he heard Frank walk toward the metal room, was Leo Franks admission of “unconsciously” going to the bathroom in the metal room.

Appellate Review

Two years of review from 1913 to 1915 by more than a bakers dozen of seasoned judges overwhelmingly believe the onus of guilt is on Leo Frank beyond a reasonable doubt, that puts the unanimous Jury voting against Leo Frank at over 2 dozen.

Questions Beget More Questions

Questions people ask after reading Leo Frank’s trial testimony: How come Monteen Stover didn’t bump into Mary Phagan coming or going, or getting assaulted on the first floor, observers are wondering why? Why does Frank harp on about $1.20 in his testimony? Was he anticipating Dorsey dropping a bombshell on the accounting books? What about the contrived murder notes that have Mary Phagan going to the bathroom in the only place she could have in the metal room? How come Leo Frank denies knowing Jim Conley was downstairs on the first floor, but Mrs. White later remembered seeing him waiting down there and Alonzo Mann in his 80’s admitted to seeing Jim Conley waiting all morning on the first floor in his usual watch dog spot. Since Jim Conley was seen numerous time, in the most high traffic area of the factory, is he likely to rob and assault someone there?

Does it even matter if Monteen Stover waited in Leo Frank’s empty inner and outer office, or not, for 5 minutes, between 12:05 to 12:10? If Frank made an unconscious visit to the bathroom before, during or after the time Monteen Stover said she waited for him in his empty office, does it matter? Yes, Harry Scott said that Leo Frank told him [Harry Scott] that he [Leo Frank] was in his office from every minute from noon to 12:35. Is it important that the only bathroom on the second floor is located in the metal room? Think about it. It was only at the trial, that Leo Frank brought out the bathroom revelation, he did not bring it up any other time – and as we remember the coroner was indignant about this fact. The Death Notes have Mary Phagan going to the toilet to make water and Leo Frank has himself going to the toilet to make water or number 2.

Was it a Blunder or Nothing at All?

ABSOLUTELY SHOCKING: Why would Frank make such a blunder and state he may have unconsciously gone to the toilets in the metal room to account for Monteen Stover saying he (Leo Frank) was absent from his 2nd floor (inner and outer) office between 12:05 and 12:10?

Leo Frank moves Mary Phagans arrival time to 12:12 in his August 18, 1913, last statement at his murder trial, because he has to make sure Monteen Stover doesn’t bump into Mary Phagan, and two minutes buys that time, but very sharply. Notice, she doesnt arrive at 12:10 or 12:11, because of the collision problem between Stover and Phagan?

That’s a subtle nuance.

Total Blunder? Why would Leo Frank put himself in the crime scene that the prosecution spent 4 weeks trying to prove the murder happened there between 12:05 and 12:15.?

What other possibility could he have come up with as to why he was not in his office?

Upstairs? Only if those witnesses on the 4th floor could be bribed.

Downstairs? Jim Conley.

Bathroom in the metal room? By admission, Yes!

Alonzo Mann On Jim Conley

Alonzo Mann’s revelations in the 1980’s tended to create more contradictions in Leo Frank’s testimony, because Frank denied knowing Conley was waiting on the first floor of the building all morning long on April 26, 1913, yet Franks August 18, 1913, statement reveals in the morning period Frank was coming and going, in and out of the building.

Where was Jim Conley?

The Specific Pages of the Murder Confession From the Official Record

If you do not want to read Leo M. Frank’s abridged 4 hour speech, you would need to at least familiarize yourself with 2 pages of the Leo M. Frank trial testimony pages 185 and 186 of the official record.

A two page excerpt (185 and 186), from the official record of Frank’s August 18, 1913 testimony captured in the Brief of Evidence (see the 2 pages listed below) provides a snap shot of his unconscious bathroom visit.

Let’s Look Closer at the Leo Frank Murder Confession

Here are two original pages from the Official Brief of Evidence, p. 185 and 186, download them.

Please review these two pages in 1913 Brief of Evidence –
http://www.leofrank.org/georgia-archive/B056/D260-B056-1216.JPG
http://www.leofrank.org/georgia-archive/B056/D260-B056-1217.JPG

If these images do not load contact us.

When was the “unconscious” visit to the metal room bathroom?

The presumption is perhaps most likely 12:03 or 12:04.

Frank claimed only three people were in the factory

Frank said (to paraphrase) that to the best of his recollection when he was in his second floor office from 12:00 to 12:45, that aside from temporary visitors, the only other people continuously in the building he was aware of were Mr. White and Mr. Denham on the 4th floor, banging away and doing construction, as they tore down a partition.

That’s it, three people.

By Frank’s statement that there were only three people in the building, the question one asks: If there are 3 people in the factory, and 2 of them didn’t do it, who is left?

Leo Frank Forgot Mrs. White’s Visit at 12:35

Frank also seems to “disremember” Mrs. White coming into his office at 12:35. Mrs. White came in asking if she could go up to the 4th floor to visit her husband, she said Frank was startled at the safe, when she spoke to his back. Frank might have been putting Phagan’s purse in there at the time, is one theory. Mrs. White noticed a Negro relaxing and waiting inconspicuously on the first floor, that looked like Jim Conley.

Alonzo Mann Corroborates and Sustains Jim Conley’s Testimony?

Alonzo Mann, confirmed it was Conley waiting there the whole morning in the 1980’s as was later discovered.

Other factors would lend to discrediting Leo Frank…

Credibility Check: Frank Denied Knowing His Employee Mary Phagan

Frank also stated from day one of the investigation all the way up to and during the trial, that he did not know Mary Phagan by her name.

Eight Ways Leo Frank Could Not Deny Knowing Mary Phagan

1. The problem with this Phagan Denial, is Mary worked down the hall from Leo Frank’s second floor office, where she worked in the second floor metal department. One employee mentioned that Leo Frank would walk around at check that people were not loafing and examining the quality of work. This was to be expected given Leo Frank was an attentive manager.

2. Mary received 50 “paychecks” (pay envelopes) each weekend from Leo Frank for working 55 hour work weeks, at 7.5 cents an hour, earning $4.05 per week and punched the time clock inside Leo Frank’s office more than 500 times (13 months x 4 weeks per month x 5 days per week x two punches per day, one checking in and one checking out). In general how important is the detail that Leo Frank was responsible for monitoring and logging employee punch card hours and then calculating weekly payments?

3. Leo Frank had to walk by Mary Phagans work station each day during her 1 year tenure at the Pencil factory to get to the metal room bathroom. Leo Frank being an avid coffee drinker would have had to go to the bathroom at least once a day if not more during the normal 10 to 12 hour a day work week. Ask anyone who binges and guzzles coffee like it’s going out of style how many times they go to the bathroom in a an eleven hour period.

4. Other employees testified that Frank spoke to Mary on a first name basis and would often get a little bit too close for comfort at times. One employee at the trial remarked about seeing Leo Frank putting his hand on Marys shoulder and newsie George Epps her neighbor, chum and fellow-employee said Mary confided to him that Leo Frank was sexually harassing her.

5. In terms of Hours: How did Leo Frank not know the girl that worked more than 2,500 hours for him (and punched the clock in front of him to log those 2,500 hours)?

6. Frank made a blunder and told detective Harry Scott that his former employee J. M. Gantt was “intimate” with Mary Phagan, which meant Leo Frank got caught in a lie, because it meant Leo Frank knew Mary Phagan enough to know that juicy little tidbit about her.

7. Leo Frank recorded the payment he made to Mary Phagan in his accounting book which the police reviewed. Frank said Mary Phagan’s initials MP and her employee number 186 were on her pay envelope and that her pay was either filled with a paper dollar and 2 silver dimes or 2 silver half dollars and 2 silver dimes. He remembered such details about what might have been in her envelope, then how could he not know MP meant Mary Phagan and wouldn’t that mean Frank knew 186 meant Mary Phagan, when it was logged in his ledger next to her name? How any times did he log Mary Phagan, 186?

8: George Epps said Mary Phagan confided in him that Leo Frank would wink at her, run up in front of her and block her on her way out, and frighten her.

Why did Frank try so strongly to lie that he didn’t know Mary Phagan and distance himself from her? What was he hiding?


Rewind to Harry Scott:

If you remember that Leo Frank told his own Detective Harry Scott, that he (Frank) was in his office every minute from noon to 12:30, he never made mentioning of any possible unconscious bathroom trips. Frank also during the Coroner’s inquest never mentions any bathroom trips. Did Leo Frank “unconsciously” forget? Why did Frank not tell the Police Chief of Detectives Newport Lanford (State’s Exhibit B), about a bathroom visit either? Three separate occasion he denied a bathroom visit, until the trial when he revealed an unconscious bathroom visit.

Frank had at least 3 opportunities or more to mention the bathroom visit, but did not, writing them off as “unconscious”, the problem with this is that he claimed he never went to the bathroom at ALL which seems impossible – it wasn’t that he forgot to mention it. Leo Frank cornered himself by outright saying he never went to the bathroom.

Time Travel

As we already discussed, the first revelation of the unconscious bathroom trip was revealed at the murder trial after Monteen Stover made her statement about his office being empty 12:05 to 12:10 – Frank also changed when Mary Phagan arrived from 12:02 to 12:12.

10 Minutes

References:

Leo Frank Case files from the Georgia Supreme Court, Adobe PDF format: http://www.leofrank.org/library/georgia-archives/

High Resolution Graphical Images: The Brief of Evidence in the Leo M. Frank 1913 Murder Trial, has been ratified by both the Leo Frank Defense and Prosecution Team. Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence. Read Leo Frank’s original trial testimony about his unconscious bathroom visit in the metal room. Also be sure to read the trial testimony of Monteen Stover, Harry Scott, Newt Lee and look over State’s Exhibit B.

Leo Frank murder trial closing arguments by Hugh Manson Dorsey are published under the title, ARGUMENT OF HUGH M. DORSEY, Solicitor-General, Atlanta Judicial Circuit, AT THE TRIAL OF LEO M. FRANK, Charged with the murder of Mary Phagan. This fascinating 146 page book was produced by Nicholas Christophulos, 411 Third Street, Macon, Georgia (GA) in 1914, through the Press of THE JOHNSON-DALLIS Co., Atlanta, Georgia. Introduction Forward, Facts of the Crime, Chronological History of the case written by Nicholas Christophulos, Macon, Georgia (GA), April 20th, 1914. Republished in this book before the arguments by Hugh M. Dorsey begin, is part of an article by Sidney Ormond published originally by Atlanta Constitution, August 27th 1913.

Read the Final closing arguments of Mr. Frank Arthur Hooper in the Leo M. Frank trial and what he had to say about Leo Frank’s unconscious bathroom visit in the metal room, available in John Davison Lawson’s American State Trials 1918, Volume X (right mouse click and save as). (READ ALL THE CLOSING ARGUMENTS).

Read what Tom Watson had to say about Leo M. Frank’s “Unconscious” bathroom visit in the metal room: 4. Watson’s Magazine, September 1915 (right mouse click and save as).

Read Mary Phagan Kean’s analysis of the Leo Frank Case: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (right mouse click and save as).

See: Internet Archive copy of Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence 1913

See: State’s Exhibit A

The Solution to the Murder of Mary Phagan From Leo Frank’s Statement

Leo Frank’s August 18, 1913 Response to Monteen Stover’s Testimony, about why Monteen Stover did not see Leo Frank in his empty office from 12:05 to 12:10PM

Now, gentlemen, to the best of my recollection from the time the
whistle blew for twelve o’clock until after a quarter to one when I went
up stairs and spoke to Arthur White and Harry Denham, to the best of
my recollection
, I did not stir out of the inner office; but it is possible that
in order to answer a call of nature or to urinate I may have gone to the
toilet. Those are things that a man does unconsciously and cannot tell
how many times nor when he does it.
Now, sitting in my office at my
desk, it is impossible for me to see out into the outer hall when the safe
door is open, as it was that morning, and not only is it impossible for me
to see out, but it is impossible for people to see in and see me there.

The “Now Gentlemen”, almost amounts to letting the Judge and Jury know that Leo Frank is about to make
a virtual murder confession. It kind of brings their focus and attention to him, after he mind numbed
them for four hours about immaterial nonsense concerning the irrelevant minutiae of his accounting work.

Then Leo Frank gives it all away with Reason #1:

Reason 1 Monteen Stover Didn’t See Me in My Empty Office: I was in the metal room.

The “but it is possible that in order to answer a call of nature or to urinate I may have gone to the
toilet. Those are things that a man does unconsciously and cannot tell how many times nor when he does it.”

With the bathroom / metal room confession being a bit strong, Leo Frank takes their focus away from that with the safe door
being, the reason Monteen Stover could not see him, which was corny and the average person even without a highly refined
bullshit detector can see right through it.

Reason 2 Monteen Stover Didn’t See Me in My Office: The Safe Door Was Open.

Leo Frank: …it is impossible for me to see out into the outer hall when the safe
door is open, as it was that morning, and not only is it impossible for me
to see out, but it is impossible for people to see in and see me there…

Monteen Stover, was there for her pay envelope, no one disputed this and she said she checked both his inner and outer office, and both were empty, the common sense test says she did the proactive thing anyone would do who came for their weekly pay and had been working at the factory for more than a year, and she knew the routine like every other employee who had worked at the factory for a long time.

Monteen Stover did not see a safe door blocking her entry into either the inner or outer office, infact when she went into the inner office she described it as being completely empty, she waited around for 5 full minutes and began to leave, she looked down the hallway and notice the door to the metal room was closed shut, the building she described seemed completely deserted. but was it?

Observers are asking, where was Leo Frank and where was Mary Phagan between 12:05 and 12:10, according to State’s Exhibit B? Because Monteen Stover coming and going did not bump into Mary Phagan or Leo Frank.

State’s Exhibit B + Monteen Stover + Leo Frank newfangled metal room bathroom admission = CASE CLOSED, August 18, 1913.

But Monteen Stover was interviewed by police doing routine questioning before May 10th, when the important time discovery was made, so really, wasn’t it May 10th 1913 the Case was Closed? Technically yes, given that Leo Frank said he never left his office, but sometimes it requires putting all the circumstantial variables together to solve a murder case. Sometimes the best evidence is circumstantial.

or Was the Case Closed in the evening of April 26, 1913, when Leo Frank in a drunken stupor told his wife Lucille Selig Frank he didn’t know why he would murder and called for his pistol so he could shoot himself (State’s Exhibit J, June 3rd, 1913)?

Lucille Selig Frank’s request to be cremated and not buried with her husband tends to corroborate the first private Leo Frank murder confession, more than the public Leo Frank murder confession.

Background on the issue of the bathroom at the Coroners inquest and then at the trial, for an understanding of Dorsey’s Interpretation

Leo Frank’s ever changing story, meant he got caught in a bold faced lie and entraps himself beyond escape in the process.

Remember that Leo Frank specified at the Coroner’s inquest that he never went to the bathroom on that infamous day of Saturday, April 26, 1913, not that he had forgotten whether or not he had gone or not, but that he had remembered never going. Dorsey articulates the admission of Leo Frank saying he went to the bathroom in the metal room to account for Monteen Stover being in his second floor office when he was not there.

Dorsey:

Frank was in jail, Frank had already stated in his affidavit
at Police Headquarters, which is in evidence, contradicting
this statement and this chart which they have made, that he
didn’t leave his office between certain hours. Frank didn’t
know that his own detective, Harry Scott, had found this little
Monteen Stover,-and I quote her evidence, I quote it and
I submit it shows that she went in that office and went far
enough in that office to see who was in there, and if she
didn’t go far enough in, it’s passing strange that anybody in
that office,-Frank himself, could have heard that girl and
could have made his presence known.

Scott, their own Pinkerton
detective, gets the statement from Monteen Stover,
and he visits Leo M. Frank in his cell at the jail. Frank
in order to evade that, says, “to the best of my recollection
I didn’t stir out of the office, but it’s possible that, in
order to answer a call of nature, I may have gone to the
toilet, these are things that a man does unconsciously and
can’t tell how many times nor when he does it.”

Didn’t Hear Monteen Stover?

I tell you, gentlemen of the jury, that if this man Frank
had remained in his office and was in his office when Monteen
Stover went in there, he would have heard her, he would
have seen her, he would have talked with her,
he would have given her her pay. I tell you gentlemen
of the jury, that if this man Frank had stepped out of
his office to answer a call of nature, that he would have remembered
it, and if he wouldn’t have remembered it, at least
he wouldn’t have stated so repeatedly and unqualifiedly that
he never left his office, and only on the stand here, when he
faces an honest jury, charged with the murder, and circumstances
banked up against him, does he offer the flimsy excuse
that these are things that people do unconsciously and
without any recollection. But this man Scott, in company
with Black, after they found that little Monteen Stover had
been there at exactly the time that old Jim Conley says that
that man with this poor little unfortunate girl had gone to
the rear, and on May 3rd, the very time that Monteen Stover
told them that she had been up there, at that time this
Pinkerton detective, Scott, as honest and honorable a man
as ever lived, the man who said he was going hand in hand
with the Police Department of the City of Atlanta and who
did, notwithstanding the fact that some of the others undertook
to leap with the hare and run with the hounds, stood
straight up by the city detectives and by the State officials
and by the truth, put these questions, on May 3rd, to Leo
M. Frank: says he to Frank:

Detective Scott Loyal to Truth.

“From the time you got to the factory from Montag
Brothers, until you went to the fourth floor to see White and
Denham, were you inside your office the entire time?”

Leo Frank Answer: “I was.” Again, says Scott-and Mr. Scott, in
jail, when Frank didn’t know the importance of the propo-
sition because he didn’t know that little Monteen Stover had
said that she went up there and saw nobody in his office-
Scott came at him from another different angle: “From the
time you came from Montag Brothers, until Mary Phagan
came, were you in your office?” and Frank said “yes.”
“From twelve o’clock,” says Scott, “until Mary Phagan entered
your office and thereafter until 12:50, when you went
upstairs to get Mrs. White out of the building, were you in
your office?” Answer: “Yes.” “Then,” says Scott, “from
twelve to twelve thirty, every minute during that half hour,
you were in your office?” and Frank said “yes.” And not
until he saw the wonderful capacity, the wonderful ability,
the wonderful devotion of this man Scott to the truth and
right did he ever shut him out from his counsel. No suggestion
then that he might have had to answer a call of nature,
but emphatically, without knowing the importance, he
told his own detective, in the presence of John Black, that
at no time, for no purpose, from a few minutes before this
unfortunate girl arrived, until he went upstairs, at 12:50,
to ask Mrs. White to leave, had he been out of his office.

Questions You Will Be Able to Answer After Studying the Leo Frank Case:

Can you solve the Mary Phagan murder mystery from the trial testimony alone? Can you solve the mysterious murder of Mary Phagan from the associated affidavits alone? Or do you need both the trial testimony and affidavits? Or are neither sufficient?

What is the century long Leo Frank Blood Libel hoax? Was Leo Frank railroaded into a vast European-American and African-American anti-Semitic conspiracy because of prevailing Anti-Jewish bigotry at the time? Was Leo Frank a scapegoat at his trial for the murder of Mary Phagan, because Jim Conley as a Negro is not “worthy” enough to pay the “price” for her so, they picked a Jew instead?

Which of the State’s Exhibits was the most revealing at the trial? National Pencil Company Factory Diagram, State’s Exhibit A, Leo Frank’s State’s Exhibit B, Affidavits of James (Jim) Conley or Minola McKnight’s Controversial State’s Exhibit J?

How many separate Leo Frank murder confessions where there according to the official record?

The official record shows Leo Frank confessed to murdering Mary Phagan three times, though he would deny all three.

Leo Frank Murder Confession Number Three: August 18, 1913

The third Leo Frank murder confession occurred on August 18, 1913, when Leo Frank mounted the witness stand at the trial. He told the Courtroom, Judge and Jury, in response to Monteen Stover saying his office was empty from 12:05 to 12:10, that he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom in the metal room. Leo Frank had stated to the police on Monday, April 28, 1913, Mary Phagan arrived in his office between 12:05 and 12:10.

It was a slam dunk for the State’s prosecution, because Dorsey and his team had spent 29 days trying to prove to the Jury that Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan in the second floor metal room.

Leo Frank Murder Confession Number One: April 26, 1913

Leo Frank murder confession number one was made to Jim Conley, when Leo Frank told him he had tried to have sex with Mary Phagan and she refused him, he then said he picked up Mary Phagan and slammed her. Mary Phagan’s bloody hair was discovered on Monday, April 28, 1913, on the handle of a lathe in the second floor metal room.

Leo Frank Murder Confession Number Two: April 26, 1913

Leo Frank confessed murdering Mary Phagan to his wife Lucille Selig Frank on the evening of April 26, 1913. Leo Frank said he didn’t know why he would murder and asked his wife for his pistol so he could shoot himself. Lucille told her family and cook Minola McKnight about what happened.

Those are the three Leo Frank murder confessions in the official record.

Leading one to ask:

Who was the “higher” star witness at the Leo Frank trial, was it Monteen Stover or James “Jim” Conley? Whose testimony was the most damaging for Leo Frank at the trial: Monteen Stover or Jim Conley? Out of the responses made by Leo Frank to the testimony and evidence provided by Monteen Stover and Jim Conley, which was one convinced the Jury of Leo’s guilt? What does your intuition and instinct tell you when all things are considered concerning the innocence or guilt of Leo Frank?

What do neutral and unbiased Leo Frank scholars think about his four-hour statement made on August 18, 1913 to the judge and jury in the Fulton County Superior Court? What do you think about Leo Frank’s four-hour statement (read it slowly and carefully)?

Images: State’s Exhibit A, The 3D map of the factory

Image: Second Floor of the National Pencil Company

The Jeffersonian Newspaper on Leo M. Frank 1914, 1915, 1916, & 1917: http://leofrank.info/images/jeffersonian/

–8-17-2011

Fair Usage Law

August 18, 2011   Posted in: Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

This Day in Jewish History: August 17, 1915, the Mob Lynching of Leo M. Frank for the Bludgeoning, Rape and Strangulation of little Mary Anne Phagan (1899 to 1913)

Leo Frank Lynched August 17, 1915

Photo Archived at the Library of Congress. Leo Frank was Lynched at 7:17 AM, August 17, 1915, this photo was taken later that morning after word got out about what happened and people flocked to Frey’s gin creating a critical mass of spectators.

Lynched Leo Frank

A Very Rare Photo of Leo Frank More Than an Hour After the Lynching Occurred

August 17, 1915, Post-lynching Hours Before Noon: At the behest of the photographer, a morbid gawker holds the tan-brown sarong wrapped around Leo Franks waist to steady his suspended body, preventing his body from twirling gently in the breeze, because it might create a blurry photo. On the right a malnourished-looking rail-thin Red Neck Cracker with “sunken cheeks” stares at the camera in a state of utter disbelief.

Multifunctional, Zoomable and Modern Aerial Map of the Approximate Location of the Leo Frank Lynching on August 17, 1915: http://www.wikimapia.org/#lat=33.9506291&lon=-84.5168781&z=19&l=0&m=b

The Jewish Version:

For the Jews and Frankites (Leo Frank Partisans), who keep on churning out dishonest propaganda and re-writing history to quench their collective and insatiable Jewish egomania, PRESENTS: The mellow dramatic, Hollywood and dramatized version Leo Frank lynch party invitation, which might as well have been read out loud by a big fat booger eating hillbilly farmer in manure stained overalls, with rotting missing teeth, a pitch fork in one hand and a torch in the other, saying something like this (please use an exaggerated and very slow southern accent and drawl while speaking out loud), Say Out Loud:

Ye are invited to the anti-Jooish Leo Frank lynch party, come August 16th and 17th, dusk to dawn! Don’t be late or you will be left behind, pre-party meet up location point to be announced. Kickoff at 10:00 PM at the gates of the Milledgeville Prison. After the abduction of the dehorned Jew, there will be an all night Model-T tailgate party to the final Good Ole Boys roundup destination near Marietta at the Fork of Frey’s Gin. Final Party Preparations at Sunrise, 7:00 AM is the main event, so Be there or Be Square. No cussing. No Alcohol. This is a dry party after all, though we will be serving drinks at the afterparty. Proper dress is required, please bring your clean white sheets and robes. Special afterparty location at Stone Mountain with Bonfire and Cross burning to be announced before we leave Frey’s Gin. We still need torches, rope, small table and peanut butter. Please RSVP to both Tom Watson and Hugh Dorsey.

The Southern Perspective

For Southerners the August 17, 1915 lynching of Leo Frank was not a Jewish Hollywood freak show, nor was it about media frenzies, anti-Jewish racism or bigotry. This is despite all the Jewish propaganda flat out lying to the public by misrepresenting the truth, with dramatized works and treatments like the Jewish fictionalized docudrama, People vs Leo Frank, 2009, and the Jewish propaganda miniseries, Murder of Mary Phagan, 1987, which together paint the picture of the Leo Frank trial and Frank’s lynching to be a vast anti-Jewish White Gentile conspiracy, AND the ultimate bamboozling of the entire United States Legal System by a semi-literate drunken Negro sweeper named Jim Conley.

For Southerners and the Elite men who carried out the judge and jury’s 13-man unanimous verdict — guilty as charged, no recommendation of mercy, signed and delivered — with the execution orders fulfilled, the lynching was a painfully somber and terribly depressing event which reminded them of an unchangeable truth about the unnecessary and tragic loss of a child – it’s irreversible.

The lynching of Leo Max Frank was no booger eating hillbilly mob of drunken revelers whipped up — on a moments notice — into an alcohol-fueled frenzy of outrage and revenge, it was instead, an extrajudicial execution done with the slow careful planning, and cold calculating bureaucratic manners of the State, by very prominent and elite men.

At 7:10AM on August 17, 1915, before the table was kicked away from beneath Leo Frank (who was hoisted upon it by 4 men), one of the Lynchers, a former State Judge, read out loud for all those present to hear: the verdict of the Jury originally August 25, 1913, sentence of death ordered by the deceased Judge Leonard Strickland Roan, originally delivered August 26, 1913, and the decisions of the higher courts (1913 to 1915).

Many of the lynchers were fathers, and even with the lynching of Leo Frank fulfilled to serve the verdict of the entire United States Legal System, they knew with its flawless execution, they could never bring Mary Phagan back alive, a little girl lost in the spring of her life.

For many people ironically, the Leo Frank case was a racial awakening, because the lynching wasn’t actually about bigotry, prejudice, media frenzies or anti-semitism, those pejoratives are false accusations and slanders coming from members of the cultural terrorist religion of Judaism, the historical enemies of Gentile Western Civilization that live within it in a parasite-host or virus-host paradigm.

For those who identify with being Southern or Southerners, what the lynching was really about was fulfilling Justice for a violent sexual predator, a man whose wealthy and powerful tribal kinsmen enabled him to nearly escape the verdict of the Judge, Jury and every level of the United States Legal System. By bribing a corrupt and unscrupulous outgoing Governor, John M. Slaton, a well connected Lawyer, who also, just so happened to be the part owner of the law firm providing Leo Frank a legal defense dream team and the result of Slaton commuting his own clients death sentence to life in prison, it made people who were never racist or anti-semitic really think differently about Jews. For many other people who considered Jews to be White, it was an awakening that perhaps Jews are different and not really “White”, it revealed to others Jews are the most “tribal” group of people in the world, even to the extreme of defending a child rapist and convicted murderer.

For Anti-Semites, the former Governor John M. Slaton, was a man who sold out the people for 30 shekels of Jewish silver.

What REALLY Happened on Confederate Memorial Day within the National Pencil Company at 12:02 PM, Saturday, April 26, 1913?

In the shuttered and virtually empty National Pencil Factory on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913, Mary Phagan tripped into the building lobby on the ground floor and climbed the 14 foot tall stairway that had a platform half way up, and upon her arrival in the office of Leo Frank on the second floor, she called out to collect her pay, and asked Leo if the “Metal had arrived”. Mary was referring to the brass, which came in sheets and was processed into eraser holders, which were wrapped around and partially hanging off the ends of individual final production pencils, before she inserted erasers in them using her Knurling machine.

Even though Leo Frank knew the answer was, “no, not yet” to the question Mary Phagan posed, he instead inveigled her, immediately coaxing Mary Phagan into the metal room with an “I Don’t Know, Let’s find out”, to see whether or not Mary would have her job back on Monday morning, April 28, 1913.

Using the little Irish girls job as a species of sexual coercion, there inside the metal room, the two of them alone, with the metal room door securely locked, Leo Frank tested Mary. Leo Frank made his aggressive sexual advance unmistakeable, unlike his less overt and subtle sexual pestering reported by 19 fellow child pre-teen and teenaged girl employees.

Now securely entrapped in the metal room at that exact moment, the 13 year old Mary Phagan flat out refused the proposition of the freaky creepy bugeye’d bespectacle’d lecherous Jewish bossman, but with no where to run or hide in a locked metal room, it was rape with no escape. The little 13 year old girl who had spurned the sexual advances of her boss, was about to get a little lesson.

A Heart Pounding Moment of Terror

The situation took a wrong turn, in these heart pounding moments, because the 4’11” girl was trapped (Brief of Evidence, Bolt Lock, State’s Exhibit A, 1913), Leo Frank 5’8″ (Leo Frank passport application) nearly 9 inches taller than her could now have his way and turn her out in that tantalizingly violent, ancient and brutal way millions of young boys and girls of every race, religion and creed throughout all of human history, in every corner of the world, have been turned out with such extreme cruelty.

On that old Southern Confederate Memorial day, given the implications, there would be the most extreme measures taken to ensure Mary Phagan could tell no one.

Leo Frank exploded in a flash of anger inside the metal room.

In a sexually savage and grizzly release, Leo Frank delivered a most cruelly violent face pounding and slammed little Mary Phagan’s head against the handle of the lathe and delivered an especially degrading and sadistic rape, one that was followed by a fist flexing garoting, as Leo Frank suffocated Mary Phagan at the same time reaching his own psychosexual religious exultation and epiphany.

It wasn’t enough what Leo Frank had done to her, the soul disfiguring moment was that Leo Frank ordered his very own personal Pet Negro, the Step-and-Fetch-it named James (Jim) Conley, to drag her from the entry of the elevator shaft in the basement to the rear cellar furnace with the intimation of cremating her and destroying the evidence. The Pet Negro refused.

Mary Phagan was dragged across the hard dirt floor of the basement from the elevator shaft to the cellar oven staging area 150 feet away, where she was finally dumped on a sawdust mound and her hands were crossed over her breast reverently by Jim Conley. Dragging Mary Phagan by the arms left her face grating over the hard dirt floor, it thus caused her dead face to get “pocked”, cut and scratched from the hard cinders and it was because the scratches on her face didn’t bleed the physicians who gave Mary Phagan an autopsy believed she had been killed earlier on a different floor. The fact her face did not bleed at all from the dragging scratches, became part of the indisputable evidence she was not killed in the basement.

The Ultimate Plot Within Plot Thickens

Once Leo Max Frank and his roustabout Jim Conley were back up in Leo Frank’s second floor office lighting sulfur matches, smoking fags and ruminating, Leo Frank formulated an outrageously botched intrigue attempting to scapegoat the bludgeoning, rape and strangulation of Mary Phagan on an innocent and honest old Negro, the Night watchman (night witch) named Newt Lee. An old nightwatchman security guard that had yet to arrive.

One allegation by the factory sweeper is during their afternoon conversation after the body was dumped in the basement and before Leo Frank left the factory at 1:20PM, was Leo Frank looked up at the ceiling and said to Jim Conley, “Why Should I Hang? I know wealthy people in Brooklyn”.

The Scapegoat

Thus Leo Frank plotted to get the hard working Night Security Guard, the Negro Newt Lee indicted, convicted and lynched, after Leo Frank himself allegedly bludgeoned, raped and strangled the little girl to brain damaged death. It was a most shocking fabrication of evidence formulated by Leo Frank to draw suspicion on Lee, it would require notes written in a Negro’s hand writing.

For anti-Semites, “the Plot” was another case of a Jew committing a crime and trying to blame it on the Goyim. The pattern reminded them of the Jews plotting to blame the crucifixion of Christ on the Romans.

How Low Can You Go? Death Row.

Only the best Hollywood writers high on crack, LSD, Meth, Schrooms and the finest eugenically bred California Kush could dream up a murder case as twisted, bizarre, perverted, farout, freaky and unusual as this one, especially given the principle, a clean cut Ivy League educated Jew from Brooklyn serving as B’nai B’rith President and Superintendent of a very successful manufacturing plant, the National Pencil Factory.

Some people believe, if Leo Frank was not a Jew, the case would never have been judaized in the sickening way it has been by a race of ultra tribalist and petulant parasites over the last 100 years.

For Some, The Truth is…

Leo Frank was a wife cheating, whoremongering, drug abusing, chain smoking, black coffee pot guzzl’n, violent, murdering, pedophile-rapist, child molesting, sexual predator who receives endless idealization, rehabilitation of image, and romanticizing, mostly from Jews and Leo Frank partisans in books, magazine articles and films.

12:03 to 12:04 PM, the Face Pounding Unravels

Leo Frank cornered and grabbed Mary Phagan just inside the metal room, she resisted and then he pounded his angry fist into Mary Phagans beautiful face and slammed the back of her head against the lathe machine which was bolted to a bench table, she ran terrified in the only direction she could travel away from him, toward the bathroom, there Leo Frank continued his violent assault, hammering his fists against her face and slamming her, until she became unconscious on the floor of the bathroom bleeding out. Leo Frank then ripped up a strip from the crotch area of her petty coat, and put the torn fabric under the back of her head to catch the pool of blood from her slumped body, he then tore and bisected up her bloomers ripping it up the right leg across the crotch to the seam, revealing her virgin 13 year old vagina, he unbuckled his pants and undid his fly, pulled down his pants and underwear, revealing an STD infected erect small-medium Jewish penis, then like a filthy dog ravaged Mary Phagan, savagely drilling and pumping his ‘without-a-condom-prostitute-seasoned’ diseased Jewish schmeckle into her dry virgin vagina, bloodying it, leaving medically observed inflammation, breaking her Hyman and leaving the remains of her still attached but torn underwear drenched with her blood (Mary Phagan Autopsy, Undertaker Notes, P.J. Bloomfields Mortuary, 4:30 AM, April 27, 1913).

This was a crime of passion and revenge against the little girl who spurned and rejected her infatuated boss.

While in the midst of pumping her she began to wake up from her unconsciousness and as she continued crying, covering up as best she could, her pounded beaten-up face and black and blue eye, before Leo Frank could orgasm, he raged in anger.

Snatch the Cord hanging on a nail in the Wall

At this point Leo Frank wanted a different kind of orgasm, the orgasm of murder, he also felt he had only one immediate choice given the implications and magnitude of it all. With malice aforethought Leo Frank quickly snatched a nearby looped 7 foot cord hanging on the wall, placed it around her neck, creating the equivalent of a thin hangmans noose, and then he yanked it up as tight as he physically could, flexing his fists until the cord sunk deep and tight into the tender flesh of her neck.

Leo Frank continued flexing upward until his hands were white knuckled and sore (that’s why he was always seen rubbing his hands afterward, and any time the name Mary Phagan was brought up), soon thereafter, Mary Phagan never woke up again, she died of brain damage within less than 4 or 5 minutes during the strangulation process. A Rape and murder of this kind was achieved in less than 10 to 15 minutes, from 12:02PM to 12:17 PM.

Send the Janitor to Cleanup the Metal Room Bathroom

Leo Frank left a grotesque scene in the metal room bathroom. Mary Phagan was found spread eagle with her arms above her head on the floor of the bathroom in the metalroom by Jim Conley, moments after Leo Frank confessed in a roundabout way to him after what had happened between 12:02 and 12:17 (Leo Frank Confession One of Three, April 26, 1913). After the first Leo Frank murder confession given to Jim Conley, Leo asked Conley to go “there” and wrap up that package with the intimation it was to be moved.

There would also be a half-assed clean up job in the metal room commenced afterwards and nearly never talked about in all the works written on Leo M. Frank.

Put the Dead Girl in the Oven

Later, Leo Frank told Jim Conley to take Mary Phagan from the second floor and burn her in the cellar furnace. The docudrama ‘People vs Leo Frank’ by Ben Loeterman suggest that “if Leo Frank had answered his phone in the earliest morning of April 27, 1913, the outcome of the case might have come out a whole lot different”. In speculation, had Leo Frank’s pet lackey and roustabout Jim Conley listened to his Superintendent and cremated Mary Phagan, the outcome of the whole case might have been a whole lot different.

The Death March

The unbeknowst death march of Mary Phagan began at around 12:02 when Mary Phagan arrived in Leo’s Second floor office, they almost immediately walked to the metal room by 12:03, when Jim Conley heard the most harrowing scream imaginably possible traveling through the nearly empty building, and by no later than 12:17 PM, Mary Phagan was no longer moving, with a rope left taut around her neck.

Star Witness: The Girl Who Broke Leo Frank’s Alibi

While Mary Phagan was in the process of being choked out by Leo Frank, a young 14 year old girl named Monteen Stover unbeknownst to Leo Frank arrived in Leo Frank’s second floor inner office seeking her pay.

At first Monteen Stover looked at the huge wall clock and saw it was 12:05 PM, once she arrived insider Leo Frank’s office she called out her bosses name, with no response from him, she looked curiously for Leo Frank in both his outer and inner office, she specifically waited inside his office till 12:10 based on the wall clock. Perplexed there was no one around at payoff time, Monteen Stover even looked down the hall and she remembered seeing the metal room door closed shut. She described the factory as being deserted.

Leo Frank was on the other side of that door “unconsciously” going to the bathroom in the metal room according to his August 18, 1913, trial statement to the Jury (Leo Frank Murder Confession Number 3, August, 18, 1913).

When Monteen Stover left Leo Franks office at 12:10 PM, Saturday, April 26, 1913, walking downstairs from the second floor to the lobby, and feeling disappointed, she knew then she would have to unfortunately wait for the next payday, which would not be until next Saturday at Noon. May 3rd, 1913, would be the day Monteen Stover was discovered and interviewed by police.

Monteen Stover clearly specified she looked in both Leo’s inner and outer office, because she was there waiting to collect her pay envelope (this was never disputed by the defense), she was there as you would expect any employee to be there who came for their weekly pay. Monteen did what any normal person would do, after waiting in what she thought was a deserted building, she finally gave up and left.

It was that next Saturday, when she was discovered and the Mary Phagan murder mystery would be considered by the police as essentially solved.

Monteen Stover was specifically discovered the following payday when she was looking to collect her pay and then it was police determined that she had found Leo Frank’s office empty on April 26, 1913, one week before. It was then that John R. Black and Pinkerton Detective Harry Scott went to the cell of Leo Frank and asked him if he had been in his office every minute from noon to 12:35, and Leo Frank’s response was an affirmative “Yes” (Trial Testimony of Harry Scott, BOE, 1913).

It was then and there that it was believed that the Murder of Mary Phagan had been solved, because if Leo Frank was not in his office, where else could he have been? Leo Frank would answer this supposition at the trial.

The police theory was Leo Frank had murdered Mary Phagan in the metal room, based on Leo Frank’s lawyer witnessed statement — State’s Exhibit B — concerning when Mary Phagan had arrived. The affidavit and testimony of Monteen Stover cracked Leo Frank’s alibi wide open, however it wouldn’t be until August 18, 1913, that Leo Frank would respond to Monteen Stover, making the equivolent to a virtual murder confession, by telling the Jury he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom in the metal room during the laps of time that Monteen Stover claimed she was waiting in his empty office from 12:05 to 12:10 PM, on Saturday, April 26, 1913.

An Important Detail

Remember that in 1913 Atlanta Georgia, even the best wall clocks were 3 minutes off in accuracy on any given day, so when you see 1913 time concerning the Leo Frank case add and subtract up to 1, 2, or 3 minutes (plus or minus).

Monteen Stover did not bump into Mary Phagan coming into the building as Monteen Stover exited at 12:11 PM, nor did she see her approaching the building when Monteen Stover arrived at the factory at 12:05 PM, because Mary Phagan had come a couple to a few minutes (12:02 PM) before Monteen arrived (12:05 PM) at the National Pencil Company.

State’s Exhibit B: Monday, April 28, 1913

Leo Frank in State’s Exhibit B said Mary Phagan arrived at 12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07. When Monteen Stover arrived at 12:05 and left at 12:10 she did not bump into Mary Phagan on her way IN OR OUT, because Mary Phagan was already in the Metal room being killed during this time between 12:05 PM or 12:10 PM, maybe 12:07 if we are to take Leo Frank on his word given (State’s Exhibit B, Monday, April 28, 1913) about when Mary first arrived according to State’s Exhibit B (3D Map of the Second Floor, State’s Exhibit A, 1913)

Humiliation and Three Leo Frank Murder Confessions


What was the ultimate humiliation for Southerners: Was the fact that Leo Frank made a statement to the Jury to counter the sworn testimony of Monteen Stover that amounted to a virtual admission of murder, one that was public, it would turn out to be the third Leo Frank murder confession, two were made in private (1. Jim Conley, 2. Lucy Selig, 3. Public, Leo Frank).

Leo Frank said he might have unconsciously gone to the bathroom in the metal room or left the safe door open in his office as the reason Monteen Stover could not see him [Leo Frank] in his office and why he [Leo Frank] could not see Monteen Stover. Leo Frank had just made his whereabouts at 12:05 to 12:10 the crux of the whole case. Leo Frank never mentions seeing Monteen Stover.

The trial statement by Leo Frank to rebut Monteen Stover with two options of explanation about his disappearance, one being about the safe door being open tended to insult the intelligence and common sense of all those listening who had been paying very close attention and understood there was only one bathroom on the second floor in the metal room. The prosecution made sure to show this point with diagrams and floor plans of the building.

How many times in US History has someone made a virtual confession at their own capital murder trial?!

The greatest blunder in US Legal trial history is this, if Leo Frank went to the bathroom in the metal room between 12:05 and 12:10, he certainly would not have left his safe door wide open when there were always people coming in and out of the factory all day, even on a holiday, this is even with the fact no one was working that day except two carpenters on the 4th floor, Leo Frank and Jim Conley waiting on the first floor. The building was unlocked according to Leo Frank, so he naturally would not leave his safe open. So the whole case came down to the word of the REAL Main Star Witness Monteen Stover vs. Leo Frank, NOT the word of the Lower Ranking Star Witness Jim Conley vs. Leo Frank.

Frankites give too much credence to Jim Conley, it was Monteen Stover’s testimony and Leo Frank’s response to her testimony that equated to a murder confession, not Leo Frank’s response to Jim Conley. So why do Frankites persist in claiming Jim Conley was the star witness?

How do you reason with Jews a racially neurotic, egomaniac people fanatically obsessed with their own sensitive ego image and victim persecution complex?

As you can see this case was not about railroading an innocent man or anti-Jewish bigotry and racism, these false anti-semitic claims, have become the longest running Jewish hoax in US History and why it is accurately called: the century long JEWISH HOAX. The whole Leo Frank case was distilled down to this single point, When Monteen Stover came to collect her pay envelope, she called out for Mr. Frank and looked for him in both his inner and outer office, but there was no Leo Frank to be found and the safe door was certainly not left open, so that meant Leo Frank was “unconsciously” going to the bathroom in the Metal Room between 12:05 to 12:10, as he revealed on August 18, 1913 at his trial.

Leo Frank at the Coroners Inquest Jury where the vote was 7 to 0 to bind Leo Frank over for Murder before a Grand Jury of 23 men

Leo was very specific that he did not use the 2nd floor bathroom ALL DAY when he spoke at the Inquest. Not that he didn’t remember, but that he DID NOT USE it. It certainly seems as if he was distancing himself (verbally and mentally) from that area in the metal room. The prodigious savant Coroner Donehee was incredulous as might be expected, who doesn’t go to the bathroom all day? Does that seem likely for any normal person? How about for a Leo Frank who guzzled black coffee by the pot, does that seem likely that he wouldn’t use the toilet all day when he was in the factory from 8:30 AM to 6:00PM? Leo Frank would change that statement that he never used the bathroom later at his trial with his deadly revelation made on August 18, 1913 to the Jury.

The result?

Leo Frank had just confessed to going into the metal room, something he had denied for months, the very place the prosecution spent 29 days from July 28, 1913 to August 25, 1913 trying to prove Leo Frank garroted Mary Phagan sometime between 12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07 in the metal room. What makes matters infinitely worse, James “Jim” Conley, in his last sworn affidavit, after his first two fell apart, finally admitted being told by Leo Frank to take the body of Mary Phagan from the bathroom in the metal room to the basement.

On August 18, 1913, Leo Frank had just corroborated Jim Conley’s admission to being an accomplice after the fact. It was the most shocking thing that the Leo Frank defense team spent 29 days trying to suggest that maybe Jim Conley actually did the murder on the first floor lobby, and Leo Frank essentially admits to killing Mary Phagan in the metal room bathroom. People were literally scratching their heads in disbelief.

Three Lawyers Articulate the Leo Frank Murder Confession, Two at the Trial, and one Later On

Prosecution Team Leader Hugh M Dorsey articulates the August 18, 1913, Leo Frank murder confession in his 9 hour closing arguments delivered at the end of the trial, so does State’s Prosecution Team Member Frank Arthur Hooper, they can both be read in American State Trials Volume X 1918, but the best articulation of the August 18, 1913, Leo Frank murder confession, does not come from the two State’s Prosecution lawyers, it comes from the Anti-Semite Tom Watson, the seasoned attorney and Senator from Georgia, who published his interpretation of the Leo Frank murder confession through his Jeffersonian Publishing company in his magazine titled: Watson’s Magazine, 1915, issues: January, March, August, September and October, and also in some of his Jeffersonian Newspapers in 1914, 1915, 1916, & 1917. These three lawyers Dorsey, Hooper and Watson each articulate the Leo Frank Murder Confession differently and you should be familiar with all three of them. And that is the solution to the Murder of Mary Phagan it was confessed by Leo Frank in the afternoon of August 18, 1913 in his trial statement to the Judge and Jury, and before the August 18, 1913 confession, Leo Frank made his second murder confession, when he secretly confessed the murder of Mary Phagan to his wife Lucille Selig Frank on the evening of April 26, 1913 (Minola McKnight, State’s Exhibit J, June 3, 1913).

Was Minolas affidavit telling the truth in State’s Exhibit J?

Lucille Selig Frank’s 1954 will specifying cremation instead of her requesting burial next to her husband tends to corroborate State’s Exhibit J as true. Today the empty grave plot #1 reserved for Lucille immediately adjacent next to Leo Frank, speaks volumes, the cremation was mandated in her 1954 will (Last Will and Testament of Lucille S. Frank, 1954).

The first of three Leo Frank confessions was made to Jim Conley at the factory and you can read the testimony of James Conley in the 1913 Brief of Evidence, along with Leo Frank murder confession #2 in States Exhibit J, and Leo Frank Murder Confession #3 is in the Trial Statement of Leo Frank in the Brief of Evidence 1913.

Before you study the three different Leo Frank confessions, study States Exhibit A and B it ties it all together and closes all the lose ends.

Anti-Semitic Mob Terror and Injustice? Good Old Fashioned Vigilante Justice Southern Style? Vindication and Victory for the Jury and U.S. Legal System? Extra-Judicial Murder? … one or more of the above? a little bit of each? all of the above? none of the above? Depends on who you ask.

Every Party has its Cliques, Right? This party was 2 months in the making.

This topic is a written attempt to show all perspectives and vantage points on the lynching of Leo Frank, including some lenses that are controversial, viewer discretion advised.

An attempt to present all sides and views, so students of the Leo Frank case can understand the lynching from a 360 degree panoramic, from the Leo Frank Defense, Frankite and Jewish community perspectives on one side, to Tom Watson, the Leo Frank opposition, the States Prosecution Team, the Elite Lynch Party and the non-Jewish perspective on the Lynching from the other side. The Leo Frank Library Archive strives to present all views, perspectives and vantage points of the Leo Frank case as convincingly as possible, so let’s start with the defense, Jewish community and Frankite vantage point and position.

The Cult of Leo Frank, Meet the Frankites: The Jewish community and Leo Frank partisans

The defense side of the Leo Frank case over the last 100 years appears to be formed by the merger of 2 groupings, one is major and one is minor, but together they create: The Frankites.

Meet the Frankites

First and foremost, Jews of all political spectra, left, center or right, genericized and called the ‘Jewish community’ hereafter, and second, to a lesser degree, mostly non-Jewish liberals on the left (the weenie, runt of the litter and egalitarian type, androgynous, sexless types, the kind of people we are sooooo grateful they finally have a low fertility rate), called ‘Leo Frank partisans’ hereafter, or together for short, we can call the Jewish community and Leo Frank partisans: “the Frankites”, as Watson originally coined, branded and summed them up with one word.

Coined Circa 1915

Considering this unusual political alliance still exists today in absolute full force, the term: Frankites is very fitting and relevant, much easier and simpler to use, than always referring to the “Leo Frank Defense Side of the Equation” as the group with the long winded name, ‘the Jewish community and Leo Frank partisans’. Also because most Frankites are predominantly Jews, the terms Frankites and Jewish Frankites are interchangeable as a very accurate description of this cult-like group, even though there are non-Jews welcomed and part of this Jewish Leo Frank cult movement. So let us begin.

The Leo Frank Defense League Position: The Frankites 100 Years Strong

In 1913 a group calling itself the Leo Frank Defense League formed (sounds similar to terrorist Jewish Defense League), though the group name has become in disuse after 1915, Frankites are not defunct, the mantle of their movement is very strong today as the Jewish Frankite Cult and is very strongly expressive through countless media efforts, the Jewish Lobby and on a global level with the ADL of B’nai B’rith.

The voice, video and print produced by members of the “Frankites” for nearly a century is virtually unanimous, concerning their position on the Leo Frank conviction and his Lynching, they summarize the whole affair as a bigoted European-American reign of terror, plus antisemitic scapegoating, which resulted in the antisemitic conviction and assassination of an “innocent” Jewish man. The mellow drama surrounding their own egomania plus their vicious smears and racist hatred are often directed against the general Gentile population, detectives in the case, the media, Hugh M. Dorsey and Tom Watson (the man who solved the murder of Mary Phagan in 1915 using the trial evidence without Jim Conley’s testimony). The Cult of Leo Frank and 100 year long Leo Frank Jewish Hoax about a conspiracy was invalidated in 1915 by Tom Watson, but the Frankites are still running strong 100+ years later.

The Frankite Position on the Leo Frank Trial: Solicitor General Dorsey, An Unscrupulous and Ambition Climber

In terms of the all encompassing false allegations of mob terror, antisemitic and wrongful conviction of Leo Frank, the Prosecutor Hugh M. Dorsey is one of the leading figures accused of being at the center of it all, labeled as the unscrupulous and ambitious Solicitor General who used the Brooklyn Jewboy as a sacrificial lamb to gain political power, prominence, a heroes countenance and prestige. Moreover, the Frankites assert the Leo Frank trial was a legal travesty used as a stepping stone by Hugh Dorsey to ascend to the highest executive position in the State of Georgia, enabling him to capture the Governorship through the popular vote.

For the Frankites: Who is Nemesis Number One?

For the Frankites the most hated figure in the Leo Frank case, is not Hugh Dorsey the man credited with making the “anti-Jewish” conviction with a death sentence of Leo Frank possible, it would instead be an unlikely third party who did not participate in the 1913 trial at all, but who ferociously struck back publicly against the Leo Frank cause celebre movement that went national sparked by Rabbi David Marx and financed via Jews Media moguls from NYC and Chicago. For the Jewish Frankites, the alleged ring leader of the latter half of this “extra-judicial diabolical travesty” which lead to the lynching of Leo Frank is almost always named as one infamous man.

Please Allow Me to Introduce You to the Fire Storm Maker: Tom Watson

For the Frankites: the Hangman, lynch party agitator or simply put the man who could be described as instigating the extra-judicial assassination of Leo Frank is populist politician, publisher and lawyer Tom E. Watson.

In terms of the sum total of the Leo Frank case, the Frankites label Tom Watson as enemy number one, not even Hugh Dorsey, who is accused of unscrupulously dragging an “innocent” Leo Frank through a kangaroo trial to ambitiously climb the political ladder, does not even get the same level of fang-bared foaming at the mouth wrath, hissing venom and vicious hatred by the Jews as Tom Watson does.

Why Watson?

What made Watson hated so much by the Jewish community and Leo Frank partisans is many fold,

Watson Infinitely Simplified a Complicated Murder Trial

One, Tom Watson simplified the Leo Frank trial by deconstructing it through his energetic writings (Watson’s Magazine Jan, March, August, September and October of 1915) in a way the average lay person could easily understand what really happened in totality during the one month long trial (July 28 to August 26) in less than an hour of reading. The alternative to trying to understand the Leo Frank trial without Tom Watson’s Magazine was simply unthinkable and unimaginable, for instance try imagining the average person attempting to read the Leo Frank trial Transcript which was more than 3,500 pages and then trying make sense of it, something like this is not realistic or reasonably possible for the average person in 1913 or 2013. Even if the average person reads the 318 page 1913 murder trial brief of evidence, the average mind untrained in legal matters might get lost in some of the testimony not being able to distill it to it’s important essentials and see with clarity the deeper emergence of the Murder Confession made by Leo Frank during his trial.

Because Watson made a complicated trial infinitely simple it was for that reason — amongst others — which we will discuss, why his writings on the Leo Frank trial are forever banned and censored by Jews and the Left, the editors of Jewish controlled Wikipedia will NOT allow Watsons works about the Leo Frank case to be listed in the references section on the Leo Frank article — even for historical purposes — that alone should make the average curious person want to read them. In fact, the most downloaded items on the LeoFrank.org web site are Tom Watson’s works, because the Frankites have made his writings a forbidden fruit. And those fruits are delicious, because they make you see things with clarity.

Number Two, Ad Hominem Attacks

Two, most gentiles just stand there and take it or cower when Jews reach into their fat cottage cheese asses to squeeze out shit to throw at Gentiles. Watson hit back, and at times Watson hit back hard and unleashed an ugly, and childish no holds barred attack against the Jewish community in response to their Jewsmedia vile smears campaign and attacks on the Honor of Georgians. Watson clowned the Jewish community by attacking the physical features of Leo Freak using harsh and extreme language to describe him.

Watson’s attacks on Leo Franks simian features could be easily taken or interpreted as antisemitism, because they were attacks against some stereotypical Jewish features and physical patterns, that are not necessarily uncommon in Jews. These typical Jewish features are reflections known as phenotypes caused by and from common tribal Jewish genotype patterns.

DSL, Dick Sucking Lips, 2013

In the modern unpublished Jewish fratboy dictionary, Dick sucking lips is the phrase which in a crude way is used in Jewish Fratboy parlance for describing the mouth of a girl with gorgeous lips, but Leo Frank was not a woman. Leo Frank had a very interesting physical feature, it was his succulent satyr lips, the kind you might find on a human-animal chimeric hybrid created with futuristic human genetic engineering, the cross between a camels lips and the lips of a seasoned Russian prostitute with extremely well painted-on lipliner to exaggerate and accentuate the lips. Leo Frank had lips that kind of looked goat-like and they were very crisply defined in the outer perimeter of them with what looked like it could be genetically encoded and genetically expressed intense lip liner, as in you don’t have to add a single drop of make up to achieve that look, it had the natural appearance of such, and naturally made women envious of Leo Franks dick sucking lips for a lack of a more accurate description.

Even worse, Watson attacked Jewish physical features in a way that was deeply entertaining and probably garnered tens of thousands of giggly snickers, deep belly laughs and knee slapping ruckus from his readers. Therefore in essence, Watsons humorous expressions of morphological antisemitism were used to degrade and denigrate Jewish people and make the public laugh at them as a physically ugly inbred tribe of physically ugly monkey trolls that would defend to the death one of their own Jewish pedophile rapist murderers, upholding him as a Martyr of a two year long anti-Jewish conspiracy.

Watson’s writings were surging with poisonous rage and energy that easily attracted a cult following.

The Leo Frank Murder Confession, August 18, 1913

Three, In 1915, Watson brought attention to the murder confession Leo Frank made on the witness stand at his own trial when Frank gave his blunderbuss statement on August 18, 1913. A confession the Jews and Frankites never ever ever ever dare bring up in any of the secondary source works they produce. You will not find Leo Frank’s THREE SEPARATE AND UNIQUE murder confessions mentioned in any books, booklets, videos, texts, documents, round tables, get-togethers and so forth, at least the ones organized by Frankites, they totally and intentionally ignore it (let’s just tuck that 800 pound break dancing pink gorilla back in the closet). Even though the three separate Leo Frank confessions were inescapable and that is what makes the rage against the Jews and Frankites so extreme, that even with the most prominent August 18, 1913, Leo Frank confession, the Jews still reach deep into their own FAT gelatinous asses to extract ammunition and smear glatt kosher human feces on anyone who might even dare to suggest Leo Frank was not only absolutely guilty, but Why?

The flash of anger as Leos fist pounded her face. Leos face surging with blood as he pulled the rope tightly around her neck so it buried deep in the flesh.

From the Southerner perspective only the most dangerous race in the universe would attempt to transmogrify a devil into Jesus, that’s what the bribed and corrupt Governor did on behalf of the Jews.

Why is the Leo Frank murder confession always left out by Frankites?

Answer: It would wipe out 100 years of Jewish and Frankite propaganda!

Watson and the Blood Libel Lynching

In what amounts to nothing less than a single unified bloc vote by the Jewish Community and Frank partisans, or the “Frankites” as they are more accurately described, they universally point the angry and guilty finger of accusation with single minded unity toward Tom E. Watson, as the alleged person to have essentially:

1. been central to inspiring the lynching of Leo Frank by whetting the murderous passion of the people, impelling them to orchestrated violence, all via the catalyst of Watson’s ferocious and venomous publications all unleashed through his Jeffersonian Publishing Company,

and

2. protected the perpetrators of the Leo Frank lynching from prosecution by shaping public opinion before and after the lynching in 1915, thus making it virtually impossible to form any Jury capable of convicting any single individual lyncher or the lynch party as a whole, because as it goes without saying, only one sympathetic lone person is needed to hold out in any Jury of twelve, no matter how compelling the evidence. It is also said that the lynchers were known by some of the public, and no one would dare speak their names openly in a way that would endanger them and it is also said that the lynchers names are now on the streets, landmarks, buildings, etc… in the greater vicinity.

Overtly or covertly these are two main supposition of the Frankites concerning the pre-party planning June to August, lynch party August 16 and 17, 1915, and the afterparty and Grand opening party for relaunch of the KKK at Stone Mountain, Thanksgiving, 1915.

(The KKK taken into its real context was an ineffective immunological response of the Host attempting to counteract the JewisHIV+ virus that has infected Western Civilization and is working to undermine it).

The Frankites (Jewish community and Frank partisans) suggest these two main accusations listed above against Tom E. Watson in virtually every secondary source written on the Leo Frank case and for good reasons too which have strong merit, at least if measured at superficial cosmetic face value, because when one carefully reads and studies the five (5) booklets on Leo M. Frank that Tom Watson published, in his ‘Watson’s Magazine’ issues January, March, August, September, and October of 1915, in total, they collectively make a very powerful, convincing, easy to follow and compelling case to show the conviction of Leo Frank was the correct decision and rightfully supports his execution by hanging as the Jury made no recommendation for Mercy from hanging on August 25, 1913.

Against Capital Punishment?

The Leo Frank conviction was perceived as correct by a public that is at least amongst the largest majority of open minded people, who are incapable of self-deception and haven’t taken sides, this is of course presuming the individuals are not morally against capital punishment when it is just in the eyes of the law.

Dorsey made sure to initially weed out potential jurors who might be against capital punishment for this reason, because even if Dorsey made a good case, there was a risk of someone against capital punishment not convicting out of fear of the outcome. Protecting against this risk, Roan gave the Jury the option of life in Prison or the death penalty by hanging. Frankites say Leonard S. Roan doubted the conviction, but what doubting judge sentences a man to die on his birthday, when he can set any date out of the year?!

Could you convict a lyncher?

In terms of justice for the lynchers, the “public jury”, if their only frame of reference on the case came from the local newspapers at the time which were blandly undetailed and un-analytical, and Tom E. Watson as their source of analysis, even local Jews would find it a double-think to hold two contradictory concepts in their mind, Leo Frank is innocent and Leo Frank is guilty. It only takes one Juror hold out to prevent a conviction, one out of twelve, that’s 8.5%.

Watson’s 1915 writings on the Leo Frank case are dangerous, because they invalidate every Frankite book written in the last 100 years and that is why his writings are banned today by Jews and Jewish occupied Wikipedia. Anyone who criticizes Jewish behavior is automatically put through the Jewish smear machine, banned, ostracized and marginalized.

There were no serious contenders producing booklets and books at the time, to balance out Tom Watson’s writings in 1915. He had a virtual monopoly on the issue of Leo Frank in 1915. So the question is could Tom Watson have been the match that sparked the boiling gasoline flood in 1915? It’s debatable. Was Watson the Straw that Broke the Camels Back? No, Leo Frank would probably have been lynched with or without Watson, the newspaper articles about the trial, the elusive closing speeches captured in the newspapers and booklets would have surely captivated the educated and elite in terms of the depth and truth of it. They never would have let Leo Frank get away with what he did, especially after Frank made a near confession during his own testimony given at the trial on 8-18-1913.

Watson Inflamed the People Against Frank?

The lynching accusations against Watson are partly overstated, because it should be noted, that the mood of the people before Watson stepped into the Leo Frank media circus in most of 1915, was already strongly against Frank, and that Watson may have only served to catalyze the permanent crystallization of those feelings which were already strong and nearly absolute against Frank after his conviction.

Can we really say Frank got a fair trial? If the mood of the people was strongly against him pre-trial?

The police, detectives and investigators had honed in within a matter of hours and days on Leo Frank (56 hours to be exact is how long it took the police to figure it out and arrest him after the discovery of Mary Phagan) and the newspapers had reflected the strength of the evidence against Frank early on well after his arrest, but the newspapers did not make any attempt to railroad Leo Frank or make him the prime suspect because he was Jewish as some Frankites like Elaine Marie Alphin have suggested.

Once Leo Frank was unanimously recommended by the Coroner’s Inquest Jury of seven men (Coroner Donehee plus six members) to be bound over for murder and reviewed by a Grand Jury, and a Grand Jury of 21 men which included 4 Jewish members together unanimously indicted Leo Frank for the strangulation murder of Mary Phagan, it might have tended to create a situation in the minds of the general public that Leo Frank was more likely to be guilty than innocent, even though our justice system requires that one is always considered innocent until proven guilty. And in a perfect society everyone is innocent until proven guilty, despite the unanimous decisions of both the Coroners Inquest Jury and the Grand Jury in terms of their belief that Leo Frank was guilty. It was not prejudices or anti-Semitism at the time that led to their belief in Leo Frank’s guilt, it was the facts, testimony and evidence.

The newspapers at the time had some influence on public opinion, as the media has forever had the ability to shape opinion.

There was no TV, Internet, texting, cell phones, mainly the only news was delivered through the newspapers. Perception is reality, this is why media control is sometimes more powerful than governments and armies in its day to day influence. Though it can’t be stated enough, there is no evidence that the media was responsible for making Leo Frank the prime suspect, they were simply reporting the facts as they came in.

The real reason Leo Frank became the prime suspect is that he lied and told the police that the Negro Newt Lee had missed 3 punches on his time card, opening up three one hour segments of time unaccounted for the Night Watchman.

Once the trial Jury of twelve men unanimously convicted Leo Frank and two years of appellate courts failed to disturb or overturn the verdict of the Jury, in most Southern peoples minds it was with absolute mathematical certainty, the factual guilt of Leo Frank. However for the Jewish Community, Leo Frank had been swept into a vast and neurotic antisemitic conspiracy and the conspiracy theories would never stop even to this day, including wild hoax claims that Jim Conley made a murder confession to his lawyer William Smith (poppycock).

Hey Frankites, what about the Leo Frank confession on August 18, 1913 that was real and is in the official record

Therefore given that Leo Frank went through a Coroner’s Jury, a Grand Jury, a Trial Jury and two years of failed appeals, all suggesting the strong likelihood of his guilt, to suggest Tom Watson caused the unjust lynching of an innocent Jew Leo Frank, is only telling a selective part of the story and showing only a portion of the whole picture. Watson is certainly important in the tail end of this dramatic Greek tragedy that is the strangulation of Mary Phagan and lynching of Leo Frank, but his role is overstated in terms of the Lynch Party. The truth is, it was Slaton and not Watson that caused the lynching.

Watson’s Death Blow

Tom Watson made sure to emphasize to his readership of 100,000, with his uniquely colorful vernacular and Southern linguistic dialect, something the masses might not have been fully cognizant of because no newspapers talked about it at the time, that is the near murder confession made on August 18 1913 by Leo Frank when he mounted the stand at his own murder trial to tell his side of the story.

For most people, they did not know the details of the trial, except for the sometimes blandly detailed and generic reports coming from the newspapers, for the masses they just assumed that the unanimous Coroners Inquest Jury, Grand Jury, Judge, Petite Jury and Appellate courts had rendered their verdict from 1913 to 1915. The average person did not read the trial testimony 3,500 pages or brief of evidence 318 pages, but they certainly will today, if they are curious enough, now thanks to the Internet and this web site. The lost Trial testimony questions and answers coming online in 2015.

Dinner Time Talk

Watson did something unheard of at the time, he made the official record available to the public, published relevant and material portions of it and discussed it in a way the Joe Six packs and Sally Soccer moms of the time could understand, and it would have surely been the exciting dinner time talk of the town in both the Jewish and Gentile homes.

Watson made it lucidly known and clear about the rarely mentioned near confession made by Leo Frank at the murder trial and expounded to his readers about the final speeches delivered by the State’s prosecution team leaders at the most crucial and critical moment in the trial of Leo Frank.

During their final closing arguments in late August 1913, Hugh M. Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper, vividly reminded observers and the court, that during the August 18 1913 testimony provided to the Jury by Leo Frank, for the first time, Frank made an inescapable admission that he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom in the metal room during the time period of the murder, the time the prosecution spent 4 weeks successfully proving Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan there. It became an easy victory after Leo Frank made his public virtual murder confession.

You Can’t Hide the Confession Frankites

Not one single secondary source ever covers this glaring fact and most people are wondering why Frank partisans won’t talk about Leo Frank’s virtual murder confession at his trial now that the centennial anniversary of the trial becomes a new reality?

Leo Frank Four Hours on the Stand August 18 1913

The way that Frank made this virtual admission was done in a way that might not have been obvious to the average person, except for those who had been paying very close attention to what Leo Frank was saying at the time and was captured in the official record as what he had said. Moreover to understand the importance of the “unconscious” bathroom visit, one must understood the layout of the second floor of the factory which contains the metal room and bathroom.

During Leo Frank’s four hour testimony to the court and Jury he spent more than three hours of it talking about the boring specifics of numeric accounting computations he had done that day and to top it off showed his accounting books and diagrams, describing the math, even going down to the minutiae explaining the actual numbers he was adding, subtracting and multiplying during his long day at the factory. It was Boring, immaterial and obtuse, the Jury wanted an explanation of why his office was empty and Frank gave it to them! However the slippery Leo Frank snuck his confession within the mind numbing 4 hours of his testimony to counter Monteen Stover.

Mob Terror Convicted Leo Frank Setting the Stage to Later Lynch Him

Another charge made by the Jewish Community and Leo Frank Partisans, is concerning the mob terror pattern and mob terror chain of events leading to the Lynching of Leo Frank. It starts with the Jury was mob terrorized, accusations that people were chanting, “Hang the Jew, Hang the Jew” would later be put out into circulation, yet not a single newspaper at the time has ever once published anything about a mob terrorists outside the court chanting “Hang the Jew, Hang the Jew”, if this really happened it would have not only been in the Newspapers at the time, but would have been mentioned during the appeals process and there is not a single line in the 1800 pages of the Georgia State Archive on Leo Frank to substantiate this claim, therefore it is likely this is pure fabricated propaganda, rumor and dishonesty by the Jewish community. The mob terror claim is overstated according to 2 years of appellate courts reviews saying this charge is absolutely not true.

Mob Terror or Leo Frank Testimony? Imagine you are on the Jury

Imagine if someone had spent the majority of their time on the witness stand going over math and accounting problems during their own murder trial as an attempt to show they were too busy to have murdered someone that day, would they come off as a total nut ball? They would if their own defense witnesses said the work they do only takes 2 to 3 hours. Leo Frank stayed at the factory till approximately 6:00 PM at night, if he arrived at approximately 8:30 in the morning, it meant he had more than enough time, even with errands to get 2 to 3 hours of work done, but to make matters worse, it was a Holiday, and he wasn’t expected to put in a 10 or 11 hour day and the work he had to do that day did not take 2 to 3 hours, it took a lot less. The Jury, Judge and Courtroom could see through it all and no impartial conscientious person was buying the nonsense and blather Leo Frank was shoveling about pencil manufacturing, everyone there wanted to know .

The specific numbers and calculations coming from Leo Frank were so mind numbing that people might have become totally dizzy, dazed, yawning and tuned out when Frank made his near murder confession on August 18, 1913, a confession that he slipped into his testimony, because no newspapers pointed it out, it was only brought up in the closing arguments of State’s prosecution Team members Hugh Manson Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper in later August 1913 and then later by Tom E. Watson in 1915, and now www.LeoFrank.org 2013 to 2015.

The question observers are asking is when will the next secondary source come out that goes over this compelling fact, since 1915 was the last time the Leo Frank murder confession was really discussed in any physically published work?

The Leo Frank Murder Confession of August 18, 1913, is indisputable, and so where Leo Frank other two murder confessions made on April 26, 1913 one to James Conley and one to his wife Lucille Selig Frank, this is part of what caused so much rage, when the Leo Frank defense lawfirm partner and corrupt Governor of Georgia John M. Slaton commuted Leo Frank’s death sentence. Leo Frank was not lynched because he was a Jew, but because he beat, raped and strangled Mary Phagan.

Why wont anybody talk about Leo Frank’s virtual admission of murder? Instead of accusing mob terror, anti-Hebrew race cards, and prejudices as the major reasons for Leo Franks conviction and lynching?

But what about the Lynching? Mob Terror? or Cold Calculating Commando Killing? The execution of Leo Frank was not by some whipped up into a frenzy, alcohol fueled, spontaneously violent crowd, coming together by the forces of rage and nature, creating a crazy mob of booger eating hillbillies and farmers with manure stained overalls, blackened teeth, fire torches and pitch forks.

It was no MOB at all

The lynch party was formed by the cognitive and genetic elite of the State of Georgia, who executed a military operation of exquisite precision. It was the single most audacious prison break in US history. One that had been planned for nearly 2 months and fulfilled to perfection.

Back to the Leo Frank Confession as the Source of His Lynching

It is important to mention this verifiable truth in the record of the closing arguments of State’s prosecution council and in the self-incriminating testimony provided by Leo Frank, because not a single contemporary writer ever mentions this glaring fact of a virtual confession by Leo M. Frank, not Oney, not Dinnerstein, or Elaine Marie Alphin whose book is filled from beginning to end with made up fabrications. Though there are plenty of sources accusing some variation of semantics in place of “Mob Terror” or “Prejudices” from the trial to the lynching, and concerning the lynching, Watson’s name is cited the most as the individual who inspired the “mob like terror lynching of Leo Frank”.

Watson: The Devils in the Details

Watson was unequivocally in support for the Lynching, and he certainly made that clear, but so was everyone else after Leo Frank’s appeals failed, he should have died at the end of a rope as prescribed by the Law and he did. Tom Watson also provided the details of the Leo Frank case in easy to understand series of works, though how much influence he had in inspiring the lynching tends to be grossly over stated. Many outside observers of the case and the general people who were interested in the trial at the time, might not have been aware of this virtual admission of guilt by Leo Frank, but Watson made sure to vividly and lucidly ensure it was unmistakably clear in 1915, so that the commutation by Slaton would and could only be seen for what it really and truly ‘was’ in the eyes of Watson, the people and elites who understood why they were against Frank: that is Slaton’s order of Clemency for Leo Frank was the most brazen and audacious betrayal of power against the law and people.

The Jewish Perspective

For the Jewish community and Leo Frank partisans, the clemency was a token of relief for an innocent man who was convicted by a mob terrorized Jury, little did they know it would become the catalyst for his lynching.

Part of Jewish self-deception and denial requires that they trick themselves into believing Tom Watson caused the lynching, they always need a devil figure to direct their hate.

For the Southren public it was the commutation that was the real source of inspiration for the Lynching, though Watson making Leo Frank’s guilt clear can not be given as a reliable reason as to why Frank was lynched, nor can his advocacy of it become part of the Jewish blame game. It is more likely that Watson was articulating the feelings of the public, rather than he was telling them what to think. Afterall the Leo Frank trial and appeals was one of the single most watched events in 20th Century Southern history.

When the Leo Frank Defense Fund Turned People Out They Invariably Moved to New York

The betrayal perceived in the eyes of the elites and general masses of Georgia was inspired by the criminal acts by the Leo Frank defense team culminating with the clemency at the end, which was such an extreme insult to ones intelligence, it dealt a death kiss for Slaton, but Slaton was no slouch and saw the writing on the wall, he could see what lurked around the corner for him, his prescience saved his own life and he moved to New York City in the nick of time (like many people did who supported the Frank side), that is, until eventually, the inferno of rage died down, he came back to Georgia to live a quiet life. This was a pattern observed thoughout the entire Leo Frank ordeal from 1913 to 1915, whenever the Leo Frank trust fund bribed someone they ended up in NYC, like the lawyer of James Conley named William Smith. William Smith got turned out like fifty dolla hooker working the corners of 42nd street in NY, but he was not alone, the affidavits in the appeals reveal so many other people who the Leo Frank defense tried to turn out and ones it did turn out. It shows you some people can be bought and others can not. None of the books written by Jews and Frankites reveal the dirty little secrets of all the criminal activity and bribery coming from the Leo Frank defense.

No Where to Run and No Where to Hide

Leo Frank however had no chance to run away to new york city, like all the people his defense fund bribed. Leo Frank had no where to run and no where to hide, as his whereabouts where fully known and within two months his doomed fate would be sealed at the end of a 3/4th inch manila rope at Frey’s Mill. The prison doubled the guards on duty as well, because they may have suspected what was coming.

Watson Sold Out!

Watson’s magazine, despite having a circulation which tripled and surged to a record circulation of 100,000, still sold out instantly during the tail end of the Leo Frank Saga in 1915, they couldn’t print the issues containing booklets about Leo Frank fast enough. The magazines were ravenously read, re-read, shared and talked about endlessly, because they intensely covered the subjects the people of Georgia and the entire nation were enthralled with, for Leo Frank, the devils in the details.

Watson’s Magazine, January, March, August, September and October 1915

There was certainly an aroma of blood lust and vengeance in the air at a time in history when the men of the community would sometimes come together in an extra-judicial critical mass to be the Judge and Jury with a hang mans noose. It was a time when criminals and rapists were dealt with effectively at the end of a rope, not locked up in jail to work out, become stronger and join powerful prison gangs. Lynchings were community affairs, it was the ultimate form of democracy celebrated and it kept rapists shaking in their boots. If every convicted rapist or murder were publicly hanged today, crime rates would drop.

Another Perspective: Watson is the Anti-Semite Superstar

Watson talked about the Leo Frank Case, at the time and in a way that no one else dared – with delicious venom, energy, wit and sarcasm. However, from the perspective of the Jewish Community and Frank partisans, Watson committed the ultimate thought crimes and hate crime, simply put, Watson articulated the guilt of Leo Frank like a virtuoso with some of the most vile antisemitic gutter language and openly incited Frank’s assassination. However, when Tom Watson wrote about these things in 1915, two years after the trial, he was releasing his own anger in his own way.

It is one thing to articulate the guilt of Leo Frank with the depth and linguistic mastery of a seasoned Lawyer, it is another to outright call for his extrajudicial extermination. Watson anyway you spin it called for bloody murder, but was he only reflecting the rage of the people? How pissed off would you be if someone raped and strangled a 13 year old girl in your family and the Jewish community tried to turn the perpetrator into a hero?

August 1915 issue of ‘Watson’s Magazine’

Even the August 1915 issue of ‘Watson’s Magazine’ published just weeks before Leo M. Frank was lynched on August 17 1915 and nearly 5 weeks after the Frank commutation on June 21 1915, makes a very compelling case for a conviction well beyond a reasonable doubt and presumably advocates delivering extra-judicial justice to Leo Frank in a roundabout way, especially because incensed and indignant southerners would want the highest penalty paid for such a heinous crime against one of their own.

After the Conviction

Leo Frank in the eyes of the general public, became the symbol of depraved, wealthy and corrupt power trying to use outside influence and big Jewish money to escape justice, and that no matter what, Frank would have to pay the fair price, handing over his own life for raping and strangling Mary Phagan. Twenty five to thirty five men were willing to risk their lively hood to ensure Frank did not escape justice.

For the Jewish community Frank became a martyr of anti-Semitic injustice. Jews suffer from some kind of tribal neurosis and mental pathologies that presume that because Leo Frank was a Jew that he couldn’t have committed this crime. Jews are the most racist people in the world obsessed with their own race.

Tom Watson as Robinhood

For Southerners, there was very much some kind of a robin hood factor in play with Tom Watson, that being, the rich Jews would have to pay dearly for their crimes against the poor working class. Moreover, that the rich, no matter how much money they threw at the Leo Frank appeals, no matter how many letter writing campaigns they launched and no matter how much national media control muscle they flexed on Franks behalf, they would not be able to weasel their way out of this one, at least not at this time. In response to this reality, the Jews have become more determined to romanticize the image of Leo Frank.

Tom Watson as a Rabblerouser

For the Jewish community, many saw the rage against Leo Frank from a neurotic victim and persecution lens which seems to be a genetically innate behavioral expression of Jews. The prosecution and persecution, as Elaine Marie Alphin might put it, of Leo Frank, was perceived as a kind of Southern blind ignorance and jungle prejudice that knew no bounds of decency, with Dorsey at the helm. Though Elaine Marie Alphin can not be considered as an overall reliable source, alas she is mentioned because she does articulate the pro-Frank side of the Leo Frank case well, even if she does so dishonestly and by completly fabricating a series of fantastic lies in her book.

The Final Word on the Matter

Though the final verdict would be re-affirmed with directly or indirectly by every level of the United States legal system, providing the “ultimate truth” of the matter and the bottom line in the Leo Frank Case from 1913 to 1986. The verdict of the Jury has not been disturbed, not even in 1986, no matter how much spin is applied by the Jews. The final verdict is unchangeable now more than 100 years after the original guilty verdict was delivered 1913, the guilt of Leo Frank is now eternally permanent as of 1986 onward. Not even the Pardon of 1986 would exonerate Leo Frank or disturb the verdict of the Jury, should make it clear that the kosher feces being flung by the Jewish Supremacists, shows that Jews are incompatible with Gentile Nations and Jews represent a terminal cancer for Western Civilization.

Another View: Articulation for those who may have once only believed emotionally in Franks guilt having faith in our legal system

As a seasoned lawyer, Watson provided power, clear and inescapable articulation of Leo Frank’s guilt for many southerners, because some of them may have only or simply believed in Frank’s guilt on an emotional level because the system said he was guilty after careful consideration and for a want of righteous vengeance for the strangulation of Mary Phagan (not because of blind anti-Jewish prejudice), rather than because they had actually read the official record of the Leo M. Frank murder trial and reasoned it out for themselves, most people have faith in our legal system of trial by Jury.

As it does today, the media has a powerful influence on the opinion of the masses, because perception is reality and Watson was able to use this eternal herd like tendency within the masses of people, to amplify their rage to a fevered pitch, with logical, well reasoned and compelling arguments as to Frank’s guilt and the necessity to lynch him. But by the time Watson wrote about the Leo Frank case the Justice System had already made up its mind and was just going through the motions.

Sept 1915 issue of ‘Watson’s Magazine’, shielded the Lynchers of Leo Frank

See the booklet that makes the strongest case for convicting Leo Frank which could be described as making it impossible to convict any lyncher of Leo Frank in any local court, simply because of the case for extra-judicial justice it makes is so strong and compelling. Moreover even without the Sept 1915 issue, the mood of the people reached its height against Frank after Slaton’s late June 1915 commutation. See: The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert, September 1915 by Tom Watson, Watson dubs Frank a “Jew pervert”.

From Watson’s view, he Perceived an ongoing Slander and Defamation campaign by the Jewish Controlled media in the Oct 1915 issue of ‘Watson’s Magazine’

Be sure to also read the October 1915 Issue of Watson’s Magazine produced by Watson, in that issue Watson both accuses and makes a compelling argument that the Jewish community lead a national campaign of hate, slander and defamation against the State of Georgia. Oney in his subtle and careful maneuvering argues that the nationwide campaign against the State of Georgia, may have back fired and hints that it also may have been in some part influential in Frank’s lynching. Indeed, even Governor John Marshal Slaton in his commutation letter, speaks of outsiders trying to influence the local and internal affairs of the State of Georgia, and that most of these outsiders have never actually read the official record and that they will have no influence on his commutation. Observers are wondering what really influenced Slaton to give his commutation, was it really because he doubted the guilty verdict? or was there something more sinister that inspired the clemency given to Frank.

After 2 years of appellate reviews failing to overturn the verdict of the Jury, the people of Georgia were enraged to murderous heights by Slaton’s commutation, it seemed to many, that the entire legal system of the United States, was turned upside down on June 21 1915, by a corrupt Governor bribed by Jewish money. For the Jewish community, the masses of Georgians were part of a vast antisemitic conspiracy.

Antisemitic Reasons From the Perception of the People

However, there is compelling evidence that many factors and variables influencing the lynching of Leo Frank, include more than Slaton’s controversial commutation, they are:

1. the big money influence of the Jewish community,
2. the Jewish nationwide letter writing campaign launched outside of Georgia in every state,
3. Jewish national media control waging a campaign of defamation, slander and blood libel against Georgia,

5. outside meddling by wealthy Jews Adolph Oct and Lasker,
6. Watson’s Antisemitism,
7. subtle and overt class, and political influences which were maneuvering both behind the scenes and openly, and the
8. strong desire of the people to see justice fulfilled against all odds.

May 5, 2004

Steve Oney’s List of the Leo Frank Lynchers

http://flagpole.com/Weekly/Features/SteveOneysListOfTheLeoFrankLynchers.5May04

In 2000, Stephen J. Goldfarb’s website, www.leofranklynchers.com, identified 12 of the Leo Frank lynchers. As a result of Steve Oney’s book, which identifies 17 more lynchers, the number of known lynchers of Leo Frank has more than doubled, from 12 to 29. There is no reason to doubt the reliability of the lynching lists complied by Goldfarb and Oney. As a matter of historical fact, the total number of lynchers may have reached 40, and both Goldfarb and Oney acknowledge that their lists are incomplete.

Oney furnishes the names of 26 of Leo Frank’s lynchers, nine of whom had previously been identified as lynchers by Goldfarb. According to Oney, the 26 lynchers, who all were from or associated with Cobb County, fell into three categories. First, there were the leaders and the planners, who conceived, plotted, and organized the lynching. Second, there were the field commanders, who were part of and traveled with the lynch party, and were in charge of the footsoldiers who comprised the rest of the lynch party. Third, there were the footsoldiers, who either were part of the lynch party that abducted Frank or materially supported or made helpful arrangements for the lynch party. Oney gives the names of six planners, three field commanders, and 17 footsoldiers (11 of whom were on the lynch party), for a total of 26 lynchers.
Both Goldfarb and Oney agree on the identity of nine lynchers. Goldfarb lists three lynchers (John Augustus (Gus) Benson, Ralph Molden Manning, and Moultrie McKinney Sessions) who are not on Oney’s list, and Oney names 16 lynchers not named by Goldfarb.

The Leaders and Planners

Joseph M. Brown (1851-1932) Governor of Georgia, 1909-1911 and 1912-1913, and a political ally of Tom Watson. On Dec. 27, 1914 he published in The Augusta Chronicle an article hostile to Leo Frank in which he asked rhetorically: “Are we to understand that anybody except a Jew can be punished for a crime?” On Aug. 8, 1915, only days before Leo Frank’s lynching, he published a position paper in The Macon Telegraph in which with regard to the Frank case he asserted that the time had come for “the people to form mobs.” As Governor of Georgia, Joseph M. Brown was the immediate predecessor of Gov. John M. Slaton.

Newton Augustus Morris (1869-1941) An 1893 graduate of the UGA law school, he held numerous public offices during his career, and was a superior court judge of the Blue Ridge Circuit (which included Cobb County) in 1909-1912 and 1917-1919. He was also a property developer and contractor. Oney calls him “a sharp operator” and “a devious and brassy character.” A person who knew Newton Augustus Morris said of him, “He was a fourteen-karat son of a bitch with spare parts.” In 1891 Morris had been charged with attempted murder and cattle rustling in California.

Eugene Herbert Clay (1881-1923) The son of a U. S. Senator, Clay was Mayor of Marietta in 1910-1911, district attorney of the Blue Ridge Circuit in 1913-1918, and a Georgia state senator in 1921-1923. Oney tells us that Clay’s personal life “was a thoroughgoing scandal and had been since boyhood.” In 1901, while a UGA student, he wandered the streets of Athens one night, firing pistol shots into the air, and as a result was expelled from the university. He was found dead at the age of 41 in an Atlanta hotel room on June 22, 1923. There are several different a accounts of how he died. According to a longtime Cobb County Superior Court judge, Luther Hames, “Clay was killed when a whore hit him over the head with a liquor bottle.”

John Tucker Dorsey (1876-1957) One of Marietta’s premier trial lawyers, John Tucker Dorsey was a member of the lower house of the Georgia General Assembly in 1915-1917 and 1941-1945, and served as district attorney of the Blue Ridge Circuit in 1918-1920. Years before the lynching he had been twice convicted of manslaughter and had served an imprisonment sentence on the chain gang. John Tucker Dorsey was a distant cousin of prosecutor Hugh M. Dorsey.

Fred Morris (1876-?) A prominent lawyer, Fred Morris was serving his first term in the Georgia General Assembly at the time of lynching. “[W]hen the Boy Scout movement began,” Oney says, “he organized the Marietta troop.”
Bolan Glover Brumby (1876-1948) Brumby owned a furniture manufacturing company, the Marietta Chair Company. In 1910 The Atlanta Constitution described him as “one of North Georgia’s most successful businessmen.” Oney says that Brumby “was the very image of arrogant Southern aristocracy” and that “nothing angered him more than Northerners.”

The Field Commanders

George Exie Daniell (1882-1970) The proprietor of a jewelry shop on Marietta Square for 40 years, he was a member of the Rotary Club and (like fellow lynchers Newton Augustus Morris and Eugene Herbert Clay) a charter member of the Marietta Country Club.

Gordon Baxter Gann (1877-1949) An attorney and protege of Newton Augustus Morris, Gann was Mayor of Marietta in 1922-1925 and 1927-1929, and a member of the lower house of the Georgia General Assembly in 1919-1922. At the time of the lynching Gann was the judge of the probate court in Cobb County.

Newton Mayes Morris (“Black Newt”) (1878-?) A first cousin of Newton Augustus Morris, he ran the Cobb County chain gang and was so proficient in using his bullwhip on prisoners that he was sometimes known as “Whipping Newt.” In 1891 he had been arrested in California for attempting to murder someone by shooting him with two blasts from a shotgun.

The Footsoldiers

The footsoldiers who assisted the lynch party in a supporting role included:
William J. Frey (1867-1925) The Sheriff of Cobb County in 1903-1909, he prepared the noose used to hang Frank, and may have actually looped it around Frank’s neck. Frey’s Gin, the location of the lynching, was his property.
E. P. Dobbs The Mayor of Marietta when the lynching occurred, he lent his car to the lynch party.
L. B. Robeson A railroad freight agent, he lent his car to the lynch party.
Jim Brumby Bolan Glover Brumby’s brother, he owned a garage and serviced the automobiles used in the lynching.
Robert A. Hill A banker, he helped fund the lynching.

The footsoldiers on the lynch party included:

George Swanson, who was serving as Sheriff of Cobb County in 1915, and two of his deputies, William McKinney and George Hicks.
Cicero Holton Dobbs (1880-1954), a taxi driver. (According to Stephen J. Goldfarb, Cicero Dobbs “operated a grocery store in Marietta for 25 years, and later the Dobbs Barber Shop.”)
D. R. Benton, a farmer, and an uncle of Mary Phagan.
Horace Hamby, a farmer.
“Coon” Shaw, a mule trader.

Emmet and Luther Burton, two brothers, who are believed to have sat on either side of Leo Frank in the automobile that took him from prison to death. Emmet is said to have been a police officer, and Luther a coal yard operator.

“Yellow Jacket” Brown, an electrician, who rode his motorcycle to Milledgeville ahead of the lynch party and cut the city’s telephone lines just before the lynch party entered the prison.

Lawrence Haney, a farmer.

——————————————————————

January 1st 2000

Leo Frank Lynchers

Copyright January 1, 2000 by Stephen Goldfarb, Ph.D.

Since the infamous lynching of Leo Frank on August 17, 1915, in Cobb County, Georgia, the identity of those involved has remained a closely-guarded secret. The list reproduced below and the ensuing discussion documents for the first time the identity of some of those who both planned and carried out this murder. This document is an incomplete list of the men who planned and carried out the kidnapping and lynching of Leo Frank in August of 1915.

The document (used with permission) is part of the Leo Frank collection and is housed in the Special Collections Department, Robert W. Woodruff Library of Emory University. Although the document is unsigned, the identity of the author is known to me; however, because of the nature of this list, I have decided not to disclose its author at this time. *(*SEE ADDENDUM TO THIS PAGE FOR RECENT ADDITIONS TO THIS INFORMATION)

Leo Max Frank (1884-1915) was the manager of the National Pencil Factory in Atlanta, Georgia, from the time of its establishment sometime in 1909. On April 26, 1913, one of his employees, a young girl named Mary Phagan, was brutally murdered in the factory. Frank was convicted of this crime in the summer of 1913 and sentenced to be hanged. For most of the next two years, Frank’s lawyers appealed the death sentence, twice to the United States Supreme Court, but to no avail. In June 1915, shortly before he was to leave office, Governor John M. Slaton commuted Frank’s death sentence to life in prison. About two months later, Frank was kidnapped from the state prison farm at Milledgeville, transported about 175 miles to Cobb County, original home of Mary Phagan, and lynched near a place called Frey’s Mill on the morning of August 17, 1915. None of the lynchers of Frank was ever tried for the murder of Frank, much less convicted; in fact the identity of the lynchers has remained a closely-guarded secret. [2]

The list itself contains twenty-six names, two less than contemporary accounts claimed as having taken part in the lynching.[3] Some of these names are of people who will very likely never be identified, unless someone with special knowledge of the lynching comes forward. In some cases only surnames are given, and in others the names are so common, that there are likely to have been several persons among the thousands of males living in Cobb County at that time with that name.[4] Nevertheless, nine of the lynch mob members, including all but one of those listed as being either a “leader” or a “planner” can be identified with confidence. The two “leaders” were identified as Judge Newton Morris and George Daniels.

Newton Augustus Morris (1869-1941) was, according to his obituary in the Marietta Daily Journal, a “leader in the Democratic party in Georgia.” He served in the Georgia House of Representatives from 1898 to 1904, during which time he was speaker pro tem (1900-1901) and then speaker (1902-1904), after which he served two terms as judge on the Blue Ridge Circuit (1909-1912, 1917-1919), the Georgia court circuit that included Cobb County. [5] Morris was credited with preventing the mutilation of Frank’s body after the lynching. According to newspaper accounts, Morris rushed to the scene of the lynching as soon as he heard about it, and once there, he “interceded and pleaded with everyone to permit Frank’s remains to be sent home to his parents for a decent burial.” While Frank’s body was being removed, one member of the crowd, who had earlier wanted to burn Frank’s body, began stomping on the corpse; Morris was able to stop this, which enabled the undertakers to remove Frank’s body to a funeral home in Atlanta. [6] The other man listed as being a leader is George Daniels. Research in contemporary documents has failed to turn up a man by that name, though two persons with the name George Daniel (or Daniell) have been identified, whose age was similar to those of the other lynchers. George Daniels is the only one on the list that is identified as being a member of the Ku Klux Klan. [7]

The following three men are listed as being “planners”: Herbert Clay, M. M. Sessions, and John Dorsey. Of the three, the best known was Eugene Herbert Clay (1881-1923). Son of United States Senator Alexander Stephens Clay, and older brother of four-star General Lucius D. Clay, who served as Allied High Commissioner of Germany from 1945-1949, Herbert Clay was mayor of Marietta (1910-1911) and solicitor general (i.e. district attorney) of the Blue Ridge judicial circuit (1913-18). In this capacity Clay should have prosecuted the lynchers of Frank, a bitter irony, as he himself was a planner of the lynching and may well have taken part in the lynching. He was subsequently elected to the Georgia State Senate and served as its president in the years 1921-1922; he was elected to the Georgia House of Representatives the following year but died in an Atlanta hotel, a few days before the opening of the 1923 session. [8] Clay is the only lyncher whose identity as such has appeared in print.[9]

Born in neighboring Cherokee County, Moultrie McKinney Sessions (1863-1927) moved to Marietta as a child and lived there for the rest of his life. Son of a prominent judge, Sessions received his legal training in a law office and became a lawyer while still a minor. A successful lawyer and financier, he founded Sessions Loan and Trust Co. in 1887. Although active in civic organizations, Sessions does not appear to have held any elected political office.[10]

Also a lawyer, John Tucker Dorsey (1876-1957) moved to Marietta in 1908, after graduation from the University of Georgia and practicing law in Gainesville, Georgia. According to his obituary in the Marietta Daily Journal, Dorsey was active in many civic activities and served in the Georgia House of Representatives (1915-1917, 1941-1945), as solicitor general of the Blue Ridge Circuit (1918-1920), and as ordinary of Cobb County from 1948 until his death. Dorsey represented the state of Georgia at the Coroner’s Jury that met to investigate the lynching of Frank. [11]

Of the remaining twenty or so lynchers, five more have been identified with confidence, these being the following: Gordon Baxter Gann (1877-1949), attorney, mayor of Marietta (1922-25, 1927-29) and member of the Georgia House of Representatives (1919-1922). Gann served as “special attorney” for coroner John A. Booth at the Coroner’s Jury, investigating the Frank lynching. [12] John Augustus (Gus) Benson (1873-1960) operated the Benson Brothers Mercantile Co., which was located on the square in Marietta from 1908 to 1933. Benson testified at the Coroner’s Jury that though he saw several automobiles near Frey’s gin on the morning of Frank’s lynching, he did not recognize anyone in any of the automobiles.[13]

William J. Frey (about 45 years old in 1915) sheriff of Cobb County (1903-1909). Frey’s mill (or gin), the location of the lynching of Frank, was owned by Frey. After his name on the list is the notation: “doubled as hangman.” Like Benson, Frey testified at the Coroner’s Jury that, though he saw several cars near his gin on the morning of the lynching, he could not identify any occupants of these automobiles. Frey also testified that after seeing the cars, he ate breakfast then drove into Marietta, and oddly enough went “to the cemetery where Mary Phagan is buried” and then drove back to the gin where he found “the body of Frank hanging [and he stated that] I looked at him but didn’t put my hands on him.” [14]

Circero Holton Dobbs (1880-1954) operated a grocery store in Marietta for 25 years and later the Dobbs Barber Shop. (He did not serve as mayor of Marietta, as the list would indicate; it was rather Evan Protho Dobbs, presumably a relative, who did so for two terms and was mayor at the time of the lynching of Frank).[15] Ralph Molden Manning (1877-1940) worked as a “contractor and road builder” much of his life and was, at the time of his death, “supervisor of street work for the city of Canton” in neighboring Cherokee County.[16]

The identification of a third of the lynch mob certainly bears out the claim that at least some of its members were prominent citizens of Cobb County, and a few were known state-wide. Included are a former speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives and president of the Georgia State Senate, and other members of the Georgia House of Representatives and Senate, mayors of Marietta, as well as judges, prosecutors, and other members of the local judiciary. Furthermore, this research offers an explanation for the failure of the criminal justice system to prosecute Frank’s murderers, for a member of the lynch mob was also the solicitor general for the Blue Ridge Circuit, the person responsible for the prosecution of the lynchers.[17]

AC=Atlanta Constitution

AJ=Atlanta Journal

MDJ=Marietta Daily Journal

NYT=New York Times

[1] There is a large literature on the Phagan murder.The standard scholarly account is Leonard Dinnerstein, The Leo Frank Case (Athens, GA, 1987), to which should be added the same author’s “The Fate of Leo Frank,” American Heritage 47 (October 1996), pp.98-109.

[2] The name D. B. (Bunce) Napier does not appear on the list, though a claim that he was one of the lynchers was made some years later; see Dinnerstein, Leo Frank Case, p.141, footnote.

[3] August 23, 1915, p. 5. Other sources reported the 25 men were involved; see AC, August 18, 1915, p.1.

[4] A case in point is “Joe Brown.” This person is likely to be Joseph Mackey Brown (1851-1932), who served as governor of Georgia two separate times between 1909 and 1913. (He should not be confused with his father Joseph Emerson Brown [1821-1894], who was also governor of Georgia, as well as a United States senator.) “Little Joe” was a vociferous critic of Governor Slaton for his commutation of Frank; see Dinnerstein, Leo Frank Case, pp. 116-17; NYT, Sept. 27, 1915, p. 6. At the time of the lynching of Frank, Brown was a resident of Cobb County.

[5] MDJ, Sept. 23, 1941, p.1 ;AC, Sept. 23, 1941, pp.1-3 ; AJ, Sept. 23, 1941, p.9.

[6] Dinnerstein, Leo Frank Case, pp. 143-44; AJ, August 17, 1915, pp. 1,3; NYT, August 19, 1915, p.3.

[7] A possible candidate is George Exie Daniell (c.1882-1970), who owned a jewelry store on the square in Marietta for over forty years. MDJ, July 27, 1970, p. 1:8. Daniell was acquainted with several of those on the list including Herbert Clay, Newton Morris, and M. M. Sessions, as all four were charter members of the Marietta Country Club, which was founded in 1915 the year of the Frank lynching. MDJ, Sept. 15, 1995, p. A-6.

[8] AC, June 23, 1923, pp. 1, 14, 16; AJ, June 22, 1923, p.1.

[9] Steve Oney, “The Lynching of Leo Frank,” Esquire, 104 (Sept. 1985), p. 101.See also “Clays Crucial for Cobb,” MDJ, Feb. 13, 1994, p. D-2.

[10] AC, June 23, 1927, pp. 1, 3; Lucian Lamar Knight, A Standard History of Georgia6 vols. (New York and Chicago: Lewis Publishing, 1917), 4:2102-4.

[11] MDJ, Feb. 22, 1957, pp. 1, 4; AC, Feb. 22, 1957, p. 48; NYT, Aug. 25, 1915, p. 6.

[12] MDJ, May 2, 1949, p.1; Walter Gerald Cooper, The Story of Georgia 4 vols. (New York: American Historical Society, 1938) 4:228-29; NYT, August 25, 1915, p.6.

[13] MDJ, Sept. 4, 1960, p. 1.

[14] NYT, August 25, 1915, p. 6.

[15] MDJ, June 2, 1954, p. 1.

[16] MDJ, July 17, 1940, p. 1.

[17] And an ex-Governor of Georgia; see footnote 4.

Many of the lynch mob members remain unidentified. I invite those who have knowledge that could add to the list of the identified to contact me so that the bright light of history can be cast on this dark and evil corner of the past.

Stephen Goldfarb, Ph.D.

ADDENDUM

(Copyright July 5, 2000, by Stephen Goldfarb, Ph.D.)

Now that she has been identified in both the national, as well as the Atlanta press, I can disclose that the list of lynchers posted on this website is in the hand of Mary Phagan Kean, great-grand niece and namesake of the young girl who was murdered in the National Pencil Factory in Atlanta, Georgia, on April 26, 1913.[1] Mrs. Kean wrote a book about the murder some years ago and in which she described those who committed the lynching in the following way:

Each was a husband and father, a wage-earner, and a church-goer. They all bore well-known Cobb County names.[2]

Mrs. Kean then added that

There is an individual alive today who knows all the vigilante group members names and has told them to me.[3]

In at least one press account Mrs. Kean claimed a different source for her list of lynchers. According to Mrs. Kean, starting at the age of 15, people would voluntarily confide in her that a family member was involved in the lynching of Leo Frank. She wrote these names down and over the years her list grew and a “version” of this list found its way into the Leo Frank Collection, Special Collections Department, Robert W. Woodruff Library of Emory University, where I found it in late 1994.[4] In either case it would seem likely that Mrs. Kean would have the confidence of the person (or persons) who could identify the lynchers and for this reason the authenticity and substantial accuracy of this list of lynchers can reasonably be assured.

Press reports, email messages, telephone calls and face-to-face conversations allow me to confirm that two persons whom I had (in footnotes) provisionally identified as being involved in the lynching of Frank can now be identified as lynchers with certainty. The “George Daniels” on Mrs. Kean’s list is George Exie Daniell (1881-1970). A native of Bremen, Georgia, Daniell owned and operated a jewelry store on the square in Marietta for 40 years.[5] Like several of the other lynchers, Daniell was a charter member of the Marietta Country Club (see footnote 7 above) and has the dubious distinction of being the only one on the list as being identified as a member of the Ku Klux Klan.

The second provisional identification, which now can be asserted with certainty, is that of “Joe Brown.” Joseph Mackey Brown (1851-1932), son of the 19th-century Georgia governor and United States senator Joseph Emerson Brown, was the oldest of the lynchers that have been identified and the only lyncher who would have had a direct memory of the Civil War. College educated (B.A., Oglethorpe University, 1872), the younger Brown (a.k.a. Little Joe) was admitted to the Georgia bar in 1873 and subsequently became a successful railroad executive. He served as governor of Georgia on two separate occasions between 1909 and 1913 and was defeated for the United States senate in 1914 by his political rival Hoke Smith. [6] Brown pleaded with Governor Slaton both in person and in the press, not to commute Frank’s death sentence and continued to attack Slaton for the commutation even after Slaton had left office and Frank had been lynched. [7]

In addition to providing confirmation for two provisional identifications, recent press coverage has led to the identification of yet another lyncher. Two recent articles on the posting of Mrs. Kean’s list, confirm that Bolan Glover Brumby (1876-1948) was one of the lynchers. [8] From a pioneer Cobb County family, Brumby was involved in the family’s furniture manufacturing business (the Washington Post called him “owner of a local chair company”); about five years before his death, he moved to Murphy, North Carolina, where he was associated with a son in a hosiery manufacturing business.[9]

At this writing (July 5, 2000), 12 of the lynchers of Leo Frank have been identified; this is almost half of those on Mrs. Kean’s list and about third of those who were involved, as the total number may have been as many as 40. [10] Response to this web page and the resulting press coverage has put me in contact with several persons who have additional information that should lead to the identification of even more lynchers.

[1] Front-page stories appeared in the following newspapers: Wall Street Journal (June 9, 2000); Atlanta Journal-Constitution (June 11, 2000); Washington Post (June 20, 2000).

[2] Mary Phagan [Kean], The Murder of Little Mary Phagan (Far Hills, NJ: New Horizon Press, 1987), pp.221-22.

[3] Ibid. p. 222.

[4] Washington Post, June 20, 2000, p. A-12.

[5] Marietta Daily Journal, July 27, 1970, p. 1:8.

[6] Dictionary of Georgia Biography Kenneth Coleman and Charles Stephen Gurr, eds., 2 vols. (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1983), 1:121-22 and James F. Cook, The Governors of Georgia, 1745-1995 revised ed. (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1995),196-98.

[7] Leonard Dinnerstein, The Leo Frank Case (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1987), pp. 116-7 and New York Times, Sept. 27, 1915, p. 6.

[8] Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 11, 2000, p. A-11; Washington Post, June 20, 2000, p. A-12. The name on Mrs. Kean’s list reads “R. G. Brumby.” It is likely that the “R” should be a “B”; perhaps a slip of the pen was responsible. The other possibility is that two Brumby’s were involved in the lynching.

[9] Marietta Daily Journal, Dec. 28, 1948, p.1.

[10] Washington Post, June 20, 2000, p. A-12.

—-

—End:

Conclusion of Southerners on the Leo Frank Lynching

The majority of Southern people had a united perspective which was they wanted honest justice and the lynchers also showed the influential Jewish media moguls and extremely tribal Jewish community that their evil power and big money could not overthrow the United States Constitution and every Level of the United States Legal Appellate System, Nor could the perfidious Jewish money bags, working in concert with their united ethnoreligious tribe prevent truth, Justice and righteousness from prevailing.

The greatest dishonor to Southerners today is the 100 year long Leo Frank hoax perpetuated by the Jewish community, that Leo Frank was convicted and lynched because of anti-semitism and prejudice.

One theory suggests Leo Frank was not convicted because of anti-semitism and Leo Frank was not lynched because he was a Jew, but partly because a corrupt Governor wheeling and dealing behind the scenes with Jews, who so happened to be the part owner of the Law firm representing Leo Frank, was not qualified to commute his death sentence and when he did, it was the ultimate dishonor, to openly disregard the evidence and testimony, and to save the neck of a perverted pedophile-rapist, child beating strangler.

When Georgia Governor John M. Slaton, the senior law partner of the Leo M. Frank legal defense team chose to commute his own client Leo Frank’s death sentence to life in prison on June 21st 1915, it was one of the most brazen acts of treason in Georgia History. See: Leo M. Frank Clemency Decision by John M. Slaton June 21st 1915.

References:

The Jeffersonian Newspaper on Leo M. Frank 1914, 1915, 1916, & 1917: http://leofrank.info/images/jeffersonian/

Tom Watson’s Magazine, 1915, Jan, March, Aug, Sept and Oct. (see download library)

-August 17

Fair Usage Law

August 17, 2011   Posted in: Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

What does Islam say about the followers of the non-Abrahamic …

Answer: You are going to Hell ,just as christians and jews ,don't take it personally.

Question:

am a Buddhist. I have muslim friends, christian & hindu ones too…

But am i a baddy? ; )

Will i not go to heaven?

Will they?

I don’t kill, lie, steal, sleep around, or do drugs or alcohol…

What’s the Islamic standpoint?

Am i a kuffir?

Is there such a thing?
Dear Selar, please see my other recent question…

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Akh5FIDlM5iybK9LAehYKgYgBgx.;_ylv=3?qid=20090217102913AAQ6bUV

t y : )
Max: t y Brother

_/_
Will Smith: the version of the Qu’ran i read said that the Lord sent prophets to the various nations to teach according to the ppl’s capacities.

Wouldn’t the Buddhists & Hindus of India fall into this category?
I’m not really here: thank you : )
Cece, Sadie, and Muslim Egypt: thank you very much. : )
Thomas – you’re very naughty
Guys: hasn’t Muhammed (pbuh) said that “He who knows himself, knows God”?
If that’s the case maybe it doesn’t matter what views you profess, but what’s in your heart?

The first girl i ever fell in love with was a Muslim, and the second, and the third : )

We were all like-minded, even though i was not circumcised, or was sure about God. Neither were they! But they were good, good ppl. Some of the best.

Isn’t that all that counts, in the end?

Original post:
What does Islam say about the followers of the non-Abrahamic …

Fair Usage Law

August 7, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

Jewish-Christian Relations, IS DIALOGUE WITH ISLAM? By Father …

In the Roman Catholic Church, relations between Christians and Jews are part of the logic of ecumenism. We can even say that without biblical roots and thi…

Jewish-Christian Relations, IS DIALOGUE WITH ISLAM? By Father Alain René Arbez
August 6th, 2011 Daniele – Europe-Israel.org
JEAN-PAUL-II-Kotel-3
Share

In the Roman Catholic Church, relations between Christians and Jews are part of the logic of ecumenism. We can even say that without biblical roots and this return to common sources, the realization of Christian unity would be doomed to failure. But Christian identity also needs to venture into the maze of interreligious dialogue, especially with Islam.

It is no coincidence that the Vatican is the same Council for Ecumenism, which oversees relations between Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox (even Christian religion, traditions) and the relations between Christians and Jews (same reference the alliance, different religious traditions). When you consider that the term oekumene in the Greek world meant “universal assembly”, it is well oriented in the axis of the fundamental criteria similar between Christians and Jews, since the Hebrew qehila applies to “the assembly called by the God of Israel, “then the early Church, dissident branch” messianic “originally composed of members of Hebrew culture.

However, our politically correct times, fond of catch-all concepts, tends to overuse the same term “ecumenism” for anything and everything in the name of an idealized multiculturalism and, specifically, is often the case when it comes to events or meetings composed of Christians and Muslims, which suggests a common membership between the church and the mosque entirely fictitious. This contradiction is nourished by the illusion still widespread – and sometimes maintained – that basically is the same God that they are on both sides, as if the Koran was a variation of the Bible as if Jesus was the voice of Allah. The media often speak of the “three monotheistic religions” to facilitate the amalgamation or the “Abrahamic faiths” as if we spoke the same Abraham, if not of the “religions of the Book”, a term, however, specifically Islamic.

However, the problem of relationship between Christians and Muslims is not of ecumenism – which assumes a core identical – but the inter-religious self-service concept, it is true, and variable geometry. Why such confusion between ecumenism and interfaith, with the betrayal of false symmetry objectively suicidal complacency? To make history, go back to the 60, the cradle of ideologies that accompanied the period of decolonization, growth, and a certain modernity. The Church did not escape the pressure of events when it was called the Second Vatican Council by Pope John XXIII. It is in this economic climate, on behalf of a generous “openness” and a proactive concern of aggiornamento, that the Council wanted to encourage the spirits to go beyond the traditional ecclesiology-centrism to take into account all is true and good in other schools of thought (cf. Lumen Gentium, 1965).

The drafting of the declaration Nostra Aetate was laborious, because of protests from Middle Eastern patriarchs allergic to a Judeo-Christian reconciliation. Focused initially on a Jewish-Christian relations reactivated, the revised text was satisfied in the end, and more generally, to invite Catholics to receive the Spirit as a sign of the religious experience of other believers. If reopened in any case long blocked the path of fraternal relations between Christians and Jews, the council left by the style adopted, establish the possibility of symmetry ambiguous scoring almost on the same level dialogue with Muslims. This prudent, more sociological than theological, of the problem would lead to endless misunderstandings among Christians, that the Magisterium does not provide the necessary spiritual anchor or safeguards specific to embark on an adventure as risky. In addition, the Catholic theology of Judaism in its infancy did not offer enough thought structures that reflect the history of the two currents from the same trunk Hebrew.

Fortunately, later, under the pontificate of John Paul II, official documents would fill much of the lack of clarity regarding the vital link and irreversible between Judaism and Christianity, but the initial momentum of Nostra Aetate formulated Angelica had so muddied the waters somewhat and allowed free rein to prospects in the equivocal relationship to the Muslim world, itself in turmoil. For matters relating to the issue of Islam in the Catholic world, the danger was in fact moving from an attitude of openness and kindness to behavior of convenience and compromise. Remember the Muslim-Christian meeting in Tripoli (Libyan) in 1976, when Gaddafi took advantage of the good will of participants Christians to call everyone to convert to Islam.

Another important landmark in the debate, the Assisi meeting in 1986 at the initiative of Pope John Paul II. There also were considerable misunderstandings and the message was garbled. The 100 religious leaders of all affiliations present responded to the call of Pope to express a common attitude of respectful dialogue in a kind of peaceful religions together. Many deduced that John Paul II prayed with Muslims, Christian and so a bond was made ??to the spiritual validity of Islam, religion rising. But the pope had prayed alongside Muslims, each according to his faith, which is significantly different. It was not meant closer to Sunni imams in Cairo as Shamans of Dakota Indians.

Probably the misunderstanding is it again based on the fact that the Council had discussed that in establishing positive relationships between Catholics and Muslims, not a theological relationship between Christianity and Islam. This is not because the course requires dawa Islamize the world and therefore Christianity that Christians must be manufactured at any price a Christian idea of Islam. Many Christian activists think in fact found in Islam their own values, in all sincerity but total incompetence. Because the key terms in Arabic to the religion of Mohammed can not find an equivalent in the register Judeo-Christian, Islam is not located on the ground biblical. Few Christians are aware of the meaning of the phrase “Allah akbar clamée or during the call to prayer but also in assassinations or attacks. This sentence does not mean repetitive so bucolic “Ah! God is great! “But a polemical:” Allah is the greatest! “This is obviously a demand to put Islam as superior to all other beliefs. “You are the best in the world! “Says the Koran to Muslims. It is this target which encourages them to build minarets higher than church steeples or impose customs formerly Christian land.

Few Christians know that the Muslim profession of faith, the shahada (the year ashadu ilaha illa-illah I) is a negative expression. “There is no god except Allah.” So that negation is in fact a profession of faith exclusionary: it involves the rejection of polytheism, but above that of the Trinitarian faith of Christians. Contemptuous denunciation of infidels and unbelievers, as the greatest sin for Muslims is shirk, the fact of involving a human being to God, namely Jesus. Remember that for Jews and Christians, the Bible is a collection of human writings inspired by God. We can dissect, analyze texts, classify messages, interpret them according to their context and their symbolism. For Muslims, however, the Koran is not a human writing. This is the very word of God incarnate in a sacred book. Hence the absolute impossibility of criticizing any point, to challenge even the most frightening Surat, for comment but can not interpret, under penalty of blasphemy. From what is ultimately established the fixity of the word Koran, and therefore congenital inability of any further developments.

The Holy Scriptures of Jews and Christians is considered by Muslims to be repealed, expired. Moreover, Muslims do not read the Hebrew Bible or the Gospels. Because the Koran is the ultimate truth, Jews and Christians were accused of having falsified the teachings of Allah in their scriptures. The Koran, which rents the Merciful but ignores the word “love” opens with the Fatiha, a surah considered by the Islamic tradition as a matrix, it would be like an abstract theological. However, according to an ancient tradition, the verse of this sura 7, after saying all the good of true believers, Muslims, hates to ban two categories: the Jews “who are subject to the wrath of Allah” ( al-magdubi ‘alyhim) and the Christians “those who are led astray far from his will” (ad-dalin).

Christians who rejoice too quickly to find Jesus and Mary in Islam are expected to look twice. Myriam because this, even if it is blank, is the sister of Moses, and Jesus called Issa this is not the faith of the New Testament after the Bible: Issa ibn Myriam is a good Muslim, a prophet of the Islam hadith which tells us that he will come to the end of time to “break the cross, kill swine, and create the only true religion, that of Allah” (Abu Dawood). It will eliminate the Jews and Christians to purify the impure world of obstacles to the rule of Allah. Issa This is not the Jesus of the Gospels. He did not die on the cross, says the Koran. It is certainly not a Son of God, since God is not father, and as there is no sin, no redemption or salvation. One can see how Islam is diametrically opposed to the heart of the Christian message and biblical references that underlie them. No alliance, no love, no sin, no redemption, no salvation, but a law, scharia, that is to say the rules to be observed not to annoy the King of heaven, unknown distant, implacable. Asked to obey Islam, Christianity claim to love.

The Islamic scholar Louis Massignon and Islamophile, reference activists Muslim-Christian relations, goes in a moment of lucidity to recognize that “the general trend of Islamic theology is to affirm God rather than by the destruction by the construction of beings “(Massignon, Passion). So what dialogue with Islam? Islam is not requesting dialogue. What interests him is to get Christians on his land, and appear with them officially as one of the major religions in Europe. One thing is to establish where possible cultural and friendly relations with people of Muslim faith, in mutual respect for identities, another is to mislead with good intentions on roads where the confusion is taqqia the lookout.

There is no theological and spiritual convergence between Christianity and Islam. The treatment of Christians in many Islamic countries would already have opened the eyes of fans artificial ideological reconciliation.

Reproduction authorized with the particulars and the following link:

© Abbé Alain René Arbez for www.drzz.fr

See more here:
Jewish-Christian Relations, IS DIALOGUE WITH ISLAM? By Father …

Fair Usage Law

August 6, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

LDS Gospel Doctrine Plus: New Testament Lesson #29 "The Number of …

The term “Grecians,” alternatively translated as “Hellenists” “probably refers to Jewish Christians from the Diaspora [ Jews who had been scattered out from Israel by conquering nations] whose native language was Greek …

A LIVING, GROWING CHURCH

Christ’s church is a living church–guided by revelation to meet the changing needs of its members within their cultures and eras. The history of the use of Seventies through thousands of years is one of the best examples of this.

“And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration” (Acts 6:1)

The term “Grecians,” alternatively translated as “Hellenists” “probably refers to Jewish Christians from the Diaspora [Jews who had been scattered out from Israel by conquering nations] whose native language was Greek and who spoke little or no Aramaic; Hebrews, by contrast, would be Christians from among those Jews who spoke only or primarily Aramaic. Conflict could arise from their social and cultural differences and spill over into the daily distribution of food. In a culture that allowed women little economic independence, widows, especially those of immigrants, would be among the most disadvantaged portion of the population” (Harper-Collins Study Bible).

“The division between Greek-speaking and Hebrew-speaking (or culturally Greek and culturally Hebrew) Jews dates from the conquest of Israel by Alexander the Great in 323 B.C. He and his successors introduced the Greek language and Greek culture into the lands they ruled. While Hellenistic (Greek) influence produced such [good] fruits as the Septuagint, Philo of Alexandria and Josephus, ‘Hebraists’ considered the ‘Hellenists’ to have developed an adulterated Judaism which had assimilated elements of the pagan cultures around them–although the Judaism of the Hebrew-speakers had not avoided these influences either” (David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, p. 239).

The solution to the problem was to call “seven men of honest report” (Acts 6:3) to see to the physical and spiritual needs of the people. They distributed food, and they performed missionary labors. “All of the seven have Greek names, consistent with their identification with the Hellenists” (Harper-Collins). All seven were Greek-speakers and could therefore communicate both in language and culture with the Greek widows. Their modern-day counterparts would probably be the Presidents of the Seventy.

The number, organization, responsibilities, and purposes of the Seventies has been one of the most dynamic of church positions–meaning it has been in a state of change almost constantly. They have been called when needed, where needed, and for what was needed at the time, including in these latter days.

“The seventy were first mentioned by the Prophet Joseph Smith one Sunday afternoon to Brigham and Joseph Young, whose voices raised together in song were pleasing to the Prophet. He listened to them for a while, then told Brigham to call a meeting of the Church for the following Saturday when he would organize the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles; and said he: ‘Brigham, you are to be one of them.’ Turning to Joseph Young, he said: ‘And you are to be a president of the seventy.’

“At that time, no one had any idea of what a seventy was or how an organization of them was to be effected. They knew only the references in the Bible where the Lord sent out ‘other seventy’ who had returned rejoicing (see Luke 10:1–17), and where an organization of seventy men was organized under Moses (see Ex. 24:1, 9; Num. 11:16). It was indeed a startling thing for them to learn that there were to be seventy men with a missionary calling, that their presidents should be seven in number. They were to assist the Twelve in preaching the gospel and in regulating the Church in all the world. (See D&C 107:25, 34.)

“On February 28, 1835, seven presidents were chosen to preside over the quorum. In order of their choosing, they were: Hazen Aldrich, Joseph Young, Levi Ward Hancock, Leonard Rich, Zebedee Coltrin, Lyman Royal Sherman, and Sylvester Smith….

“The Prophet also organized 2 1/2 more quorums of seventy, making a total of 3 1/2 quorums. They were presided over by the presidents of the First Quorum….

“The seventy were known as seekers of knowledge as well as preachers of the gospel. One reading the diaries of these men realizes that they took seriously the office of seventy. Their missionary labors were phenomenal…

“During the period of exodus from Nauvoo, the seventies quorum was left in charge of and supervised temple ceremonies. Joseph Young, the senior president, supervised this work and presided in the temple.

“In research from Nauvoo’s seventies’ records, Brother William G. Hartley, assistant Church historian, notes that: ‘more than one-third of the Mormon Battalion consisted of seventies drawn from more than thirty separate quorums. They reformed into one ‘mass’ quorum in Los Angeles on April 18, 1847, electing their own seven presidents under the direction of Levi W. Hancock…’

“About one-half of the men in the pioneering company which led out in 1847 were seventies. One would expect the seventies to lead out, for they were mostly young men in their late twenties and early thirties when they were ordained in 1845…

“Of the 2,200 seventies ordained between 1835 and 1855, between one-third and one-half were foreign born, England alone providing no less than 500.” (S. Dilworth Young, “The Seventies: A Historical Perspective,” Ensign, July 1976)

GREAT EXAMPLES FROM THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH

JOYOUSLY SEEKING AND SHARING THE GOSPEL: Philip and the Ethiopian

The preaching of the gospel followed the order which Christ had laid out in Acts 1. The gospel was first preached in Jerusalem at Pentacost to the pilgrims who had come for the festival. They then took it home with them to the neighboring areas. After preaching the gospel in Jerusalem, the disciples carried it to her “black-sheep sibling” Samaria (Acts 8) where it was well-received and many joined the Saints.

And then one investigator appeared from quite far out of the range of the missionary labors so far:

“And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip [one of the seven], saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. And he arose and went: and behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias (Isaiah) the prophet” (Acts 8:26-28).

“The conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch, who is from a region vastly removed from Jerusalem, signals the fulfillment of the promise to all those who are ‘far away’ (Acts 2:39)…Ethiopian, in Luke’s world, referred to anyone with dark skin, particularly to persons from territories south of Egypt. Various ancient writers depict Ethiopians as handsome people who come from the ends of the known world. As a eunuch, he could not be a Jew or a proselyte to Judaism, and thus his conversion foreshadows that of Cornelius, which formally opens the Christian mission to Gentiles. Candace is the title traditionally given to the Queen of Meroe (a Nubian realm along the upper Nile), making the eunuch’s position one of considerable power. That he has been to Jerusalem to worship indicates his interest in Israel’s religion, as does his reading of Isaiah. Gentiles could worship in the temple enclosure, although they were restricted to the outer court. Reading was a customary activity during travel; here it sets the stage for Philip’s approach. The prompting of the Spirit suggests that God stands behind this overture. The passage quoted is Isa. 53:7-8” (Harper-Collins).

“Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him” (Acts 8:29-31).

Of course, most of us have the same reaction when we read Isaiah! But the Ethiopian’s comment was a true reflection of the use of the scripture in his day. “No ancient sacred books were intended to be read without a teacher: hence the Ethiopian comment in the Acts says to St. Philip ‘How can I understand unless someone tells me?'” (C.S. Lewis, The C.S. Lewis Bible, p. 1238). Not being a Jew, he had no synagogue to study with.

So the man read to Philip the verses that concerned him at the moment, which were prophesies about Christ. “Then Philip opened his mouth” (a most important step in missionary work) “and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing” (Acts 8:35-39). It may be that Philip immediately vanished from the man’s sight and was transported to his next area of labor (keep in mind that they were traveling in the chariot all the time that Philip was teaching him, and may have gotten quite a ways away), or it may be Luke’s way of saying that the Spirit prompted Philip to go preach in another area, and the eunuch was left on his own to continue to learn and grow as a new convert.

“Later church tradition holds that the eunuch became the first Christian missionary to Africa” (Harper-Collins).

CHANGING DIRECTION: Saul of Tarsus and Ananias of Damascus

Saul was a young leader of the Jewish church, with orders from the Sanhedrin to persecute those “defecting” to Christianity. He carried out his duties faithfully, sincerely, and violently–an early example of the fulfilling of the prophecy to the disciples that “the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service” (John 16:2).

“And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, and desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem, and as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: and he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks” (Acts 9:1-5).

“Pricks” is alternatively translated as “goads.” This phrase, “It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks,” was a proverb used by both Greek and Latin writers. (For my reference, click here.) It basically refered to a pointy stick that was used to prod work animals to move in a certain direction. If they kicked against it, it only inflicted more pain upon them. The proverb was a tool for teaching not to resist powerful authority.

Saul’s next question reveals his marvelous heart: “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” (Acts 9:6). He was told that he must go to Damascus with the exact opposite aim from what he had planned–rather than persecute the Saints, he was to join them. Rather than bind Ananias (and others) and send him to Jerusalem, he was to submit to him and receive healing in the name of Christ from the blindness that had struck him when discovering he was serving the wrong master.

At the same time, “There was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias, and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord” (Acts 9:10). Ananias’ answer was a statement very similar to Saul’s. “I am here” meant “I am ready to serve; what would you have me do?” He also was told to do the exact opposite from what he had planned–rather than hiding from the infamous Saul, he was to seek him out, heal him, baptize him, and give him the Gift of the Holy Ghost

Saul became one of the greatest missionaries ever, and his epistles continue to preach the gospel 2,000 years after he wrote them, to peoples on every continent, even places of which he’d never heard in his lifetime. But even though he made a 180-degree paradigm and allegiance shift on the spot, he still had much to learn before he became that great missionary. He stayed and learned from the disciples in Damascus, and then “straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God” (Acts 9:19-20).

“[An] aspect that many readers seem to miss is concerned with Paul’s preparation to represent the Lord. There is a nine-to-ten-year period from Paul’s conversion until the time of his so-called first missionary journey. Obviously, it was as necessary for Paul to mature and season in the gospel, grow and develop, as it is for the rest of us. Even so, considering the fervent zeal of this famous convert, we can assume that Saul was very involved in missionary efforts from the time of his conversion, wherever he was. But the first detailed reference to a mission is in Acts 13, when he is called to accompany Barnabas to Cyprus and some Asia Minor cities. For the first part of the journey, Luke implies that Barnabas is the leader, and Saul continues to use his Jewish name. However, when the missionary company meets the Roman proconsul Sergius Paulus, Saul seems to take the lead in preaching to him and in pronouncing a curse of blindness upon the interfering Jewish magician, Elymas. Including the incident with Paulus, several events signal a change in leadership. Paul was a Roman citizen; the missionaries were entering a predominantly gentile phase of their journey; and John Mark returned to Jerusalem (he may not yet have been prepared to proselyte among the gentile nations). Paul may simply have been the one best equipped to lead the group during that phase of their travels. From this time onward, Luke never refers to Saul by his Jewish name, but instead calls him Paul (probably his Roman cognomen) and refers to the group as “Paul and his company.” (Acts 13:13.) (C. Wilfred Griggs, “Paul: The Long Road from Damascus,” Ensign, Sept. 1975).

One more oft-overlooked lesson to learn from Saul–and one which many of us struggle to learn–is forgiveness of oneself. How could Saul have succeeded in doing the Lord’s work if he had continued to be wracked in guilt? We all will spend some time suffering in one hell or another, as did Saul and his Book of Mormon counterpart, Alma the Younger, for our sins, weaknesses, and mistakes. It is necessary. We learn from the experience how to avoid misery in the future, and how to help others avoid it, and how to help them be freed from it when it comes. But while suffering the misery of remorse, we are severely limited in our ability to bless others. Although it is temporarily necessary, it is a self-centered existence–centered in our suffering. Once we have passed through “our Gethsemane,” we must allow Christ to free us by forgiving ourselves completely (while still remembering the lesson learned), so we can focus on freeing others.

GIVING EVERYTHING: Stephen and Tabitha

We are quite familiar with the story of the stoning of Stephen, the first Christian martyr (Acts 7). He was the first of the Seven to be chosen, “a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 6:5). His performance of “great wonders and miracles among the people” (Acts 6:8) led to his persecution, trial, and death by stoning at the hands of Jews, an act which was illegal under Roman rule, just as was the trial, conviction and execution of Christ. (See a previous post.) He did not desist in teaching the gospel, even at threat of death. He saw a vision of the Father and the Son. As Jesus Christ called upon his Father as he died, so Stephen “[called] upon God, [saying] Lord Jesus receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge” (Acts 7:59-60). He was truly a disciple of Christ who gave all.

Another great example of a disciple of Christ (the only instance in the New Testament in which the feminine form of the word “disciple” is used, according to Harper-Collins) is found in the story of Tabitha. Tabitha “was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did. And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid her in an upper chamber” (Acts 9:35-37). They sent for Peter, who went into the room, “and all the widows stood by him weeping, and [showing] the coats and garments which [Tabitha] made while she was with them.” Tabitha had given her life in service to others. But unlike Stephen, her work was not finished and she was allowed to return to continue her discipleship. “Peter put them all [out of the room] and kneeled down, and prayed: and turning him to the body said, Tabitha, arise. And she opened her eyes; and when she saw Peter, she sat up. And he gave her his hand, and lifted her up, and when he had called the saints and widows, presented her alive. And it was known throughout all Joppa; and many believed in the Lord” (Acts 9:40-42). By raising the dead just as Christ had done, Peter showed the people that he had the power of God.

Stephen’s testimony resulted in his death as a martyr; Tabitha’s testimony resulted in being raised from the dead. Stephen served in a public way, as the first “President of the Seventy,” working miracles and wonders. Tabitha served in a homely way, working with her hands to clothe the needy.

Each of us, likewise, has our own mission to perform, our own ways in which we can best exemplify Christ. It may be a miraculously extended life. It may be an early death. It may be in travels and leadership and public speaking. It may be in staying home and filling the needs among our neighbors. It may be in calling down the powers of Heaven through Priesthood blessings. It may be in nurturing children. It may be in changing our perspective, lifestyle and friends completely. It may be in keeping perspective, and serving lifelong friends. If we live “full of faith and the Holy Ghost” as did Stephen; and “full of good works and almsdeeds” as did Tabitha; if we ask, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” as did Saul and Ananias, and if we follow the direction of the Spirit as did Philip, no matter how our lives turn out, we will have filled our missions as disciples of Christ.

Read more:
LDS Gospel Doctrine Plus: New Testament Lesson #29 "The Number of …

Fair Usage Law

July 18, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

The Anti-Semitic Murder of B’nai B’rith President Leo Frank

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean, Publisher: New Horizon Press; 1st edition (September 15, 1989).

The book, ‘The Murder of Little Mary Phagan’ authored by Mary Phagan Kean, the great grand niece of little Mary Phagan (1899 to 1913) is probably the most even-handed book written about the subject and its aftermath in the last one hundred years.
This exceptional book ‘The Murder of Little Mary Phagan’ details the most infamously sensational and contentious early 20th century rape and strangulation cold case investigation that began at 3:30 AM on April 27, 1913 when the Night Watchman Newt Lee called the police and reported the murder. 56 hours later on April 28, 1913 at 11:30 AM, Leo Frank was arrested, it would be his last day of freedom. The cold case would be solved when detectives discovered one of the employees who worked at the factory named Monteen stover. While interviewing Monteen Stover the police found out she went to the factory on April 26, 1913, to get her pay and waited in Leo Frank’s empty office from 12:05 to 12:10 PM. Without Leo Frank knowing the police had questioned Monteen Stover, Detectives John R. Black and Harry Scott, approached Leo Frank in his cell and asked him if he had been in his office every minute from noon to 12:35PM and Leo Frank responded an affirmative ‘Yes’. The alibi of Leo Frank had just been cracked wide open.

Mary Phagan Kean offers a unique analysis of the 29 day capital murder trial which began on July 28 and led to the August 25, 1913 murder conviction of Leo Max Frank, followed by its affirmation by presiding Judge, the Honorable Leonard Strickland Roan on August 26, 1913, who sentenced Leo Frank to death by hanging at the suggestion of the Jury.
The book also discusses Leo Frank’s subsequent post-conviction appeals from 1913 to 1915, and his death sentence commutation by the corrupt Governor John M. Slaton on June 21, 1915.
Leo Frank would have his throat slashed on July 17, 1915 by a fellow inmate named William Creen and on August 16, 1915, Leo Frank was abducted from prison in a military commando style raid by the elite of georgia and lynched at sunrise on August 17, 1913.

Nearly 70 years after the lynching of Leo Frank, pressure from the ADL of B’nai B’rith and other Jewish organizations resulted in a highly political posthumous pardon without exoneration for Leo Frank in 1986. The Leo Frank case continues to capture the imagination of the public more than 100 years after his conviction.

Brief Biography of Leo Frank

Leo Frank was born in Cuero (also known as Paris), Texas on April 17, 1884. His family moved 3 months later to Brooklyn, NY, where Leo Frank was raised and educated at local public schools. After doing college prep work at the Pratt Institute, Leo Frank matriculated into the Ivy League Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. Leo Frank began studying Mechanical Engineering during his first semester in fall of 1902.

1905

During the summerbreak of 1905, between his Junior and Senior year in college, Leo Frank went with his wealthy uncle Moses Frank on a sojourn overseas and spent the summer travelling around Europe.

1906

In the fall of 1905 Leo Frank began his senior year of college. After graduating in June, 1906, with a degree in Mechanical Engineering, Leo Frank bounced around from job to job, until he visited Atlanta, Georgia, in 1907 and met again with his rich uncle Moses Frank to discuss a potentially lucrative business venture. After visiting Atlanta, Leo Frank made a very serious life decision and decided he wanted to participate in his wealthy uncles venture and he would again go on a sojourn overseas to make it happen in December 1907. Leo Frank traveled to the German Empire where he studied pencil manufacturing. After his 9 month apprenticeship, Leo Frank returned to NYC, on August 1, 1908 on the USS Amerika and then briefly stopping at his home in Brooklyn to visit his family for 1 week. Leo Frank then made a permanent move to Atlanta, Georgia, in August, 1908, starting a new life in the Heart of the South, starting work at the National Pencil Company on August 10th, 1908.

1910

In 1910, Leo Frank married into a wealthy and established German Jewish family (Selig-Cohen) and became actively involved with Jewish philanthropy and society. Leo Frank was a rising star he was elected B’nai B’rith President of Atlanta in 1912 by the 500 member lodge. By 1913, with nearly 5 years of experience, Leo Frank had reached the pinnacle of his career at the National Pencil Company, as superintendent, accountant, and part owner.

1913

The National Pencil Co. factory was located on 37 to 41 South Forsyth Street, it was there Thirteen year old Mary Phagan, an employee of Leo Frank had begun working in the early Spring of 1912, a little more than a year before her murder. Mary Phagan worked just down the hall from Leo Frank’s office on the 2nd floor where she participated in the final and finishing production stages of the pencil manufacturing process. Mary Phagan worked in the “metal room”, in a section called the tipping department, her job was inserting erasers into the empty brass metal bands that were attached to the end of the pencils on a nulling machine.

The metal department, where Mary Phagan worked contained within it the only bathroom and also the girls dressing room on the second floor. It was these places where the blood and hair of Mary Phagan would be found on Monday morning at 7AM on April 28, 1913, by early bird employees starting the work week. Word of Mary Phagans death had already reached all of Atlanta when a newspaper “Extra” was released on Sunday, April 27, 1913, after the normal paper.
Once the word got out about the discovery of real forensic evidence, word traveled fast, employees of the whole factory who were already in emotional hysterics would flock to the metal room, gawking at these unusual blood stains on the floor and the tress of 6 to 8 hairs with dry blood on them broken off and stuck on the handle of the lathe machine of Robert P. Barret.
A white powder known as haskolene was found suspiciously smeared and rubbed into the fresh blood stains on the metal room floor found in front of the girls dressing room, it appeared to be an attempt to cover up the evidence, but the blood bled through the whitepowder turning the red blood stain variations of white, pink and dark blood red. The blood stain also had a star burst pattern that occurs when the back of someones bloody head is dropped on the floor.

The half-baked and half-assed “clean-up job” appeared to be a failed attempt to cover up the blood stains near where the murder victim it was later revealed was dropped as she was being moved from the scene of the crime in the metal room bathroom down 2 floors to the spot adjacent to the basement furnace.

Little Mary Phagan’s Life (1899 to 1913):

The 55 hour work week Mary Phagan performed at the pencil factory for about 7.5 cents an hour, was her small way of helping support her five siblings, and widowed mother (who remarried a cotton mill worker named Mr. John W. Coleman in 1912). Mary’s step father knew Mary Phagan and her family quite well for 4 years and he identified the hair found on the lathe machine as belonging to Mary Phagan, as did several employees.

The week before Phagan’s murder, a shortage of brass supplies at the factory had led to a reduction in her work hours and she was temporarily laid off until the material and supplies could be replenished. Her wages for the shortened work week came to $1.20 or just 7.5 cents an hour for the 16 hours she had worked the previous Friday (11 hours), and Monday (5 hours) prior to her being murdered on Saturday, April 26, 1913.

On April 26, 1913, a State Holiday, celebrated locally as Confederate Memorial Day, Mary came to the factory to claim her pay before going to see the Confederate memorial day parade with some of her friends and neighbor / co-worker George W. Epps in the location of Elkins-Watson place at 2pm.

Mary Phagan never arrived at 2:00PM as promised, George W. Epps stuck around for 2 hours and then left at 4:00PM.
Later in the evening George Epps ran over to Mary Phagan’s home, which was right around the corner, to find out why Mary Phagan never showed up at the designated time. Mary Phagan’s family was already in a state of distress and panic over her being missing, but they also thought she might have gone to stay with a relative. Mary Phagan’s father, Mr. Coleman, had looked for Mary at the Bijou theater, and discovered the Handsome Mr. Darley, Foreman, at the National Pencil Company with another guy, and each one them was with a young girl from the pencil factory. Mr. Darley was married, but the young girl he was squiring was not his wife.

April 26, 1913, Noon

When Mary Phagan arrived at the factory at minutes after noon (12:02PM), Marys pay was allegedly issued to her by Leo Frank and according to the pre-trial investigation and later the testimony at the 1913 Trial, Leo Frank was the last person to admit seeing Mary Phagan alive in a virtually empty factory. On Saturday, April 26, 1913, there were 4 people in the factory at the time of Phagans arrival, when the normal number was more than 100+. It was the reason among others why Leo Frank became a suspect so early on when all things were considered.

George Epps made a deposition providing troubling testimony to the police, stating that Mary had told him in confidence, that Leo Frank scared her and often made lascivious, inappropriate sexual innuendos and insinuations toward her, that Leo Frank was “after her” in local parlance. According to Epps, Mary Phagan told him that Leo Frank would run up in front of her when she was trying to leave work and during the work day would stare at her and wink.

George Epps would after the Leo Frank murder trial get kidnapped by Frank cronies, be threatened with violence and forced to recant his testimony by signing a false affidavit under duress. George Epps later signed a true affidavit about the intimate details of his abduction and being kidnapped to Alabama. The true affidavit described in details the dishonest trickery that unraveled when he was kidnapped and forced under duress to sign a pre-written affidavit.

April 27, 1913

In the early hours of Sunday, April 27, 1913, at around 3:24 AM in the morning, the Negro night watch (“night witch”) Newt Lee made a phone call to the police. Newt Lee found Mary Phagans mangled body on a dirt mound near a furnace in the rear of the basement at 3:20 AM, with what looked like a strip or part of her bloody pettycoat wrapped around her head. Police reported there was evidence she had been dragged by her arms from the elevator 140 feet face down, before being dumped next to the furnace. Phagan’s face was so scratched up, punctured and covered with filth at first the police were unsure if it were a white or black girl.

The autopsy would reveal she had been hit on the face around the eye with a fist, there was also damage to the back of her head that was likely caused when it hit the handle of the lathe on the second floor in the metal room and broke off her hair. The underwear of Mary Phagan was torn open, she had been violently raped, her face beaten black-and-blue, and strangled with a 7 foot cord. One doctor testified under oath to several types of specific kinds of sexual violence and vaginal damage that occurred, suggesting some kind of rape either penile or by fingers.

Leo M. Frank

The police after viewing the body of Mary Phagan made several failed attempts at reaching Leo Frank on the phone in the early hours of April 27, 1913, but they did not have problems reaching other people. It would not be until the early morning after sunrise the police finally reaching him on the phone, they went directly to the home of Leo Frank at around 7am in the morning.
When the detectives arrived at his home, the door was answered by Mrs. Lucille Selig Frank, the police asked to speak with Mr. Frank. Like typical seasoned detectives, without telling Leo Frank what it was about, they observed him and asked him to come to the factory with them, suspicion fell on Leo Frank because he appeared to be extremely nervous, trembling, rubbing his hands, and pale. Police noticed Leo Frank appeared to be badly hung over, bumbling, jimjamming and agitated. Leo Frank also gave overly detailed and meticulous answers on very minor points, his voice was hoarse. Leo Frank fumbled, butterfingered and struggled with minor tasks like fixing his collar and tie. Moreover, Leo kept saying he hadn’t had breakfast and kept asking for a cup of coffee trying to delay the the process of being taken to the Pencil Manufacturing Plant he was Superintendent.
The police asked Leo Frank if he had known Mary Phaganand Leo Frank denied knowing a Mary Phagan saying he would need to check the accounting books he managed to be sure.

The Mary Phagan denial would become an important point at the trial, because Mary Phagan had worked for a year on the same floor as Leo Frank, her work station was only a few feet away next to the bathroom, where Leo Frank visited each day more than once. Other employees testified Frank knew Mary on a first name basis, others said they saw him behave in that gray area between politeness and sexual harassment toward her. Mary Phagan had also collected more than 50 pay envelopes from Leo Frank during her 1 year of employment and logged more than an impressive 2,750 hours of work at the factory from Spring 1912 to Monday, April 21, 1913.

Leo Frank flat out got caught in a lie about whether or not he knew Mary Phagan, which damaged his credibility and left people wondering why he was trying to pretend not to know her.

Frame the Nightwatchman Newt Lee

On Sunday, April 27, 1913, Leo Frank said Newt Lee’s time card was punched correctly, but on Monday April 28, 1913, Leo Frank said Newt Lee did not punch his time card at 3 disparate intervals, creating 3 intervals of 1 hour of unaccounted for time for Newt Lee. Leo Frank told the police to check his body and house, the police found no Marks on his body, and his home and laundry showed no blood stains. When the police searched Newt Lee’s home without a warrant, at the bottom of a laundry barrel they found a bloody shirt. The shirt had blood stains high up on the armpits in the front and back in a way the police immediately thought it was a plant, plus, the shirt was minty clean and did not have the distinctive negro funk on it hey recalled.
It was these three variables the fresh shirt, with oddly placed blood smears and no funky smell, that gave it away the shirt was a plant.

It was as if Leo Frank was trying to implicate Newt Lee, the murder notes with “night witch”, the time card contradiction and the planted shirt, turned full suspicion on Leo Frank.

Leo Frank’s last full day of freedom was Monday, April 28, 1913, because on Tuesday April 29, 1913, at 11:30PM Leo Frank was arrested.

After arresting and questioning the black janitor James “Jim” Conley, who it was later discoverd was present at work on the infamous Confederate Saturday, the police eventually cracked James “Jim” Conley with the 3rd degree and after 3 half-truth affidavits, they finally got James “Jim” Conley to admit he was an accomplice after the fact to the strangulation murder. They got the details out of him about how the body was transported to the basement and what Leo Frank was saying and doing that day.
James Conley admitted he was asked by Leo Frank to move the body of Mary Phagan to the basement and ghost wrote four dictated “death notes” (only 2 were discovered) which were scattered next to the head of Mary Phagan by Leo Frank once she was dumped in the basement and James Conley left the building.

The murder notes were a very contrived attempt to make it appear as if Mary Phagan had written the “death notes” after she went to the bathroom and was sexually assaulted by a negro. The “death notes” where unmistakeably clear in their attempt to pin the crime and point guilt to the “long tall slim negro” night watchman Newt Lee (“night witch”).

The “death notes” left many people asking themselves when or ever in history of the 13.7 Billion Year Old Cosmos has a black man committed a rape, robbery and murder, and then stuck around to write literature, four murder notes, only 2 were found, as if they were being written by the victim in the middle of the rape by night time security guard and then addressing the notes to her mother describing what happened.

The Trial

There was some conflicting testimony about what Leo Frank said concerning a question Mary Phagan asked him at 12:03 PM, “Has the metal come in?”. A Pinkerton detective and defense witness hired by the National Pencil Company contradicted Leo Frank about the answer Mary had given to the question.

The trial would make history, because it would be the first time in the United States of America, where the testimony of two black man (Jim Conley & Newt Lee) would lead to the conviction and death sentence of a white man (Leo Frank) by an all White jury in the white racially consciousness and racially segregated South. However, the star witness was not Black, but White.

Star Witness Monteen Stover and the (2nd) Leo Frank Murder Confession

Though the Star witness was neither Newt Lee or Jim Conley, but a 14 year old White girl named Monteen Stover who cracked wide open Leo Frank’s alibi. Monteen Stover had come to the factory to collect her pay envelope minutes after Mary Phagan had arrived, but she did not bump into Mary Phagan walking down the stairs and Leo Frank was not in either his inner or outer office, nor was Leo Frank aware that Monteen Stover had arrived and waited for him in his second floor office for five minutes fully between 12:05 to 12:10 PM. Frank would counter the testimony of Monteen Stover stating, he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom in the metalroom during this time.

Frank had entrapped himself beyond escape, because the only bathroom on the second floor was located within the metal room, it was the metal room where the murder evidence was found and the prosecution had successfully built a 29 day case that Leo Frank had murdered Mary Phagan there in the metal room between 12:05 and 12:10. To make matters worse, Leo Frank had made a statement, known as State’s Exhibit B, where he said Mary Phagan had arrived into his office between 12:05PM and 12:10PM, but Frank’s office was empty and he claimed he was inside the metal room’s bathroom. Leo Frank had made a virtual murder confession at his own trial, it was the first time in US history.

Be sure to read the final closing statements of State’s prosecution team leader, the Solicitor General Hugh Dorsey and Assistant Solicitor Frank Hooper in American State Trials Volume X 1918, for their unique take on the Leo Frank murder confession. One should also read the really long winded closing arguments of Hugh Dorsey published separately outside of American State Trials Volume X 1918, known as ‘The Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey’.

Tom Watson

Many would argue the best post trial analysis of the Leo Frank murder confession is articulated by the genius & anti-semite Tom Watson in his five booklets on the Leo Frank trial in Watson’s Magazine, January, March, August, September and October of 1915.

Appeals 1913 to 1915

Numerous frivolous, ultra cheesy and half-baked appeal attempts were made by the Leo Frank Legal Defense Team to the Georgia Superior Court, Georgia Supreme Court, US Federal District Court and United States Supreme Court, all appeals were denied after careful review, with lengthy decisions written and rendered (see LeoFrank.org).

Commutation June 21, 1915

The departing Governor of Georgia, John M. Slaton (who also happened to be a senior legal partner and part owner of the same law firm which represented Leo Frank at the trial), decided to commute the death sentence of his client, Leo Frank, to life in prison on June 21, 1915, just days before the end of his last term as Governor. It was an act of political suicide, but it didn’t matter, as he was leaving office anyway and was likely rewarded in other ways.

1915

The genius anti-semite Tom Watson through his popular Jeffersonian publishing company in 1914 and 1915, mocked Leo Frank calling him a Jewish sodomite and wrote five separate scathing reviews about the Leo Frank Case in January, March, August, September and October of 1915 issues of Watson’s Magazine (These 5 issues are available on Archive.org). They are deliciously sarcastic and filled with energy, seasoned wit and juicy venom.

Leo Frank Shanking, July 17, 1915

One month after the commutation of Leo Frank, he had his neck slashed in prison by a fellow violent inmate named William Creen, who used a 7 inch butcher knife on Leo’s tender throat. Leo Frank barely survived the attack, two inmate doctors came to his help, the wound was a bit slow to heal in the hot humid summer of 1915.

Almost 2 months later, after Leo Frank received controversial clemency against the wishes of the Jury that sentenced him to death, a well organized group of about 25 to 35 men, many of which were from Georgia’s highest strata of politics, law and society, organized themselves into the ‘Knights of Mary Phagan’. This newly formed group of Georgia’s elites, sought to fulfill the conviction of the Jury and death sentence judgement preserved and prescribed by Judge Leonard Strickland Roan. These elite men of the Knights of Mary Phagan wanted to deliver righteous retribution in the form of “Southern Style Vigilante Justice”.
After much careful planning, Leo Frank was kidnapped from the minimum security Milledgeville prison he was housed on the evening of August 16, 1915, driven all through the night and then lynched in the early hours of August 17, 1915, from an oak tree near the town where Mary Phagan had formerly lived.

Post Lynching, August 17, 1915

Franks dangling body became a public spectacle, photographs were taken and the pictures of Leo Franks lifeless suspended body, gently twirling in the breeze became popular post cards and memorabilia in the South, selling out almost instantly.

How the Most Definitive Book on the Leo Frank Case was Born

The book ‘The Murder of Little Mary Phagan’ is written by the namesake of the murder victim, Mary Phagan’s great niece named Mary Phagan Kean. When Mary Phagan Kean was 13 years old, she discovered her given name was no mere coincidence. When people heard Mary Phagan Keans name they started asking her questions about whether she was related to the famous little Mary Phagan who had been murdered long ago by Leo Frank on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913.
Mary Phagan Kean would learn a startling secret when she asked her family if she was a blood relative connected to the Mary Phagan who was murdered. When her family revealed the truth about her blood relation, Mary Phagan Kean immediately became insatiably curious about the investigation, trial and aftermath.

Instantly becoming a life long student of the case at age 13, Mary Phagan-Kean has devoted every free moment in her entire life studying volumes of research and documents, reading every surviving document surrounding the torture, rape and strangulation of her great grand aunt, 13 year old Mary Phagan (1899 to 1913) and the biography of Leo Max Frank (1884 to 1915).

B’nai B’rith

Leo Frank was the President of the 500 member Atlanta Chapter of B’nai B’rith. As a result of the conviction in this national scandal which evolved into a sensational trial, it would become the critical mass of “Anti-semitism” catalyzing the formation of two American groups: the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in October, 1913, or ADL (www.adl.org) for short, and spark the revival of the defunct nativist and ethnic nationalist Ku Klux Klan (KKK) in 1915 as a White Nationalist immunal response to what they perceived as an infection of the United States as a host body.

Half-Truths

Jewish Scholars which overwhelmingly wrote the lion share of all the written books, articles, web sites, scripts and texts about the subject of Leo Frank and Mary Phagan almost unanimously allege the investigation, trial, and conviction where part of a widespread Antisemitic conspiracy, a text book case of railroading and framing an innocent Jewish Man because of anti-Jewish racism and religious hatred. Leo Frank partisan books often leave out most of the relevant facts, evidence and testimony in the Leo Frank case dishonestly spinning the facts convenient to creating doubt about Leo Franks guilt.

1980’s

Pressure from the powerful Jewish community, Jewish groups and ADL (Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith) with an affidavit from a lonely, broke and senile octogenarian, the former office boy of Leo Frank who worked for him for 3 weeks in April 1913, a man named Alonzo Mann, resulted in the highly political 1986 Georgian pardon of Leo Frank (without exoneration).
There was only one problem, Alonzo Mann had died in March of 1985 and no one could question him. The politically corrupt board forgave Leo Frank, but kept his guilt intact and thus did not disturb the verdict of the Jury.

On March 11, 1986, a pardon without exoneration of guilt was issued by the board:

Without attempting to address the question of guilt or innocence, and in recognition of the State’s failure to protect the person of Leo M. Frank and thereby preserve his opportunity for continued legal appeal of his conviction, and in recognition of the State’s failure to bring his killers to justice, and as an effort to heal old wounds, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, in compliance with its Constitutional and statutory authority, hereby grants to Leo M. Frank a Pardon.

A number of fictionalized media dramatizations have been made about the trial in the form of plays, musicals, miniseries, docudramas, video blogs, songs, treatments and Broadway plays all created by Jews making a mockery of the life of Mary Phagan who is used as nothing more than a plot antagonist. Attempts are made idealize and rehabilitate Leo Frank as an innocent Jewish victim of evil Antisemitism, transforming him from a pedophile murderer into a holy religious martyr.

The blood libel against the Leo Frank prosecution and people who think Leo Frank guilt continues to this day by the Jewish community, though sometimes it is often couched. The Jewish community won’t dare ever mention the “unconscious” bathroom murder confession Leo Frank made on the witness stand when he was giving his statement at the trial on August 18, 1913. The statement Leo Frank made to counter Monteen Stover’s testimony is always left out of most books.

Leo Frank is the only person in US history to make a virtual murder confession at his own trial, shocking, but true. See Hugh M. Dorsey, Frank Arthur Hooper and Tom Watson’s interpretation of the Leo Frank murder confession. Also see State’s Exhibit A, B, J, Monteen Stover’s Testimony, Harry Scott’s Testimony and the Testimony of Leo Frank.

The 4.7MB adobe PDF version of the book is available here for download. Please download this book and read it.

“Definitive account of one of the most famous crimes of the century.”–American Jewish Outlook

“Riveting and captivating!” — Ira Stein

“The most evenhanded account of the most sensational trial of the 20th century.” — Matt Cohen

“The best book written on the Leo Frank case since 1915” – MC

The book was published in English on September 25, 1989

For more information on the Leo Frank Case, visit: www.LeoFrank.org
More excellent books and reading on the subject include:

0. The Leo Frank Case (Mary Phagan) Inside Story of Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery 1913 – The first neutral book written on the subject in 1913. Very interesting read available on: www.Archive.org and www.LeoFrank.org.

1. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean (Available here on www.Archive.org). Written by Mary Phagan Kean, the great grand niece of Mary Phagan. A neutral account of the events surrounding the trial of Leo Frank and considered the most balanced, fair and accurate work on the Leo Frank case. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan is well worth reading and it is a refreshing change from the endless number of Leo Frank partisan media, articles and books turning the Leo Frank case into a mellow dramatic, Jewish, neurotic, race obsessed and hollyweird tabloid controversy. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan is required reading.

2. American State Trials, volume X (1918) by John Lawson (Available here on www.Archive.org and www.LeoFrank.org) Tends to be biased or lean in favor of Leo Frank and his legal defense team, this document provides an abridged version of the Brief of Evidence, leaving out some important things said at the trial and the details of some of the evidence when it republishes parts of the official trial testimony. Be sure to read the closing arguments of Luther Zeigler Rosser, Reuben Rose Arnold, Frank Arthur Hooper and Hugh Manson Dorsey. What this book possesses is something that no other book does, it has the abridged closing arguments of State’s prosecution team members Hugh M. Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper, be sure to read their interpretation of the Gobsmacking, August 18, 1913, Leo Frank murder confession when Leo Frank to counter Monteen Stover’s testimony, says that he might have had the safe door open or “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom in the metal room. Be sure to familiarize yourself with Monteen Stover’s testimony and the official 1913 Brief of Evidence. For the best interpretation of the mind boggling Leo Frank murder confession, one better than both Hugh Dorsey and Frank Arthur Hooper, then definitely read the Anti-Semite Tom Watson’s five works on the Leo Frank trial in his Watson’s Magazine issues: Jan, March, August, September and October of 1915. Putting aside Watson’s vile Anti-Semitism, his works on the Leo Frank case are delicious, full of wit, sarcasm, energy and venom (Required Reading).

For a more complete version of the Leo M. Frank trial testimony, read the official 1913 murder trial brief of evidence (available on archive.org) and you can see what was left out in American State Trials Volume X 1918.

3. Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey in the Trial of Leo Frank (Available here on LeoFrank.org.). Some but not all of the 9 hours of arguments given to the Jury at the end of the Leo Frank trial. Only 18 Libraries in the world have copies of this books. It can be found here on archive.org thanks to LeoFrank.org. This is an excellent book and required reading to see how Dorsey in sales vernacular ‘closed’ a Jury of 12 men and Judge Roan. Make sure you read the section on the Leo Frank murder confession in this book and compare it to the one in American State Trials Volume X 1918, see the differences in the final closing arguments.

4. Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913, Brief of Evidence. Extremely rare, only 1 copy exists, and it is at the Georgia State Archive. This document is available now on www.Archive.org and LeoFrank.org.

5.,6.,7., The Atlanta Constitution, The Atlanta Journal, The Atlanta Georgian (Hearst’s Tabloid Yellow Journalism), April 28th to August 27th 1913.

8. Tom Watson’s Jeffersonian and Watson’s Magazine: Watson’s Magazine, January 1915, Watson’s Magazine, March 1915; Watson’s Magazine, August 1915, Watson’s Magazine, September 1915, and Watson’s Magazine, October of 1915. (Available here on www.Archive.org and www.leofrank.org). Tom Watson’s best work on the Leo M. Frank case was published in September 1915. Watson’s five works written collectively on the Leo M. Frank topic, provide logical arguments confirming the guilt of Leo M. Frank with superb reasoning.

These five works are absolutely required reading for anyone interested in the Leo M. Frank Case. Tom Watson’s magazine publications surged from 30,000 to 100,000 copies, when it was announced he would be writing on the Leo Frank case. These magazines are extremely rare and very difficult to find. However they have been scanned and are available on both www.Archive.org and www.LeoFrank.org.

1. The Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (January 1915) Watson’s Magazine Volume 20 No. 3. See page 139 for the Leo Frank Case. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source: www.Archive.org

2. The Full Review of the Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (March 1915) Volume 20. No. 5. See page 235 for ‘A Full Review of the Leo Frank Case’. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source: www.Archive.org

3. The Celebrated Case of The State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank By Tom Watson (August 1915) Volumne 21, No 4. See page 182 for ‘The Celebrated Case of the State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank”. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source: www.Archive.org

4. The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert By Tom Watson (September 1915) Volume 21. No. 5. See page 251 for ‘The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert’. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source: www.Archive.org

5. The Rich Jews Indict a State! The Whole South Traduced in the Matter of Leo Frank By Tom Watson (October 1915) Volume 21. No. 6. See page 301. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source: www.Archive.org
The most comprehensive research archive of Leo M. Frank Case information and documents, visit: www.LeoFrank.org

Fair Usage Law

July 10, 2011   Posted in: Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

Jewish and Gentile Relations on the Brink: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan 98 years ago April 26, 1913.

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean, Publisher: New Horizon Press; 1st edition (September 15, 1989).
Brief Biography of Leo Frank
Leo Frank was born in Cuero, Texas on April 17, 1884. His family moved 3 months after his birth to Brooklyn, NY, where Frank was raised and educated, before attending college at upstate NY. Frank matriculated into Cornell University in Ithaca, NY, 1902 as an Engineering student, and after graduating in 1906, he traveled to Germany to study pencil manufacturing. After his 9 month stint in Europe, Leo Frank made a permanent move to Atlanta, Georgia, in August 1908 starting a new life in the Heart of the South.
1910
In 1910, Leo Frank married into a wealthy and established Jewish family (Selig-Cohen) and was elected B’nai B’rith President in 1912. By 1913 Leo Frank had reached the pinnacle of his career at the National Pencil Company, becoming superintendent, accountant, manager and part owner.
1913
The National Pencil Co. factory was located on 37 to 41 South Forsyth Street.
Thirteen year old Mary Phagan, an employee of Leo Frank had begun working at the pencil factory sometime in early Spring of April 1912, about a year before her murder. She worked just down the hall from Leo Frank on the 2nd floor. Mary Phagan worked in the metal room, in a section called the tipping department, her job was inserting erasers into the empty brass metal bands that were attached to the end of the pencils.
The metal department, where Mary Phagan worked was adjacent to and contained within it the unisex bathroom and girls dressing room, near where her blood and hair of Mary Phagan would be found by early bird employees on Monday morning at 7AM on April 28, 1913. Once the word got out about discovery, the employees of the whole factory in hysteria would gawk at these unusual blood stains on the floor and the tress of 6 to 8 hairs stuck on the handle of the lathe machine.
A white powder haskolene was found suspiciously smeared and rubbed into the fresh blood stains on the metal room floor in front of the dressing room turning the red blood stain variations of white, pink and blood red, the half-baked “clean-up job” appeared to be a failed attempt to cover up the blood stains near where the murder victim it was later revealed was accidentally dropped as she was being moved from the scene of the crime to the spot adjacent to the basement furnace.
Little Mary Phagan’s Life:
The work Mary Phagan did at the pencil factory was her small way of helping support her five siblings, and previously widowed mother, who remarried Mr. J. W. Coleman. Mary’s step father knew Mary for 4 years and he identified the hair found on the lathe machine as belonging to Mary Phagan.
The week before Phagan’s murder, a shortage of metal supplies at the factory had led to a reduction in her work hours and she was temporarily laid off. Her wages for the shortened work week came to $1.20 or just ten cents an hour for the twelve hours she had worked prior to her being murdered.
On April 26, 1913, celebrated locally as Memorial Day (Confederate Memorial Day), Mary came to the factory to claim her pay before going to see the parade with some of her friends and neighbor co-worker George W. Epps at 2pm.
Later in the evening Epps ran over to Mary Phagan’s home, which was right around the corner, to find out why Phagan never showed up. Mary Phagan’s family was already in a state of distress over her being missing, but they also thought she might have gone to stay with a relative.
When Mary Phagan arrived at the factory, Marys pay was allegedly issued to her by Frank and according to the pre-trial investigation and later the testimony at the 1913 Trial, Leo Frank was the last person to admit seeing Mary Phagan alive in a virtually empty factory (there were 4 people in the factory at the time of Phagans arrival, when the normal number was more than 170+).
There was also some conflicting testimony about what Leo Frank said concerning a question Mary Phagan asked him, “Has the metal come in?”. A Pinkerton detective and defense witness hired by the National Pencil Company contradicted Leo Frank about the answer Leo Frank said Mary had given to that question.
George Epps provided troubling testimony to the police, stating that Mary had told him in confidence, that Leo Frank scared her and often made lascivious, inappropriate sexual innuendos and insinuations toward her, that Leo Frank was “after her”. George Epps would later after the Leo Frank murder trial get kidnapped by Frank cronies, be threatened with violence and forced to recant his testimony by signing a false affidavit under duress. George Epps signed an affidavit about the details of his abduction and the dishonest trickery that unraveled when he was kidnapped and taken to Alabama.
April 27, 1913
In the early hours of Sunday, April 27th 1913 at around 3:30 AM in the morning, the night watch (“night witch”) Newt Lee made a phone call to the police. Newt Lee found Mary Phagans mangled body on a dirt mound near a furnace in the rear of the basement, with part of her bloody underwear wrapped around her head. Police reported there was evidence she had been dragged from the elevator face down, before being dumped next to the furnace, Phagan’s face was scratched up and covered with filth. The autopsy would reveal she had been hit on the face around the eye with a fist, there was also a damage to the back of her head that was likely caused when it hit the handle of the lathe, her underwear was torn open, she had been raped, beaten and strangled with a 7 foot cord. One doctor testified under oath to several types of specific violence and vaginal damage occurred, suggesting some kind of rape either penile or by fingers.
Leo Frank
The police after viewing the body of Mary Phagan made several failed attempts at reaching Leo Frank on the phone, after finally reaching him, they went directly to the home of Leo Frank at around 7am in the morning. The detectives arrived at his home asking Mrs. Frank to speak with Mr. Frank, they requested he accompany them to the factory. Like typical seasoned detectives, without telling Leo Frank what it was about, they observed him, suspicion fell on Frank because he appeared to be extremely nervous, trembling, rubbing his hands, pale, appeared to be hung over, bumbling, jimjamming and agitated. Leo Frank also gave overly detailed and meticulous answers on very minor points, his voice was hoarse and he fumbled and struggled with minor tasks like fixing his collar. Moreover, Leo kept saying he hadn’t had breakfast and kept asking for a cup of coffee. The police asked Leo Frank if he had known who Mary Phagan was and he denied knowing a Mary Phagan saying he would need to check the accounting books he managed to be sure. This would become an important point at the trial, because Mary Phagan had worked for a year on the same floor as Leo Frank, her work station was only a few feet away next to the bathroom, where Leo Frank visited each day. Other employees testified Frank knew Mary on a first name basis. Phagan had also collected more than 50 pay envelopes from Leo Frank during her 1 year of employment and logged more than 2,500 hours of work.
Frank flat out got caught in a lie about knowing Mary Phagan which damaged his credibility and left people wondering why he was trying to pretend not to know her.
After arresting and questioning the black janitor Jim Conley, who was present at work on the infamous Saturday, the police eventually after 3 half-truth affidavits, got Jim Conley to admit he was an accomplice to the murder after the fact. Conley admitted he was asked by Leo Frank to move the body of Mary Phagan to the basement and that he wrote four dictated “death notes” (only 2 were discovered) which were scattered next to the head of Mary Phagan.
The murder notes were a very contrived attempt to make it appear as if Mary Phagan had written the notes after she went to the bathroom and was assaulted there. The notes where clear in their attempt to pin the crime and point guilt to the “long tall slim negro” night watchman Newt Lee (“night witch”). Leaving many people asking themselves whenever in history has a black man committed a murder and stuck around to write murder notes as if they came from the victim and addressing it to her mother.
The trial would make history, because it would be the first time in the United States of America, where the testimony of two black man (Jim Conley & Newt Lee) would lead to the conviction and death sentence of a white man (Leo Frank) by an all White jury in the racially segregated South.
Star Witness Monteen Stover and the Leo Frank Murder Confession
Though the Star witness was neither Newt Lee or Jim Conley, but a 14 year old White girl named Monteen Stover who cracked wide open Leo Frank’s alibi. Monteen Stover had come to the factory to collect her pay envelope minutes after Mary Phagan had arrived, but Frank was not in either his inner or outer office, nor was Leo Frank aware that Monteen Stover had arrived and waited for him five minutes 12:05 to 12:10. Frank would counter the testimony of Monteen Stover stating, he might have “unconsciously” gone to the bathroom. Frank had entrapped himself beyond escape, because the bathroom was located within the metal room, where the prosecution had successfully built a 29 day case that Leo Frank had murdered Mary Phagan there.
Appeals
Numerous frivolous appeal attempts by the Leo Frank Legal Defense Team to the Georgia Supreme Court, District Court and United States Supreme Court, were denied after careful review, with lengthy decisions written and rendered (see LeoFrank.org). The departing Governor of Georgia, John M. Slaton (who also happened to be a senior legal partner in the same law firm which represented Leo Frank), decided to commute Leo Franks death sentence of his client to life in prison on June 21, 1915 days before the end of his last term as Governor. The Antisemite Tom Watson through his popular Jeffersonian publishing company in 1914 and 1915, called Leo Frank a Jewish sodomite and wrote five separate scathing reviews of the Leo Frank Case in January, March, August, September and October of 1915 issues of Watson’s Magazine (These 5 issues are available on Archive.org).
Shanking July 17, 1915
One month after the commutation of Leo Frank, he had his neck slashed in prison by an inmate named Green, who used a 7 inch butcher knife. Frank barely survived the wound and it was slow to heal in the hot humid summer of 1915.
Almost 2 months later, after Leo Frank received a clemency reduction of his death sentence to life in prison, a well organized group of about 25 to 35 men, many of which were from Georgia’s highest strata of politics, law and society, organized themselves into the ‘Knights of Mary Phagan’. This newly formed group of Georgia’s elite, sought to fulfill the conviction of the Jury and deliver righteous retribution in the form of “Southern Style Vigilante Justice”.
After much careful planning, Leo Frank was kidnapped from the minimum security prison he was housed in the evening of August 16, 1915, driven all through the night and then lynched in the early hours of August 17th 1915 from an oak tree near the town where Mary Phagan had formerly lived.
Lynching
Franks dangling body became a public spectacle, photographs were taken and the pictures of Franks suspended body, gently twirling in the breeze became popular post cards and memorabilia in the South, selling out almost instantly.
Mary Phagan Kean
The book ‘The Murder of Little Mary Phagan’ is written by the namesake of the murder victim, Mary Phagan’s great grand niece named Mary Phagan Kean. When Mary Phagan Kean was a teenager, she discovered her given name was no mere coincidence. When people heard Mary Phagan Keans name they started asking her questions about whether she was related to the famous Mary Phagan who had been murdered long ago by Leo Frank. Mary Phagan Kean would learn a startling secret when she asked her family if she was a blood relative connected to the Mary Phagan who was murdered. When her family revealed the truth about her blood relation, Mary Phagan Kean immediately became insatiably curious about the investigation, trial and aftermath. Instantly becoming a life long student of the case, Mary Phagan-Kean has devoted her entire life pouring over and painstakingly researching and reading every surviving documents surrounding the torture, rape and strangulation of her great grand aunt, 13 year old Mary Phagan.
B’nai B’rith
Leo Frank was the President of the Atlanta Chapter of B’nai B’rith. As a result of the conviction in this national scandal and sensational trial, it would become the critical mass of “Antisemitism” catalyzing the formation of two American groups: the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in October, 1913, or ADL (www.adl.org) for short, and spark the revival of the defunct nativist and ethnic nationalist Ku Klux Klan (KKK) in 1915.
Jewish Scholars which overwhelmingly wrote the lion share of all the written books, articles, web sites, scripts and texts about the subject almost unanimously allege the investigation, trial, and conviction where part of a widespread Antisemitic conspiracy, a text book case of railroading and framing an innocent Jewish Man because of anti-Jewish racism and religious hatred. These books often leave out most of the relevant facts, evidence and testimony in the Leo Frank case spinning the facts convenient to creating doubt about Leo Franks guilt.
1980’s
Pressure from the Jewish community, Jewish groups and ADL (Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith) with an affidavit from a lonely and senile octogenarian, the former office boy of Leo Frank for 3 weeks in April 1913, a man named Alonzo Mann, resulted in the highly political 1986 Georgian pardon of Leo Frank (without exoneration). They forgave Leo Frank, but kept his guilt intact.
On March 11, 1986, a pardon without exoneration was issued by the board:
Without attempting to address the question of guilt or innocence, and in recognition of the State’s failure to protect the person of Leo M. Frank and thereby preserve his opportunity for continued legal appeal of his conviction, and in recognition of the State’s failure to bring his killers to justice, and as an effort to heal old wounds, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, in compliance with its Constitutional and statutory authority, hereby grants to Leo M. Frank a Pardon.
A number of fictionalized media dramatizations have been made about the trial in the form of plays, musicals, miniseries, docudramas and Broadway plays all created by Jews making a mockery of the life of Mary Phagan, idealizing and rehabilitating Leo Frank as an innocent victim of evil Antisemitism. The blood libel against the Leo Frank prosecution continues to this day by the Jewish community, though sometimes it is often couched. The Jewish community won’t dare ever mention the “unconscious” bathroom murder confession Leo Frank made on the witness stand when he was giving his statement at the trial on August 18, 1913, to counter Monteen Stover’s testimony. Leo Frank is the only person in US history to make a virtual murder confession at his own trial. Shocking, but true.
The 4.7MB adobe PDF version of the book is available here for download. Please download this book and read it.
“Definitive account of one of the most famous crimes of the century.”–American Jewish Outlook
“Riveting and captivating!” — Ira Stein
“The most evenhanded account of the most sensational trial of the 20th century.” — Matt Cohen
“The best book written on the Leo Frank case since 1915” – MC
The book was published in English on September 25, 1989
For more information on the Leo Frank Case, visit: www.LeoFrank.org
More excellent books and reading on the subject include:
0. The Leo Frank Case (Mary Phagan) Inside Story of Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery 1913 – The first neutral book written on the subject. Very interesting read.
1. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean (Available here on www.Archive.org). Written by Mary Phagan Kean, the great grand niece of Mary Phagan. A neutral account of the events surrounding the trial of Leo Frank. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan is well worth reading and it is a refreshing change from the endless number of Jewish and contemporary books turning the Leo Frank case into a neurotic race obsessed tabloid controversy.
2. American State Trials, volume X (1918) by John Lawson (Available here on www.Archive.org) Tends to be biased in favor of Leo Frank and his legal defense team, this document provides an abridged version of the Brief of Evidence, leaving out some important things said and details when it republishes parts of the trial testimony. Be sure to read the closing arguments of Luther Zeigler Rosser, Reuben Rose Arnold, Frank Arthur Hooper and Hugh Manson Dorsey. For a more complete version of the Leo M. Frank trial testimony, read the 1913 murder trial brief of evidence and you can see what was left out.
3. Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey in the Trial of Leo Frank (Available here on www.archive.org and www.LeoFrank.org). Some but not all of the 9 hours of arguments given to the Jury at the end of the Leo Frank trial. Only 18 Libraries in the world have copies of this books. It can be found here on archive.org thanks to leofrank.org. This is an excellent book and required reading to see how Dorsey in sales vernacular ‘closed’ a Jury of 12 men and Judge Roan.
4. Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913, Brief of Evidence. Extremely rare, only 1 copy exists, and it is at the Georgia State Archive. This document is available now on LeoFrank.org.
5.,6.,7., The Atlanta Constitution, The Atlanta Journal, The Atlanta Georgian (Hearst’s Tabloid Yellow Journalism), April 28th to August 27th 1913.
8. Tom Watson’s Jeffersonian and Watson’s Magazine: Watson’s Magazine, January 1915, Watson’s Magazine, March 1915; Watson’s Magazine, August 1915, Watson’s Magazine, September 1915, and Watson’s Magazine, October of 1915. (Available here on www.Archive.org and LeoFrank.org). Tom Watson’s best work on the Leo M. Frank case was published in September 1915. Watson’s five works written collectively on the Leo M. Frank topic, provide logical arguments confirming the guilt of Leo M. Frank with superb reasoning.
These five works are absolutely required reading for anyone interested in the Leo M. Frank Case. Tom Watson’s magazine publications surged from 30,000 to 100,000 copies, when it was announced he would be writing on the Leo Frank case. These magazines are extremely rare and very difficult to find. However they have been scanned and are available on both www.Archive.org and www.leofrank.org
1. The Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (January 1915) Watson’s Magazine Volume 20 No. 3. See page 139 for the Leo Frank Case. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source Archive.org
2. The Full Review of the Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (March 1915) Volume 20. No. 5. See page 235 for ‘A Full Review of the Leo Frank Case’. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source Archive.org
3. The Celebrated Case of The State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank By Tom Watson (August 1915) Volumne 21, No 4. See page 182 for ‘The Celebrated Case of the State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank”. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source Archive.org
4. The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert By Tom Watson (September 1915) Volume 21. No. 5. See page 251 for ‘The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert’. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source Archive.org
5. The Rich Jews Indict a State! The Whole South Traduced in the Matter of Leo Frank By Tom Watson (October 1915) Volume 21. No. 6. See page 301. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga., Digital Source Archive.org
The most comprehensive research archive of Leo M. Frank Case information and documents, visit: www.LeoFrank.org

Fair Usage Law

April 26, 2011   Posted in: Anne Frank, Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

98 Years Ago in Jewish History, April 26: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Leo Max Frank, on April 26, 1913.



Corporate Standard of the National Pencil Co. Circa 1913

The National Pencil Company was conceived in the Jewish imagination of 1907, and born on April 8th, 1908. The business became terminally ill Monday, April 28, 1913, when early-bird employees of factory found a tress of what looked like it could be Mary Phagan’s hair on the handle of a lathe in the metal room located at the rear of the 2nd floor. Moments later a strange pinkish-red blood stain was discovered on the floor, diagonal to the bathroom door in the metal room, it was smeared with a white powder machine lubricant called haskoline. When word of these two forensic discoveries, spread like wild fire to the 170 employees, countless dozens of laborers flocked to witness the spectacle. Hissy fits and tantrums unraveled, because it was evidence leading to the discovery of the real scene of the crime, not the basement where Phagan had been found. This forensic evidence in the metal room would later be corroborated by numerous employees of the factory at the Coroner’s Inquest and later at Leo Frank trial. For more than one hundred years the Jewish community has attempted to suppress this evidence, until many legal records of the Mary Phagan case where published online.

While hysteria was fermenting at the National Pencil Company, numerous blocks away, Leo Frank, and his two high-powered lawyers, Luther Rosser and Herbert Haas, were at the Atlanta police station. Leo Frank was giving a statement to an official stenographer, Gay C. Febuary, who was capturing the deposition that would later become State’s Exhibit B. Mary Phagan’s Mother, Mrs. Frances Coleman, would sue the National Pencil Company, about 2 years after the trial of Leo Frank ended, for the wrongful death of her daughter and the National Pinkerton Detective Agency sued them as well over an unpaid detective bill of about $1300. Neither were ever able to collect the money awarded to them by the courts.

The National Pencil Company Imploded.

Leo Frank’s wealthy uncle Moses Frank, hired him based on qualifications, not only because he was his nephew. Moses was one of the angel investors, who in part made the National Pencil Company possible, and was no where to be found at the Leo Frank trial, but a very contrived letter was mailed to Moses Frank on April 26, 1913, claimed to be written by Leo Frank in the time range of the murder, attempting to show his very calm state of mind and it was added as evidence at the trial. The outer portion of the letter was never recovered and questions about the letter’s unusual content emerged.

Leo Max Frank (April 17, 1884 – August 17, 1915)

Also stylized as:

1. Leo Max Frank (the name chiseled on his tombstone within Mount Carmel Cemetery NYC),


2. Leo M. Frank (his name and signature on official legal documents),
3. Leo Frank (his name known by the public), or just simply
4. Leo or Frank (for short).

Welcome to The Biography of Leo Frank:

The early years…

    Meet the Franks:

The closest family members of Leo Frank clan that is

Papa: Rudolph Frank (November 5, 1844 to January 15, 1922), a Jew of North-Central European Ashkenazim roots was born and raised in Germany where he earned his Medical Degree, until he later immigrated into the United States in the latter half of the 19th century circa 1869. Rudolph would make several career changes during his life and live in vastly differing places. Rudolph worked as the postmaster in Cuero Texas (Census, DeWitt County, Texas, 1880) and later a traveling salesman in NYC. Leo Frank using the terminology of the era described his father’s absence at his trial, because Rudolph had become an “Invalid” (Leo Frank Statement, Trial Brief, August, 18, 1913). Rudolph was buried in Mount Carmel Cemetery in Queens, NY at grave site location: 1-E-41-1035-4 (right adjacent to his wife, who was buried after him).

Mama: Rachel “Ray” (née Jacobs) Frank (April 16, 1859 – January 1, 1925), an Ashkenazim Jewess was born of German-Jewish immigrants living in NYC. She was not only raised in Brooklyn, but spent the vast majority of her life in New York, except for a 3 year stint in far-off Cuero Texas, and several months here-and-there going back and forth to Georgia for important events, such as the Frank-Selig wedding (November 30, 1910), her son’s murder trial (July 28 – August 26, 1913) and his numerous appeals hearings, and generally for other family affairs. She was buried in Mount Carmel Cemetery in Queens, NY at grave site location: 1-E-41-1035-3 (adjacent right of her son, adjacent left of her husband Rudolph).

Sister: Marian Frank, Leo’s baby sister by 2 years, at about the age of 24, she became Marian Stern in January 1910, when she married German-Jew Immigrant (1898) Otto Stern in NYC. Marian lived a long life for the period, born on October 18th, 1886, she died April 2, 1948, and is buried at Mount Carmel Cemetery in grave site: 1-E-41-1035-12. Long lived Otto Stern, her beloved husband, born March 11, 1882 died May 26th, 1963, and is buried next to Marian at Mount Carmel Cemetery in grave site: 1-E-41-1035-11.

Uncle Moe & Aunt Sarah: Moses Frank (1841-1927), Rudolph’s older brother was Moses Frank, Leo’s “rich” uncle who made his money in cotton oil speculation and was a major shareholder and visionary who helped make the National Pencil Company a reality. Moses was Married to Sarah his second wife, who died August 1st, 1937, and she is buried at Mount Carmel Cemetery in Queens, NY, at grave site location: 1-E-41-1035-6.

Moses Frank the “Confederate Veteran”

Steve Oney describes Moses as, “Confederate veteran Moses Frank” (Oney, 2003, p. 10), despite being over cited without reliable sources by Leo Frank partisan writers, Moses Frank never served in the confederate Army and despite the extremely high survival rate of enlistment documents in the war between the states, there are no records of any kind, or reliable evidence, to support that he was ever in any U.S. Military, North or South, nor do any of his eulogies make reference to him as a Confederate veteran (Koenigsberg, 2011). Reuben Rose Arnold makes mention of Moses as a confederate veteran obliquely in his closing arguments during Leo Frank’s re-trial appeals hearing before Judge Leonard Strickland Roan, in late October 1913, before Roan rejected the petition October 31, 1913.

FRANK, Lucille 1-E-41-1035-01 EMPTY, REFUSED TO BE BURIED NEXT TO LEO FRANK IN HER LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT
FRANK, LEO 1-E-41-1035-02 08/17/1915
FRANK, RAY 1-E-41-1035-03 01/01/1925
FRANK, RUDOLPH 1-E-41-1035-04 01/15/1922
FRANK, Moses 1-E-41-1035-05 10/24/1927
FRANK, SARAH 1-E-41-1035-06 08/01/1937

STERN, MARIAN 1-E-41-1035-12 04/02/1948
STERN, OTTO 1-E-41-1035-11 05/26/1963

1881: From Texas to New York City – An Arranged Marriage in the Jewish Enclave of Brooklyn

Step back in time to the early 1880’s, not at all uncommon during Jewish history and the era, an arranged marriage was organized between a much older gentleman (lucky old goat) and a reasonably attractive young Jewess. It was the typical selective breeding program that has been a permanent fixture over the Jewish centuries, the older intelligent gentleman obtaining a young healthy breeder for services as housewife. In Brooklyn, NY, 1881 Rudolph Frank and Rachel Jacobs married within the Jewish enclave of Brooklyn, NY. Rudolph Frank “robbed the cradle” as they say and was 16 years Rachel Jacob’s senior. After their traditional Jewish marriage and brief honeymoon, they made the great voyage to Cuero (Paris), Texas, for the next 3 Years (1881 to 1884).

Ironically in terms of “robbing the cradle”, Twenty Nine Year Old Leo Frank (1884 to 1915) was about 15 years senior to 13.9 year old little Mary Anne Phagan (1899 to 1913) when he became the prime suspect for the bludgeoning (12:04pm), rape and strangulation (12:05 to 12:10pm) of her on Saturday, April 26, 1913, Confederate Memorial Day, inside the metal room at the rear of the second floor at the National Pencil Company, located at 37 to 41 South Forsyth Street.

“The Perfect Family”

Several years and more after Rudolph Frank and Rachel Jacobs married, they created the proverbial “perfect family” and had two children together, a boy and a girl, in the “perfect order”, first a son named Leo Max who was born at their humble abode in Cuero Texas in 1884, followed by a daughter Marian born in Brooklyn, two years thereafter in 1886.

Leo, Rudolph and Rachel Frank, Early Family Life in Texas – 1880’s and onward

Rudolph Frank, had served as the local postmaster in Cuero, Texas and before emigrating from Europe in the United States, he had formerly engaged in training as a physician back in his “ancestral homeland” of Germany, but he unfortunately never pursued the course work necessary in medicine to become a fully recognized Doctor in the United States. He certainly would have had the option of plugging into the lucrative Doctor Pharmacy matrix after upgrading his training in the US, but he did not go this route and instead became a traveling salesman until he was unable to work any longer around 1910 when he had a nervous breakdown.

Brooklyn Native, Rachel Jacobs (a Jew Yorker by birth), traditional for the time, became a young home maker after her marriage to old goat Rudolph, but the young housewife felt like a withering flower once she was physically uprooted in Brooklyn and transplanted into the boiling-hot, primitive and rural makeshift town in backward Cuero, Texas. Rachel was replanted far away from her parents home in leafy Brooklyn, a once lushly sylvan and green oasis, from the urban sprawl of Manhattan. For the Jewish genepool the mega cities of America, like NYC, offered the best genetic protection, business opportunities and racial improvement for the Europeanized Ashkanazi. It was not just Manhattan, but Brooklyn that often attracted the best and brightest of the aggressive, racially conscious, eugenically minded, agitative, revolutionary and nation-state wrecking International Jew.

Back in the Summer of 1883: The Conception of Leo Frank

One day during the sexual heat of a hot and dry Texas summer in July, 1883, all the biological stars were in alignment, Rudolph and Ray had finally, after nearly 2 years of marriage and trying, conceived their first child.

It’s Official: Ray Frank is Pregnant 1883

The pregnancy would eventually be affirmed for sure, when during the early first trimester, Rachel began experiencing all those natural signs of being “prego”, including morning sickness and that peculiar craving for kosher pickle and matzo smoothies.

Rachel would put her hand on her bump and in turn it would become for Moma Ray and Papa Rudolph a glorious, momentous and celebrated moment of what was to eventually come, is it a boy or a girl? What do we name our child or who do we name our child after? With a high infant mortality rate back in those days, it was enough to make the newly wed couple frightened, uncertain and excited about their unknown future. Rudolph would have been walking around puffed and proud-chested, glowing and beaming, the old goat was going to become a father after all, he was beside himself with joy and praying for a son.

Hurray! It’s a Boy!

They did not know it at the time, because obviously there were no Medical ultrasonography machines or other gender determining sciences available back in “them days”, but they were to be eventually surprised during the birthing process when they saw Leo’s little schmeckle pop out.

Nine months after conception, on April 17, 1884, a son was born to a relieved Rudolph whose prayers were finally answered. Leo Frank had entered the world in their wooden frame home. The Frank’s humble little abode in Cuero was located about 100 or so miles from San Antonio, Texas.

Talk of moving away for better opportunities and “greener pastures” began before Leo was born and would intensify immediately thereafter, more importantly the social infrastructure and extended family network was mostly back in mean green urban machine of Brooklyn, NOT in the drab tumble weed fields and listless planes of wild west, 19th century Texas, where the total population was less than 2 million in the semi defacto republic of Texas whose fields that seemed endless.

It is said, that as hard as it is to believe in an age where every keystroke is recorded, they didn’t have birth certificates back then in Texas, at least in that “neck of the woods”.

It’s Time to Pack Our Bags HONEY, We’re Movin’ (back) to Brooklyn!

The freshly formed Frank clan would follow through with no doubts or hesitations, embarking on an arduous journey, and the Frank trinity would soon emigrate forever from the flat, rural, provincial, yawning and cowboyesque Texas, to the hustling and bustling cosmopolitan North East, where life was truly more bearable. Where one could live deeply and suck the marrow out of the bones of life, as Henry David Thoreau might have quipped about Brooklyn had he actually been born there.

Some of the best genepools in the world were forged in the womb of Brooklyn.

1884 Summer: Rudolph, Rachel and Sweet Baby Leo Frank

A tumultuous turning point for the new Frank family began in the summer of 1884, the complicated move at the time would have taken weeks of careful planning, organizing, and packing. The Frank family voyage was unfolding at a time in U.S. history when far-reaching travel was rough and painfully slow, but fortunately patience was plentiful, though trying at times.

The Frank family made the right choice when they decided to relocate from the slow small-town of Cuero, Texas, thousands of miles away, back to the home-town of Rachel, that place of brick, rock and brownstone clad buildings, the living suburb within the periphery of NYC known as the borough of Brooklyn or Kings County.

Home Sweet Home, Brooklyn had “better-everything” and it was where everyone would benefit and have more opportunities, but not unlike Texas, where during certain times of the year, their arrival was at the thickest and sweatiest time during the peak of humid mugginess in the sweltering New York summer heat.

No words might describe the ecstasy of finally settling in for a bit, sliding in and marinating in an oversized and soothing claw foot bath tub, after such a long stinky trip, which had many stop overs, random annoyances and delays. It was so nice to have plumbing and toilets with running water vs. Texan crescent moon, phone booth style, Earthen closets that perpetually stunk to high heaven.

Back to Brooklyn

Cute little coneheaded and round faced baby Leo Frank, who not only looked more like his mother than his father, also got her generic good looks too. Sweet baby Leo Frank was barely three months old at the time of this immense cross country pilgrimage and major relocation to the land of milk and honey, he was still suckling nourishing milk from his mothers bosom. The trip would naturally be a traumatic experience for him, instilling a little bit of that restless spirit into the environmental mix with his diasphoratic DNA, afterall Leo’s ancestors had all immigrated to the United States 1 to 2 generations prior. That long dramatic journey from one side of the country to the other, would not be Leos first or last and it certainly left a powerful impression upon him in a very abstract way, not unlike his future travels, which would be even more dramatic in 1905 and 1907, with two European Trips.

Finally, after settling into NYC at the Jacobs residence, Rudolph Frank took a job as a traveling salesman and Rachel “Ray” resumed her roll as homemaker. Two years later and in the chillier NY months, a baby sister had arrived, Marian Frank, who was born during a chilly fall day.

Aww, Leo and Marian looked so cute together. Mommy when I grow up, I’m going to become a fiendish serial killer!

Leo looks like the male version of his mommy Rachel as a child, but his Eastern European round plate face would narrow, and square down a bit, giving him a more oval and chiseled, athletically handsome, nerdish look during his physical prime in 1912.

Education: Public Schools, College Prep at Pratt Institute, Cornell University 1902 to 1906

Frank spent his most formative years growing up in NYC, he was educated at public schools and the prestigious artsy-fartsy prep school, Pratt Institute of Brooklyn (1898 to 1902), which is still running strong more than 100 years after Leo attended, but it’s now a college, instead of a highschool. One can only imagine what a fascinating place Brooklyn must have been like in the decades surrounding the turn of the century, as it was going through its own rapid development and evolution.

Leo M. Frank was a star student and matriculated into Cornell University in Ithaca, NY from the Fall of 1902 and he studied there until his college graduation ceremony in June of 1906. Frank studied Mechanical Engineering and dabbled in numerous hobbies, sports, collegiate activities and clubs.

During Frank’s college years at his Alma mater, he engaged in chess, cards, tennis, amateur photography and played basketball for his class team. Frank was a handsome athlete and scholar who looked a lot like the fictional character Donnie Darko (Jake Gyllenhaal) during his college years and during his murder trial looked a lot like Pee Wee Herman strung out on crackrock.

Something just isn’t right, an appropriate nickname for this human ticking timebomb, ready to explode at any moment, might be: Leo Freak.

During his free time Frank engaged in Jewish fraternal oriented activities and practiced amateur landscape photography of which many photos survived. The 1906 Cornell yearbook has Frank listed as a member of the Cornell Society of Mechanical Engineering (CSME). Frank was also a member of the Cornell Congress and the H. Morse Stephens debate team. If Frank’s participation in the multitude that is the college experience and his ability to multi-task were any indication of his potential, he was destined for greatness, but on the flipside our intuition and instincts tell us there’s also something that just aen’t right about this guy. Some of Leo Franks pictures reveal a real kind of wide-eyed chizophrenic side about him.

Leo Freak

A posthumous core drilling of Leo Frank should be conducted to obtain his genetic equation and analysis performed to determine its multifactorial gene patterns and then compare it with other pedophiles who murder children. Multi-processor cloud computing can be utilized to see what gene patterns make one prone to these kinds of psychotic behaviors if enough samples are collected and analyzed.

Notice those creepy, bulging and psychotic serial killer eyes, can you imagine having to stare into them as a child laborer while he is winking cockeye’d sexual suggestions as his left lazy-eye rolls and turns out of alignment? Would you not be freaked out if you were a little girl? He definitely has some serious hormonal imbalance issues (hyperthyroidism?) going on and possibly physiological or mental problems from years of excessive consumption of drugs, alcohol, cigarettes and whoring. One can only wonder how those environmental and genetic imbalances may have affected his mind and propensities from time to time.

However, he also seems to be a good nature’d kind of guy too, who had great managerial talents. What we have here is a real Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, as Dorsey accurately put it (Dorsey, August 21, 22, 23, 25, 1913) during his closing arguments, something not at all uncommon in many people.

Employment 1906 to 1913

1906

After college, Frank took a job in the summer of 1906 as a draftsman for the B.F. Sturtevant (Sturdivant) Company in bone chilling and frozen tundra of Hyde Park, Massachusetts, 6 months later he returned to New York as the brisk chilly fall turned into a frigid shitty NYC winter.

1907

In early 1907 Frank began a new job working for the National Meter Company of Brooklyn, NY, as a testing engineer and draftsman for about 10 months. Though Leo M. Frank was Ivy League educated at the haughty Cornell University – the best school of higher education New York has to offer (no offense Columbia) – he was unable to connect with any kind of steady job, though not because he lacked talent. Leo Frank was a smart young man.

1907, 1908 to 1913, Big Opportunities in the South, briefly in 1907, and five years during 1908 to 1913.

Leo Frank’s wealthy world traveling uncle Moses Frank, known affectionately as Uncle Moe, had suggested to Leo M. Frank that he should consider becoming involved in a potentially lucrative opportunity and participate on some level in the technical and accounting management of a new manufacturing venture, a pencil factory in Atlanta, Georgia, one that Moses had just invested in with some serious shekels. After all, Leo Frank was no slouch, he had an engineering degree and it would be most useful and valuable to have a family member on the team being a serious player. Moses was no slouch either, he made his golden nest egg from cotton oil, and it was time to make another, because being on permanent vacation can slowly get very expensive and that’s the honest to G*d truth. Moses was a vibrant old man, but partially blind by 1908 (Koenigsberg, LeoFrankCase.com, 2011). Moses was the high-up and undeclared patriarch of sorts for the Frank clan.

1907 October – Life Changing Event, Atlanta & European Sojourn.

In the middle of October 1907 Leo’s uncle Moe and associates, invited Frank down south to Atlanta, it was part pleasure, but mostly about business. Moses offered Leo the opportunity of a lifetime, suggesting that Leo stop working for other people and making them rich, and instead come to work for a newly born family oriented business, which tragically could have been a dream come true, but sadly is remembered as the infamous National Pencil Company located in the blackened heart of Atlanta, Georgia. Defense leader, Luther Rosser in a loud basso voice would describe the factory as a vile hole in his closing argument at the end of the trial August 1913.

Frank thought it over as he experienced that warm tingly feeling of excitement getting a boner in his pants and agreed, after spending 2 weeks enjoying a little taste of Atlanta’s red light district, 23 year old Leo Frank returned to NYC momentarily and then embarked on a long and bitterly cold Atlantic journey, across that dangerous and unforgiving dark-wine Homeric ocean, to the conglomeration historically known at the time as the “German Empire” — papa Rudolph Frank’s and Uncle Moe’s ancestral home land in Europe.

In December 1907 Frank began a 9 month apprenticeship in scold and gruff Germany, to study the art of pencil manufacturing under the directorship of Eberhard Faber.

Today Eberhard Faber is a name found commonly on pencils, pens and erasers. Faber built the first U.S. pencil factory in 1861. Faber was the last in a family of lead pencil manufacturers dating back to Kasper Faber, who died in 1784.

1908

In August of 1908 Leo M. Frank returned briefly to NYC to kiss and hug his mom and dad, while giving noogies and purple nurples to his sister, then he practically ran out the door and off he left his home in Brooklyn, NY and permanently relocated with his broken-in leather luggage down south to Atlanta, Georgia.

After briefly settling in, on the 10th day of August 1908, Frank was given a medium level entry position at the National Pencil Co., and he embraced it. With hard work and dedication. Leo Frank vigorously moved up the ranks, building trust and developing a reputation for punctuality and meticulousness. In a matter of new york style energy, he shown bright in the South. In time Frank became more than superintendent, and accountant, but part owner of the National Pencil Co. as he gained shares in the company.

In Time, Rising to Superintendent, Accountant, Treasurer and Employee Payer.

When Frank became superintendent of the 37 to 41 S. Forsyth street, National Pencil Company factory, his responsibilities were for purchasing supplies and machinery, accounting, operations, paying off employees and insuring the final production quality exceeded that of competitors. Frank was also made a part time general supervisor of the pencil Lead plant on Bell Street. Frank had a lot of responsibilities, and he worked long hours and his math-science brain were put to good use and as a result his accounting and management skills grew to the point where he could manage the books with his eyes closed.

The Creepy Boss with the Rattling Cash Box

Leo Frank was diligently focused on work flow minutiae and efficiency, and as a result his upward mobility at the pencil factory was reflective and worthy of his skill. HE worked for nearly five years, reaching the apogee of his career while he was at his prime age of 29, just before his arrest, and during this nearly half-decade (August 10th 1908 to Tuesday, April 28th 1913) of service he had developed a general reputation amongst the general public atleast face value wise, as a good chap with promising potential. His rich uncle Moe, was proud of Leo and saw him as the perfect gentleman to command the helm of the factory on the ground.

In general Leo Frank exhibited all the behaviors you would want in a leader, an early bird, punctual, hard working, obsessive compulsive, good at accounting, embezzling and cooking the books properly, and paying attention to details, and keeping 2 sets of books. Leo Frank monitored time cards with a magnifying glass fanatically and could account for every second of every minute and every agorot and shekel, this is precisely why the business was so successful. From it’s humble beginnings in 1908, it was a powerhouse by 1913, primarily because of Leo Frank and the occasional dressing down or scoldings he received from old Sigmund “Ziggy” Montag.

Although Leo Frank was a multitasker at running the show, he had a darkly fiendish and perverted side to him too. The alleged perception of his character amongst a bakers dozen or more of tweenage girls who had labored at the factory, was that Leo Frank was the creepy touchy-feely boss, one whose “claws” came out. Leo Frank got just a wee little bit too close for comfort if you know what I mean, but he wasn’t always so obvious when making innuendos, he was sometimes very subtle and not always so noticeable in his lecherous deviousness. Naturally given Frank’s position in the limelight of the Southern Jewish community, his high leadership position at the factory and his relatively new marriage, tended to ensure Leo Frank was reminded he had to display some semblance of stealthiness. Frank wasn’t a dummy after all, he knew on some level whether consciously and unconsciously, he had to try to maintain some measure of self-control and fertiveness for his frisky affection.

Population and Labor Surge

There was an over abundance of child labor available in Atlanta at the time, and no shortage of naive farmgirls who sought a better life in the “fast” urban cities, far away from the droll existence on the monotonous fields of east bumble-fuck Georgia. The lean muscle, rail thin and bespectacled handsome nerd was always making couched sexual propositions to a careful selection of his pre-teen and teenage girls working at the factory, they claimed Frank made “implied” innuendos, naughty suggestions, lecherous stares, was openly caught sometimes leering at the girls in the dressing room, at times winking and he got a little bit too familiar at times with some of the girls. There were other allegations too, besides aggressive sexual harassment (lasciviousness), the factory was also being used as a rendezvous for in-call and out-call prostitution under the winking eye of Leo Frank. There were after work, during the work week, and Saturday Dionysian stress relief parties involving booty, bubbles and beer. The gloomy poorly lit basement was one of those kinky places couples were allowed to rendezvous. In general the factory could be interpreted as becoming the work hard and play hard fiefdom for Leo Frank lording it over innocent factory girls, but in really, he was just trying to blow off some steam and it got way out of hand.

Concerning the culture at the factory, Even foreman NV Darley, another married man, was seen with a young girl at the picture show on Confederate Memorial Day (Koenigsberg, 2011).

Child Prostitution

The jammed rows of fire hazard, small detached homes on mechanic street, were brothels humping and pumping with activity, that were located just a stones throw away from the Pencil factory and at the time bursting at the seams with child prostitutes, hookers and fresh street meat. Not so ironically, the National Pencil Company factory was once a bed bug ridden sweaty hotel where grandpa dirties and horn dog men of all ages for that matter, could get their rocks off on the side and bring home fresh STD’s to their unfortunate and unsuspecting house-Frau wives at home. The bordellos were sadly filled with poor, naive and worn out farm girls and child laborers who had been ground down in the slave pits of the “meat grinding” mills and the filthy factories for just pennies an hour, and many finally were turned-out and began working for a dollar an hour, that is once they realized turning tricks could earn them a weeks wages at the mills.

Farming, during droughts or floods, weak market sales and down cycles, would cause the major cities of the South to become flooded with families who had young farm girls and boys looking for any work and wages available. Child Prostitution was an unfortunate part of city growing pains caused by surging population growth, where severe poverty was rife, and the testosterone-fueled demands were high. Though on its best day, Atlanta didn’t have even a fraction of the numerical whoring available as NYC did at the time, but pound for pound, Atlanta had more. Wages in the South were a fraction of what they were in the North, this was due to the crisis of poverty and the legacy of losing the Civil War.

Rattling the Money Box, Hey Baby, How About it?

In a slap stick kinda way, Frank would often make inappropriate sexual innuendos with the cash box flush with cash, on top of his office desk. Frank sitting in his swivel chair, with his long skinny bony looking legs spread like a turkey wishbone, slapping his knees together back and forth, he would rattled the swollen cash box against his desk smirking, grinning, winking and saying how bout it? Though sexual harassment was no stranger to women in the history of female labor, it was often the biggest complaint in the factories (People verses Leo Frank, 2009), mills and industrial sweatshops of the time. The number of teend girls sexually molested and raped in these horrendous environments are uncountable. However, the temptation was always there on both sides because of natural hormones. However for testosterone surging men, turning out girls was a game that today is called today in urban areas, “the crown and the jewels”. It’s a game that has existed and been playing out across history, whenever young girls were forced to come into contact and work in a mans world, which is why wine, women, whiskey, and hormones came into play.

Leo Frank’s Character for Lasciviousness was Bad

Frank’s character would be described by more than thirteen of the child laborers, who would testify against him, saying Frank was, what amounted to a lascivious (sexually aggressive) pedophile and some suggested he was a frequent dabbler in whoring. Though the words pedophile, whoring and whoremonger did not exist at the time, these kinds of descriptions were vividly implied during the Leo Frank trial (July 28 to August 25, 26 1913), and later even more affidavits supporting these notions would emerge at the Georgia Supreme Court hearings.

After the trial, Dorsey worked overtime to counter the claims of the defense that the accusations of sexual harassment were false. Dorsey went ahead and secured more affidavits supporting Frank’s pedophilia and naughty tendencies, including one that was most chilling about a young girl that got knocked up by Frank and revealed a very kinky-sexually-aggressive side of Leo Frank…

Leo Frank was into Bruise Biting

Apparently Frank was into sadist sexual biting, he allegedly left teeth marks and bruises on a little teenage girl he had raped one year before he murdered Mary Phagan. Perhaps, the young degenerates DNA has lived on after all, not through his bloated and dumpy, infertile wife, who couldn’t conceive after 3 years of manual procreation, but the sweet, young and naive lass he debauched at the factory circa 1911that no one found out about until late 1913 and early 1914 during Frank’s Georgia Supreme Court Appeals.

At Least Ten to One Ratio: People attesting to Leo Frank’s Good Character vs. Bad Character for Lasciviousness

Though there were just as many, if not more, a lot more people that came forward to say Frank was not a licentious boss with perpetual wood in his pants, taking advantage of his position of power. However, the quantity numbers game could not save Frank in this situation, because of the “quality” and closeness of those speaking out against him. Most of the people who were attesting to Frank’s good character were bussed in from NYC, or knew him outside the factory, so those saying Leo Frank was lascivious was on parity with those saying he was a good guy.

Pedophile, Like accusing people of Racism and Anti-Semitism: Guilty Until Proven Innocent

The accusation people use today when they want to shame, smear and defame you is to call you a racist, antisemite, or pedophile. It’s a sad reality, but in a situation where a girl claims naughty overtures by the bossman, or any man for that matter, he is almost certainly and always socially considered guilty before innocent.

How Many Witnesses Corroborated Leo Frank’s Naughty Tendencies?

Dorsey put the number at 19 verifiers in his closing arguments (Dorsey, August 21, 22, 23 & 25, 1913) making it somewhat virtually impossible to counter the notion that the lascivious tendencies of Leo Frank were not true. Thus it did not matter how many character witnesses Leo Frank’s defense team “bussed down” from New York to Atlanta.

The claims of some of Frank’s female employees essentially amounted to pouring a cup of hemlock on his murder trial and poisoning it beyond recovery, because Leo Frank was not on trial for pedophilia, adultery, sexual harassment or whoring on the Sabbath.

The Leo Frank Defense Team would argue that bringing up Frank’s pedophilia and whoring escapades had no place at the trial, because Frank was not on trial to determine if he was a sexual pervert and predator, however, the prosecution brought it up only after the defense made the blunder of bringing up Leo Frank’s character first. The rule at the time is that you couldn’t challenge the honor of ones character, until the defense brought it up first and they did.

Once the defense gave the green light on the issue of character, Frank’s lascivious and licentious tendencies became fair game and the prosecution went to great lengths to show Frank’s propensities and tendencies for sexual aggression and whoring to support the theory of why he murdered Phagan and it helped the prosecution build their case in a big way. It tended to wipe out over 100 character witnesses Leo Frank had bussed down from the North East, including teachers, and associates from the Pratt Institute of Brooklyn and the uppity Cornell University. It became oddly alien that Frank had to bus in truck loads of Northerners, because the Jury would naturally wonder why, Frank, who lived in the south for 5 years, was unable to bring in more local support from the 500 member Atlanta B’nai B’rith organization of which he was leader or the Temple he was member. After all, 5 years in Atlanta was a decent amount of time as one of the most prominent member of the Southern Jewish Community and Frank’s local showing was average at best.

In Lucille’s July 17, 1909 picture with Leo Frank, Lucy looked her best.

When the Big Boned Lucy was Attractive: July 17th 1909, 6 years later Leo’s Throat Would Be Slashed in the Milledgeville Prison by William Creen

1910 – Marriage of Mr. Leo Max Frank (1884 to 1915) Marries Miss Lucille Selig (1888-1957).

Meet the Seligs: Daughter, Lucille, Mama, Josephine nee Cohen, and Papa, Emil Selig

Earlier in 1910, Leo’s baby sister Marian Frank, became Marian Stern after she had married Otto Stern in NYC, and Frank being older by a couple of years felt the half-joking half-serious social pressures at the time and knew he was overdue to marry.

Frank was fortunately introduced to Lucille Selig after he had arrived. Once Leo Frank settled in and took permanent residence in Atlanta in August of 1908, he began dating Lucy very seriously in 1909. Lucille Selig came from a prominent and wealthy Jewish family of industrialists who two generations earlier had founded the first synagogue in Atlanta.

The Selig-Franks lived in a modest rented home Home 68 East Georgia Avenue.

A Match Made in Heaven: Emil and Josephine

Both born on the same month and day:

Lucille’s father Emil Selig (Jun. 10, 1849 – Mar. 30, 1914) was a salesman for the West Disinfecting Co., a maker of soaps and supplies, before that, he was a liquor salesman. Son of Samsohn Seelig & Sara Loeb. Emil was buried in Oakland cemetery Jewish Section, Block 279, Lot 58, Grave 3.

Mrs. Josephine Loeb-Cohen Selig (Jun. 10, 1862 – Jan. 27, 1933), was a stay at home mother and her daughter Lucille would often spend their time as socialites lounging about, playing cards, and socializing with their sowing-circle of cackling Jewish housewives and gossipy yentas. Magnolia McKnight (Minola) was their personal cook, who also did light cleaning and laundry. Josephine and her daughter(s) lived the good life, the simple life, the pampered patrician life, by comparison to the toiling local crackers as they were called in local parlance (Oney, 2003), because they were light and flakey . Lucy’s (Lucille) zaftig figure and swelling beltline showed that there was no shortage of downright good ole fashioned “house negro” cooking lovingly made by their skinny high yellow “black mammy”, Minola (Magnolia McKnight) as they affectionately called her.

Josephine was buried a Oakland Cemetery, in Jewish Section, Block 279, Lot 58, Grave 2.

Josephine’s parents were Jonas Loeb Cohen (1823 – 1885) and Regina Abraham Cohen (1839 – 1918).

The Odd Couple “Opposites Attract”: Mr. Leo Frank and Miss Lucille Selig

An Engagement and Prelude to a Marriage Destined to Fail:

The colloquial that “opposites attract” tends to apply more to short term relationships and temporary lust, than anything else. Therefore the cliche “opposites attract” is a misnomer to the highest in the bigger picture of life. Every learned psychologist will tell you that studies show those kinds of relationships can tend to be very problematic, unstable, divisive and often don’t work out in the long run, but back then it “didn’t matter” marriage was for the most part a life long venture and people learned how to “suck it up”, not like today where 50%+ of people divorce over the pettiest of squabbles within the first few years. It also helped that life expectancies in the early 20th century were decades shorter than what they are today, but Jews generally have a longer life expectancy when they are affluent.

The marriage of Leo and Lucille, was sadly like too many marriages, eventually destined to fail even if they would have most definitely remained together till the end, but it didn’t really matter for Leo as there was an infinite supply of side action on the sly.

Leo Frank was very much a total opposite of sorts compared to Lucile, and they had more serious differences than things in common. The marriage between them appears to be more political and convenient than anything else, atleast based on some of the things that would come out about what Frank was doing on the down low at the factory, their marriage could not be described as happy by any stretch of the imagination, except on the surface for appearances, but definitely not under the Jewish Royal Marriage veneer.

Meet the Bride: Lucile Loeb-Cohen Selig

Lucille Selig Frank (February 29, 1888 – April 23, 1957) was very much different from Leo Max Frank (1884 – 1915). Lucille “Lucy” Selig was a “red boned” big thick girl, “chunky, but funky” in Jewish frat boy parlance. Lucy was part of the highly assimilated Jewish community of Georgia and very much Southern and sassy, moreover, irregardless of being from a well-to-do and prominent family, she was very much provincial compared to Leo. In fact as any born and raised New Yorker will tell you (which Leo Frank “essentially” was), everyone outside of NYC is provincial.

And Despite being intelligent with a sharp and witty tongue, Lucy’s highest educational level ended at high school, though she was well read and could still hold her own. Lucille was a strong loyal woman to the core, but she did something unexpected in 1954, three years before she died.

Leo Frank was a lean, mean, whoring machine, and slim with that “low body fat” look. Frank was no doubt a high testosterone, heavy drinker, chain smoker, partier and fit to fuck after years of tennis and basketball at his Alma Matter. Frank was very cosmopolitan minded, well traveled, could speak basic German, and as for Hebrew and Yiddish, as a Jew Yorker, those dialects came as part of the natural ethnic enclave culture of Jewish Brooklyn, and to top it all off, Frank rightfully was a bit of an educated snob, the Ivy Leaguer of privilege had the opportunity to study at one of the best schools in the United States and then afterward take an educational “sabbatical”, experiencing first class training overseas in the cold, gruff, serious and no-nonsense Germany. These things were part of what made Leo Frank a cut above the rest.

After the odd-couple married, the big boned Lucille packed on the stereotypical post-marriage stones, her weight slowly swelled up like a hog soothingly grazing at a voluptuous landfill, though she was an extra thick woman that held her weight really well, it still left her looking frog necked, androgynous (like the fictional character “Pat” from the comedy show Saturday Night Live) and dumpy – as the unflattering evolution of her photos clearly shows before and during the Leo Frank affair.

Hillary Clinton Will Tell You Some Women Should Not Have Short Hair

Lucille’s masculine short-butch bull-dyke haircut like her weight issues didn’t help her either, but anyway you slice it or dice it, Leo Frank got bored with Lucy faster than a new york minute, “specially” when the factory was flooded with pre-teen and teenage former-farm-girls blossoming much faster than their city peer counterparts. The teen girl laborers matured years ahead of their time and were nothing like the girls who came from middle class families, who could ensure their daughters wouldn’t have to give up school to work in the “meat grinding” mills.

The thoughts Frank had of mounting that swelling provincial cow he wed gave him the visual notion of a mosquito trying to puncture and drill into a beached walrus with a matted afro. And naturally the fit and skinny Leo Frank took to his past time of buffet whoring more vigorously, when he got tired of hogging, with his “big fat wife” as he called Lucille behind her back (Jim Conley, August 4, 1913).

Steve Oney put’s Leo Frank at 5’6″ and 135lbs (Oney, 2003), but Frank’s passport application puts him at 5’8″ (1907) and so does his College yearbook (1906) that also puts his weight at 145lbs., we can rationally presume he put on 10 to 15lbs.

Frank could hang with the best of them, no pun intended, his liver was clad in iron, well trained and seasoned from years of partying at college and he certainly enjoyed the unlicensed “speakeasies” and underground poker halls of NYC, not to mention swilling the exquisite beer of Germania during his 9 month stint. Moreover, as a whoring aficionado, Frank certainly delighted in sampling some of Germanias Aryan Beast Whores in the half-underground half-above ground red light district there too in 1908. Frank proudly earned his International whoring wings in his fathers, ancestral homeland to crown off his whoring escapades in New York City and eventually his main-staple out-call bordello-ing headquartered on mechanic street in Atlanta.

Frank loved to bogart cigarettes and puff his tabacky pipe, and to wash it all down he guzzled black coffee by the pot during his work days and after the sun had already set and the hands of the big ole clock in his office stuck seven, the evening was inaugurated, it was time to drink whiskey and get frisky, to top off those the long stressful days and it was all just a phone call away.

Nina Formby

A simple phone call to the mischievous and twinkle in her eye Negress Nina Formby, Leo Frank’s favorite mamasan who worked down the street in the area of Atlanta that was jam packed and wall to wall with young meat child brothels. Frank could send order take out delivery directly to his office for mere dollars. Frank loved to sample and dabble in the endless experienced or fresh meat that was constantly churning, and burning through the “blink and look the other way” Atlanta Red Light District.

Frank had some major hormone issues and mental imbalances, its not clear if it was genetic or from excessive consumption (too much substance abuse), or both, however you can tell he had these problems at times, by the numerous pictures of him looking like a psychotic serial killer with his out of orbit big buggy bulging scary creepy eerie freaky eyes which seem to swallow you and even sparkle like black diamonds as Jim Conley described. At times Leo’s eyes appeared hyperthyroid (graves disease?), which might be more revealing about his physiology, psychology and personality than meets the eyes (no pun intended).

Barring Leo Franks Flaws

ASIDE from Franks sneaky-creepy-freaky predatory behavior against his pre-teen and teenage girl employees, after work and weekend drunken debauchery, swings of mentally and hormonally imbalanced states, Frank was actually exactly the kind of guy you wanted to run your factory, because barring his flaws, he was work-hard-play-hard, early to work and late to get home (not always late to get home because of work, though it certainly offered a good excuse). What also made Leo Frank, really valuable is that he kept obsessive-compulsively detailed records, and he monitored employee time cards religiously and fanatically. He was a human calculator and timeclock after nearly 5 years of accounting management at the factory.

Frank could be relied on because he was always punctual, but at a salary of $150 a month, even if he dipped into in the company coffers to finance his bingeing and whoring rampages, it went un-noticed and the embezzlement he conducted didn’t raise any suspicions or eye brows from Moses Frank or Sigmund Montag.

The surviving records and invoices of the National Pencil Company, show money was flowing in like it was going out of style, money in and pencil stock out. The numbers were growing fast and furiously at the factory’s bank account. Sales reports showed they were sometimes churning out $2,500+ to $5,000+ a week in gross orders, not bad by 1913 standards.

Aside from a little diversionary behavior on the side, during occasional evenings, and weekends, putting Leo Frank’s reputation at risk, Frank was mostly liked by his employees and he held the company together for the most part given it’s zillions of complicated variables that had to be juggled. Franks creepy innuendos towards his employees never became an issue, because the girls that got creeped-out would move on, the ones turned out ended up at the brothels and the ones that tolerated it and stayed would put up with it begrudgingly and stoically. The official record has numerous laborer girls who became former employees, and if you think about, it didn’t matter as there was an infinite supply of new young meat that needed a job.

Had Frank not gone off the edge on April 26, 1913, the National Pencil Factory would probably today be remembered as a shimmering icon of industrious glowing Southern Jewish history. Instead, the factory is remembered by Southerners as a vile sweatshop and bastion of pedophilia where little mill girls got tested and some of them turned out. For the Jewish community the factory is remembered as a mini Jewish Holocaust, by a people bent on its own exaggerated victim hood and obsessed with perfidious narcissism against perceived “out groups”, if only they had saved the western wall of the pencil factory before it got demolished, it would have become a spiritual shrine, a Southern wailing wall part 2, for Jews to bob, undulate and weave, to release all of the pain and suffering through prayer the Jewish people have had to endure, all dramatized by an egomaniac people who love to celebrate their own metaphorical “sadomasochistic” instigated persecution.

A Marriage of Politics

Leo Frank engaged in a highly political matrimony, marrying into a prominent Jewish family, one who generations earlier had founded the first synagogue in Georgia. Leo and Lucille were married by Rabbi David Marx on November 30, 1910 in a borderline-gouache pink wedding ceremony at their in-laws gaudy and dated McMansion.

Meet Rabbi David Marx, More than a Rabbi, he was the Catalyst and Lead Activist of Leo Frank’s Emotional Exoneration Movement

The prominent Dr. David Marx was the Rabbi of the Hebrew Benevolent Congregation, a popular Jewish reform synagogue of the highly assimilated Jewish community in the South, he had presided over the Selig-Frank matrimony. Atlanta at the time had the largest Jewish community in the south with several thousand Jewish families who were all highly assimilated and active in Jewish life.

The Insiders Version of the Marital Event:

The wedding was held at 68 East Georgia Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia, the home of the bride’s parents, Mr. Emil Selig and Mrs. Josephine Loeb-Cohen Selig. Rabbi David Marx performed the ceremony and members of Hebrew Benevolent Congregation attended before a small gathering of family and close friends. The Athens Banner described the evening as “a pretty event,” noting that “the house was artistic with quantities of smilax and vases of pink carnations in all the rooms.”

The paper reported that “Miss Michael sang several beautiful selections of songs before the ceremony and was accompanied by Miss Regina Silverman, who also played the wedding march.” … The two young women also wore pink, with Helen Michael in “a white lingerie gown over pink silk” and Regina Silverman in “a pink chiffon cloth gown over silk, trimmed with lace and black marabou.

Other out-of-town attendants at the wedding included the groom’s parents, Mr. and Mrs. Rudolph Frank of Brooklyn, New York, and the best man, Mr. Milton Rice of Rochester, New York. The paper stated the couple would “spend several weeks at the Piedmont before going north for a wedding trip.”

After their honeymoon, Lucille and Leo settled in with their in laws the Cohen-Seligs, at 68 East Georgia Avenue, the place of their pink-overload marriage. Lucille and Leo Frank became active members of Georgian Jewish Society. Frank a highly secure, confident, physically active man, with poise, had the highest honor bestowed upon him, he was elected B’nai B’rith president the largest Lodge in the South, over 500 members strong. It made sense that Leo Frank was elected as president of B’nai B’rith, as no nebbish, shivering, insecure and nervous nelly of a man would ever be elected to such an important position. Frank was a man who beamed with inner confidence and strength, he was the superintendent of the National Pencil Factory, he was married into a prominent Jewish family, he was active in Jewish Society and Philanthropy, he was physically fit, so naturally he was a perfect leader and face for the well networked B’nai B’rith.

Noon, April 26th 1913

In a shuttered factory on Confederate Memorial Day, Saturday, April 26, 1913, Leo Frank was wrapping up some last minute paperwork before intending to do some lite afternoon whoring and then call it a day to go to see a baseball game with his brother in law Mr. Ursenbach married to Lucille’s older sister. However, things took a wrong turn.

Thirteen year old Mary Phagan came in to the factory to receive her pittance of pay, $1.20, from a previously shortened week that ended early for Mary the Monday before on April 21st 1913. Phagan was one of Leo Frank’s child laborers at the factory working on his floor, she was bubbly and vivacious according to Phagan-Kean, with lovely blue eyes and well developed for her age. Mary Phagan had been laid off because supplies of brass sheet metal had ran out before the new shipment arrived. The brass was cut and formed into bands attached around the ends of pencils used to hold erasers to the pencils, and when the brass had intermittently ran out, 4 girls in the metal room had to be temporarily laid off until new supplies arrived. Phagan worked in the metal room’s tipping department, using a knurling machine, inserting erasers into the metal bands of the erasers at 7.5 cents an hour.

Dorsey Called it a Species of Coercion

Frank allegedly lured Mary Phagan down the hall from his second floor office into the metal room, which was where Phagan had toiled endlessly for the last 13 months at her workstation. It was theorized based on the testimony of Jim Conley and circumstantial evidence, that Frank convinced Phagan to follow him to the metal room on the false pretense of seeing if the brass metal supplies had arrived or not, and thus determining whether or not Phagan would have her job back on the following Monday morning.

Once Frank was alone inside the metal room with Phagan, Leo quietly closed the door shut and securely locked it, and according to Hugh M. Dorsey in his closing remarks, Leo Frank, using Phagan’s temporary laid-off status and potential job prospects on Monday, April 28, 1913, as a “species” of sexual coercion and leverage (Dorsey, August 1913). Frank bluntly demanded sex from Mary Phagan, implying if she wanted her job back, but when Phagan resisted him and tried to escape, Leo Frank grabbed her, bludgeoned her by pounding her in the face with his angry fist, he lifted her up and slammed her against the handle of the lathe, where her hair broke off and was spotted by an employee Barret et al, on Monday morning, August 28th 1913, and affirmed by numerous other employees who knew Phagan after identified her hair.

Frank then allegedly dragged Phagan into the bathroom of the metal room while she was unconscious, lifted her skirt up, ripped or cut open her underwear and raped her 13 year old virgin, rupturing her hymen and leaving her tornup underwear bloodied according to the physical evidence retrieved from Phagan by the Undertaker and presented at the trial (BOE, 1913). Frank then allegedly grabbed a nearby cord used to tie the boxes of pencils and garroted Phagans tender throat until she suffocated from a lack of oxygen and died of brain damage. A follow-up clean-up job ensued, once Leo regained his composure.

Mary Phagan’s strangulation became a national scandal once its discovery hit the media’s press machines and it became a cause celeb for the Jewish community which feared being disgraced because a high profile member of their tribal community might have committed such a disgraceful act and heinous crime against one of the host populations children.

According to Leo Frank’s own statements and behaviors which some say collectively amounted to virtual admissions on: April 27, April 28 (See State’s Exhibit B in the Brief of Evidence 1913), April 30, and August 18th (see the unconscious bathroom segway confession), the beating, pedophile-rape and child-murder of Mary Phagan, occurred between “12:05 to 12:10, maybe 12:07” or possibly “12:10 and 12:15”, and with the absolute time range basically being 12:03 to 12:15. Though we will never know for sure, until the invention of a time machine or an identical simulation or our universe comes out near the end of this century, can’t wait to see the previews.

Murderer?

To be fair, Frank might not have had premeditated murder in his heart when his ulterior motives inspired tricking Phagan to go back with him into the metal room to see if the supplies had come in, but in his overpowering attempt to turn her out, he knew unconsciously he had no choice but to permanently silence Phagan, because if Phagan had reported that he violently forced himself on her, rape or not (rape-escape), the consequences would have been severe. White people back then did not tolerate the shit that goes on today, it was well known in those days when white people weren’t deracinated from their racial consciousness, their was the risk of mob vigilante justice, which at times included castration with rusty farming tools without anesthesia, followed by lynching for rapists or attempted rapists, and even if Frank did not hypothetically end in that fate because of his social rank and access to other peoples wealth, he knew either way his career, reputation, the factory and marriage would have been permanently ruined if it was found out about.

Mary Phagan’s last breath was at around 12:07 p.m..

After Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan.

Based on interpretations and recollections of Jim Conley (Connolly) Statements:

Frank asked his roustabout, lackey and watchdog Negro custodian, Jim (James) Conley (also spelled Connolly depending on the primary source), to dump the body of Phagan in the rear of the basement in front of an over sized large furnace, with the unspoken intention of later asking Connolly to stuff Mary Phagan in the oven to cremate her. When Frank and Connolly went back to Leo’s second floor office, Frank allegedly asked Connolly to ghost write unheard-of and never before created murder notes, as if they were actually being written by Mary Phagan while she was in the middle of being raped and killed by the Nightwatchman, an honest Negro employee who had not arrived to work yet, but would be at the factory in the late afternoon to begin his security guard rounds.

Blame it on the Night Watchman Newt Lee (The Night Witch)

The contrived murder notes evolved the Mary Phagan cold case into one of the most shocking and embarrassingly botched attempts in U.S. history, by a person trying to third-party frame and railroad a violently heinous rape and murder on an innocent Negro (Negro is the term they used back then to describe Afro-Americans), Leo Frank’s graveyard shift employee, an African American named Newt Lee, who was setup to be the fall guy and scapegoat for Phagan’s murder (according to Jim Conley).

Later at the trial, Newt Lee, who had been working at the factory as the nightwatchman for 3 weeks, would have some very interesting sworn testimony to provide about Leo M. Frank’s unusual behavior on that infamous day of April 26 1913. It was testimony that even Leo Frank would not fully counter or explain away during his August 18, 1913 trial testimony. Newt Lee also told the police that the factory was being used by couples to have evening trysts.

Down payment of a Half Pack of Cigarettes, Two Paper Dollars and Two Silver Quarters, $200 promised

Frank allegedly offered a $200 payment for Conley to cremate Phagan, and then took it away when Conley was resistant and then offered it again, but as a potential post-payment if Jim Conley or Connolly would go downstairs stuff the dead little girl into the giant cellar oven and burn the evidence, but Connolly was leery and hesitant, saying he would only do it if Frank helped. For some reason Frank wanted Connolly to do it by himself and would not help him. Frank told Conley that if he didn’t get caught and if Connolly would do the job, he would pay him the money during the week.

Frank gave Connolly a small down payment of cash and smokes,telling him to light up, but Jim Conley later left the factory with the $2.50 and a half-pack of cigarettes, that Frank had given him as a small down payment on the $200 bribe offering, without doing the final dirty work.

Frank sternly, firmly and directly ordered Jim Conley to come back later and finish the clean up job, including specific hints that Jim Conley must finish the makeshift crematorium work of burning Phagans body if he wanted to get the $200 at a later time. Jim Conley didn’t accept or reject the job, but got spooked, left the factory after Leo Frank left and went drinking across the street before going Home and falling asleep – not waking up until mid day Sunday.

Had Jim Conley done what Leo Frank had told him to do, this article might not exist today.

Based on different accounts, Frank left the factory to go home for a late lunch between 1:10 and 1:20, arriving at his home at about 1:30, he was nauseous and lost his appetite, stayed for about 10 minutes, didn’t eat anything and then left to go back into town. Frank silently prayed to himself, hoping that Jim Conley was doing the erasure of evidence deed.

Jim Conley never came back, can you blame him?

Frank Had the Worst Case of Butterflies in his Stomach

Leo Frank returned to the factory after his late low calorie “lunch” of allegedly eating nothing and his stomach was twisting in knots. Frank waited around desperately for Jim Conley to return promptly, on the promise of $200 in Greenbacks, that is if Jim would incinerate the body, but when Jim Conley never came back that late afternoon, Frank was Freaking out and became nauseously terrified and more nervous, agitated, frenetic and excited then ever, and in a last pitched act of desperation, Frank snatched the contrived murder notes he had dictated to Jim Conley he had him scrawl up earlier, and scattered them next to Phagan’s body in the gloom of the basement.

It is not clear, why Frank did not attempt to stuff the bloody body of Phagan into the oven himself and attempt to destroy the evidence. Although Phagan was a low chunky girl at 4’11” she easily weighed 115 to 120lbs, almost as much as Leo Frank at 5’8″ and 135lbs and the dirt floor basement was absolutely filthy, covered wall to wall in black charred soot and cinders. Frank being a bit of a premadonna was smart and cautiously would have avoided getting unnecessarily dirty and stain himself up with filth and possibly blood in a way he could not explain away when he went home to his big fat wife (as he described his own wife). Had skinny Leo Frank tried to stuff that heavy little girl in the oven, A sarcastic moment… Lucille might say: Honey, why does your handsome suit have some blood and soot stains all over it? Frank might reply: Oh, I don’t know pumpkin, just a busy day on the job at the quiet office on this State holiday violently raping little girls and then strangling them off for good measure so they can’t snitch. Fortunately Frank was wearing a brown suit at work, brown is the best color in the world for hiding stains.

Frank then went back upstairs to possibly resume a poorly and partly consummated clean up job in the metal room that his step-and-fetch-it Jim Conley had not done a very good job, but possibly being a little bit of a premadonna it is unlikely he would have made much effort, for the same reasons he had not wanted to touch the nasty twisted and disheveled body in the basement that his actions in the metal room had earlier created.

If You’re Gonna Murder Someone, At Least Do a Good Clean Up Job

Since they didn’t have CSI at the time, Frank didn’t know any better, his training was in engineering, not forensic murder cover-up. In the second floor metal room there appeared to be a really badly executed clean up job, which included smearing and rubbing haskolene into the blood stains left by Mary Phagans head when she was accidentally dropped on the floor during her removal process. The haskolene smearing appeared to be a cover up attempt to hide the murder evidence as best as possible, but the blood clearly showed through the bungled erasure attempt. It was a major blunder, and Frank should have just had his Step-and-fetch-it Jim Conley use good old fashioned water, soap and a scrub brush. It was likely that Frank had the Janitor do the half-assed clean up job and that Jim did a half-heartedly poor job or was just simply unable to hide the soaked in blood stains on the metal room floor, so they were smeared with haskolene. They botched the clean up job big time. Even worse, no one thought to remove the hair left on the lathe after Leo slammed Mary’s head into it. Employees discovered the hair in the morning of Monday, April 28th 1913, and later Mr. Coleman, Mary Phagan’s step father would identify the hair as being Mary’s. That was another major blunder of Frank, he had the negro lackey sweep the floor and clean the bathroom, but he forgot about the hair that got on the lathe.

4pm: The Night Watch (“Night Witch”) Arrives

Newt Lee, the Tall Slim Negro

When Newt Lee finally arrived at work at a few minutes to 4pm, Frank was bustling with nervousness, frantic, agitated, frenzied and excited. Leo M. Frank in a wild frazzled and pumped-up state practically pushed Lee out of the building. Frank ordered a very tired and resistant Newt Lee to leave the factory, requiring Lee to come back to the factory in about 1.5 to 2.5 hours, have a good time and come back at 6PM or 6:30PM. Frank had one last hope Jim “James” Conley would hopefully come back for the potential $200 bribe offering and final clean up job, but alas, he was not returning that day, he was in drunk and happy lala land back in his “nigger shack” as Steve Oney accurately described what they were called at the time.

“What Time is It?”

Newt Lee made a strong resistant hesitation to leaving the factory, because he was exhausted, he had to come into work an hour earlier at 4pm instead of 5pm on Saturday April 26 1913 by Frank’s request made on Friday April 25 1913. Frank said he wanted to go to the baseball game, which he canceled after he murdered Phagan. When Newt Lee asked Frank if he could please sleep in the packing room for an hour or two, but Frank flatly refused, wouldn’t let him stay and was insistent that Newt Lee leave the factory and go out and have a good time – finally Leo Frank practically forced Newt Lee out of the factory.

Newt Lee left and came back at a few minutes before 6pm , Frank was still in a panicked and nervous state, asking him in a frantic state what time it was, this was coming from the man who spent the last 5 years in front of a large faced time clock and meticulously recorded everything.

6PM

At 6PM, Frank told Newt, “Don’t punch yet!”, saying that he needed to change the time sheet. Newt watched Frank butterfinger and fumble with the changing of the time sheet in the time clock, his hands were bumbling and fumbling with it even after 5 years of changing the time sheets, it took him twice as long as usual. It was something Leo Frank could normally do with his eyes closed, blind folded and one hand tied behind his back, but today for some strange reason he was struggling with it. Newt went downstairs after he punched to smoke a fag, on a crate in the doorway downstairs.

Frank frantically gathered his stuff, put on his hat and goat, then left the building briskly. As Frank exploded out of the door, he became terrified with horror when on the way out he ran into a former employee and bookkeeper named Gantt, and fell backward scared trying to practically crawl backward into the building, but it was too late – he had been spotted by Gantt and Newt Lee who was smoking finishing off his fag looked at Frank perplexedly. Frank knew that Gantt had known Mary and the Phagan family quite well, but Frank was deeply relieved when he discovered that the former employee was there because he wanted to collect his shoes he left there in the factory previously and was not looking for the missing Mary Phagan who at this time had spent nearly 6 hours slow-rotting in the basement.

As the former employee Gantt, had requested to go into the factory to get his shoes, Frank lied in a non-challant manner to the former employee saying he had seen the Negro Jim Conley sweep them out of the factory, Frank was trying to get rid of him without seeming overly concerned, However, Gantt outmaneuvered Frank by saying they were a different color, and Frank who was in no position to get into a heated debate, quickly acquiesced, Frank wanted to “get the hell out dodge” as soon as possible and as far from the building as possible, as he knew Phagan’s lifeless body was slumped on a saw dust pile in the basement would be discovered by the “Night Witch” during his rounds.

Gantt convinced Frank to let him go in to the factory and Frank obliged with the caveat that Newt Lee must accompany him during the whole time. Gantt, found his shoes in the packing room, and left the building with Newt Lee closely following and monitoring. Newt Lee, then locked the front door and began his security rounds.

630PM

When Frank got home at 6:30pm, he did something he had never done before with Newt Lee, he immediately called the factory but no one picked up the phone.

7PM

Then Frank called again at 7:00pm and Newt Lee finally picked up, Frank in a brisk frazzled voice asked if everything was Alright at the factory and when Newt Lee said Yes, Frank curtly said goodbye and slammed the phone. Frank had never called the factory on a Saturday or any other day for that matter before, to check up on things, according to Newt Lee who worked there for 3 weeks.

Frank also never asked about Gantt.

At the trial, Leo Frank said he called to see what the status was concerning Gantt, but Newt Lee said Frank did not ask about Gantt.

Frank might have been calling the factory twice to see if Newt Lee discovered the body of Phagan, because Newt Lee was supposed to check every square inch of the factory during his rounds, but once the factory was locked up, Newt might have not gone all the way back into the rear of the basement or at all until the early morning of April 27th 1913 during his visit to the negro toilet to drop the Cosby’s off at the pool, but that was still about 8 hours away.

Ironically, Leo Frank in his August 18 1913 trial testimony would make subtle complaints against Newt Lee for not finding the body sooner, henceforth throwing even more suspicion on his own two never before made phone calls to the factory at 6:30 and 7:00 PM on April 26th 1913.

That evening Frank chain smoked cigarettes and guzzled booze like it was going out of style, he drank the liquor cabinet dry, he was attempting to medicate himself and his copious binging would ensure he would be badly hung over the next day and may have contributed to his inability to hide his guilt-revealing body language or it could have made him appear guilty because he was so worn out, pale, nervous and had a trembling hoarse voice, he would fire off questions at the police before they could answer the questions and fumbled with his shirt and tie.

April 27th 1913

At approximately 3:15 AM in the morning, the Negro Nightwatch named Newt Lee, during his lantern beholden factory rounds, went down to the cellar to use the negro latrine in the rear of the basement, the Cosby’s were knocking, and they were asking if they could use the pool in the back yard, when he finished his business, without wiping he pulled up his draws and pants, and buttoned up, he spotted and discovered the mangled twisted body of a little girl in the gloom of the rear of basement, about 150 feet back.

When he approached the dead body, he noticed that her dress was pulled up and her underwear was torn and pulled down, soaked in blood and urine, and a cord was dug snug and deep into the tender flesh of her neck. Newt Lee got the hell out of dodge as quickly as he possibly could and called Leo Frank for nearly 10 minutes straight, but alas there was no answer, Leo was drunk as a skunk and passed out stone cold, finally giving up on ringing Frank, Newt Lee called the police station at 3:28AM and one of the biggest Jewish scandals of the early 20th century was about to unfold.

Newt loped to the ladder at the beginning of front area of the basement and shimmied back up, he ran up the stairs, briskly going to the office to call Leo M. Frank. After nearly 10 minutes of trying to reach Leo M. Frank, Newt gave up and decided to call the police.

A Phone Call at Half Passed Three in the Morning, the Investigation Begins

The Police and Detectives were on the scene within minutes in their model T fords, they were left with the engines on, they were let in by Newt Lee who waited by the front door for them to arrive, and they went down the hatchway, descended the diagonal ladder with lanterns and flash lights, beginning their investigation. They noticed drag marks from the front of the elevator and lead all the way to the cinder / saw dust pile in front of the furnace. They found had to pull down a stocking to confirm the girl was White, because she had been dragged in the dirty floor. They found the contrived murder notes. Later that same morning and day, observing, and questioning countless associated and affiliated people, they immediately contacted an apprehensive Leo M. Frank at the crack of dawn because he was a senior level manager of the factory who had been at the virtually empty and shuttered factory that day. Frank resisted going with the police when they arrived because he wanted some Coffee and breakfast before going out with them, and Frank was very nervous, pale, trembling, fumbling with himself and was hung over badly with a hoarse voice. He fired questions at the police so quickly they didn’t have a chance to answer.

Frank Incriminated Himself

When Frank gave a number of incriminating statements, was betrayed by his body language and made several foolish mistakes and blunders that totally gave himself away, the intuitive police and detectives became very suspicious, with the result of Frank becoming prime suspect number one. After questioning Leo Frank and numerous other people, everything seemed to conclusively point in the direction of Leo M. Frank. Two days later, Leo Frank was arrested and detained on the morning of Tuesday, April 29 1913 at 11AM and later, he was indicted and finally his conviction on April 25 1913, which was affirmed by the Trial Judge the day after the verdict on August 26, 1913. It was this highly publicized event at the end of the trial that became one of the pre climaxes of the Leo M. Frank case, followed by a lynching 2 years later and in all, would define how Leo M. Frank would forever be remembered.

The undertaker had also arrived afterward and they took the body out of the basement, up the ladder and to the mortuary to be placed on a cooling table.

The dead child, was later identified by Grace Hicks the morning of April 27th 1913 as thirteen year old Mary Anne Phagan. Grace Hicks worked in the metal department on the second floor with Mary Phagan for about a year and was very familiar with her. Grace Hicks testified some very interesting details about the metal room, including the positioning of the dressing room and the layout of the bathrooms there and where Mary Phagan’s work station was in relation to them.


Police and Detective Investigation – April 27th 1913 Sunday

After police and detectives questioned Leo M. Frank, countless dozens of factory employees and arrested some affiliated people, all the evidence began pointing in one direction.
Tuesday April 29 1913

Fifty Six hours after the body of Mary Phagan was discovered, the police and detectives had developed a very strong legitimate suspicion against Frank, their intuition was based the evidence and testimony they had gathered. Leo M. Frank was arrested on Tuesday, April 29th 1913 at 11AM, it was the last day of his freedom.
Coroners Inquest Jury, Wednesday, April 30 1913

The official murder investigation wasted no time.

The coroner’s inquest began shortly after nine o’clock on Wednesday, the 30th day of April. The empaneled Jury hearing the testimony consisted of 7 men in total, 6 inquest Jurymen and the Coroner:

1. H. Ashford, 2. Glenn Dewberry, 3. J. Hood, 4. C. Langford, 5. John Miller 6. C. Sheats 7. Judge of the Inquest Jury, Coroner, Paul Donehoo.

The Perjury of Lemmie A Quinn

Concerning Leo M. Frank’s alibi, Frank said he had forgotten for the first week of the murder investigation to bring forward Lemmie A Quinn, foreman of the metal room, a key witness. However at the Coroners Inquest, Lemmie Quinn, came forward to provide contrived testify that sounded totally suspicious and did not pass the common sense test.


Herbert Schiff

Quinn said, he had come back to the pencil factory and specifically Leo M. Frank’s office at 12:20 to talk about baseball with Mr. Herbert Schiff, but Mr. Schiff was not supposed to be at the factory at all that day which was virtually empty, because it was a State holiday, Confederate Memorial Day and everyone was given the day off. The testimony of Quinn was meant to shrink the plausible time Leo M. Frank could have strangled Mary Phagan by 10 minutes. Quinns testimony also added eye witness testimony strength to Frank’s alibi which left him about a half an hour unaccounted for (noon to 12:30). Lemmie Quinns perjury, shrunk Leo M. Frank’s unaccounted for time from 30 minutes to 20 minutes when the murder took place, but it still left wide open and unaccounted for, the time frame Mary Phagan had come to Leo M. Frank’s office, which was between 12:05 and 12:10, maybe 12:07.

Conclusion of the Coroners’ Inquest and Jury

Coroner Paul Donehoo and his Inquest Jury of six men empaneled, questioned over 100 employees and dozens of other various associated people. The week long inquest and testimony provided under oath, left very strong suspicion on Leo M. Frank when Thursday, May 8th 1913, the Mary Phagan Inquest drew to a close.[1]

Coroner’s and Inquest Juries Verdict 7 to 0

The Coroner and his Inquest Jury of six men together voted unanimously 7 to 0 recommending Leo M. Frank held for murder and turned over to, and investigated by a Grand Jury of 23 men which included 5 Jews.

Newt Lee was ordered to be held as a material witness as expected.

Deputy Plennie Minor delivered the unanimous verdict of the Coroner’s Inquest Jury to Leo M. Frank who was being held in the infamous Tower. Frank was sitting perusing a local newspaper at the time. Deputy Plennie Minor approached Leo M. Frank and told him about the unanimous verdict of the Inquest Jury, which had ordered that Frank be held for murder and for a more thorough investigation by the Grand Jury! Newt Lee slumped his head dejectedly when the bad news was delivered, however, Leo Frank insolently replied that it was no more than he had expected and continued crackling away and folding at the big sheets of his newspaper.

More than two hundred witnesses, factory workers and affiliates had been subpoenaed providing testimony at the Inquest.

Grand Jury: A Decisive Moment, to Try or Not to Try.

On May 24th 1913, the day the Grand Jury of twenty three men were to vote after a long, grueling and exhaustive review of testimony and evidence concerning Leo M. Frank, they would be short some members. Two Grand Jurors where not present on the day of the vote, one member, a Jewish member went to New York City and M. Beutell, a Gentile, had an important event he was unable to miss, and as these two men were out of town, they were not permitted to vote by absentee ballets, it therefore reduced the Grand Jury from 23 to 21 voting men. The importance of this reduction was that only a majority of 11 instead of the former 12 votes were necessary to indict Leo Frank in this nail biting moment for the police and prosecution that had tirelessly spent a month building their case.

Even though Leo Frank was a businessman partly responsible for creating more than a hundred jobs for the community, they were not sympathetic, because primarily the evidence was solid and overwhelmingly strong against him. With twenty-one men remaining, some close observers may have wondered if the vote was straddling the fence in either direction, and questioned whether the majority of 11 out of 21 would come forward and vote for an indictment or not.

A Close Call?

In a result that set another powerful tone for the future of the case, just as the Coroner’s Inquest Jury vote had done, the Grand Jury voted unanimously 21 to 0 in favor of indicting Leo M. Frank for the murder of little Mary Phagan. With four Jews voting unanimously with seventeen other Gentile men to Indict Frank, it puts serious doubts about the veracity of the Jewish Communities historical and contemporary race-baiting hatred claims over the last 100 years that Leo Frank went to trial because he was Jewish; an innocent Jew railroaded and framed collectively by European-Americans who are innately anti-Jewish and the whole Leo Frank affair was a widespread anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic conspiracy.

Countering the Jewish position, Southerners are wondering why Frank supporters must resort to making false, bigoted and racist blood-libel smears against them for the last 100 years, when the evidence against Frank is solid, and every level of the U.S. legal system sided with the Jury.

The indictment read…

In the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse Leo M. Frank, of the [Fulton] County and State [of Georgia] aforesaid, with the offense of Murder, for that the said Leo M. Frank in the County aforesaid on the 26th day of April in the year of our Lord Nineteen Hundred and thirteen, with force and arms did unlawfully and with malice aforethought kill and murder one Mary Phagan by then and there choking her, the said Mary Phagan, with a cord place around her neck contrary to the laws of said State, the good order, peace and dignity thereof.

The Frankites, like Steve Oney and Dinnerstein, would claim the outlandish claim the entire Leo Frank case can be reduced to the word of Jim Conley vs. Leo Frank. Though the indictment had absolutely nothing to do with Jim Conley, and after powerful and compelling evidence (without Jim Conley) was presented to the Grand Juryman, the following 21 Grand Jurymen of which four were Jews unanimously signed the bill of indict against Leo Frank (Bill of Indictment, 1913, Atlanta Publishing Company, The Frank Case, 1913; and Mary Phagan Kean, 1987).

The 21 Members of the Grand Jury Unanimously Voting to Indict Leo Frank are:

1. J.H. Beck, Foreman,
2. A.D. Adair, Sr.,
3. F.P.H. Akers,
4. B.F. Bell,
5. J.G. Bell,
6. Col. Benjamin,
7. Wm. E. Besser,
8. C.M. Brown,
9. C.A. Cowles,
10. Walker Danson,
11. G. A. Gershon,
12. S.C. Glass,
13. A.L. Guthman,
14. Chas. Heinz,
15. H.G. Hubbard,
16. R. R. Nash,
17. W.L. Percy,
18. R. A. Redding,
19. R.F. Sams,
20. John D. Wing,
21. Albert Boylston

After the twenty one Jurymen unanimously signed the murder indictment of Leo M. Frank, would be put on trial before a cohort of 13 men, a Judge and a petite Jury of 12 men to decide his fate.

Trial of Leo M. Frank


Judge Leonard Strickland Roan Presiding Over the Leo Frank Murder Trial

The Murder Trial Testimony Captured in The State of Georgia vs. Leo M. Frank, July 28 1913 to August 26 1913

Leo Frank late July 1913 at his Murder Trial

After being virtually silent during nearly three months of incarceration at the tower, Leo Frank finally emerged in fore of the public stage, for a sardine packed courtroom and a drama which would last 29 days. Unknowingly at the time, the Leo Frank trial would become one of those rare cases in U.S. history that would enthrall and capture the imagination and tribal emotions of the masses for more than a century after the whole ordeal. Put before a freshly created Jury and showing signs of being physically sunken, mentally worn out and emotionally weathered, Leo Frank sat in the middle of the court room, not obscured by a table, but fully exposed in full view, flushed and emaciated – a shrunken and empty shell of the former man.

Leo Frank’s perturbly cocked head with a gentle sideways lean exuded a very subtle plea for mercy, pity and sympathy, coming from his eyes impenetrable walls. Throughout the entire trial, Leo Frank’s crossed arms and legs exuded at times lonely, insecure, arrogant and insubordinate body language which gives one the nearly imperceptible psychological feeling of wanting to ask: what are you hiding? More Particularly, Leo Frank’s shifting crossed arms could easily be interpreted as an overtly defensive body language you might expect of a teenage boy who painfully waits in the tension of anticipation just moments before being sternly scolded by an incensed mother. Though psychology was in its infancy at the time (1913), today more than a century later, contemporary psychologists suggest most people unconsciously interpret crossed arms as different mental degrees reflecting defensive, “conflicted” and closed symbolic behavior. Moreover, Leo Frank’s testicle crushing tightly crossed legs gave off the most imperceptible haughty, stimulated and shielded tone.

There was something unnerving about Leo Frank’s body language and appearance at the trial, which seemed entirely out of place, giving one the feeling of an unsettling notion. Frank’s body language seemed out of sync with everyone else in the Courtroom and most certainly the Jury placed in front of him, and as such, Leo Frank’s demeanor whether intentional or unconscious was setting a disadvantageous posture, working against him from the starting block of his trial.

On the witness stand Leo Frank changed his alibi and admitted he was “unconsciously” in the toilets, where Phagan was murdered, so it was an easy conviction.

The Conviction

The Leo M. Frank conviction, along with what was perceived as defamatory portrayal of Jews in the media, became the impetus and directly inspired the founding of the ADL.

Appeals – Majority and Unanimous Decisions during the Appeals Process Affirm the Murder Conviction Given by the Trial Jury

After the murder trial ended on August 26th 1913, Leo M. Frank commenced two embarrassing and estopel years (1913 to 1915) reflecting a snap shot the Leo Frank Defense League movement, with numerous half-serious half-baked legal appeals made to the Georgia Superior Court, Georgia Supreme Court, United States District Court and United States Supreme Court, every court carefully and meticulously studied and reviewed the murder trial testimony and evidence, every single court affirmed the murder conviction, with only 4 dissenting judges out of more than a dozen affirming Judges. See: Primary Sources Section.

Two Years of Half-Baked Court Appeals

Leo Frank then began a very expensive two year circus of embarrassing, poorly concocted and frivolous appeals. Franks lawyers and defense teams used every method of criminal activity on behalf of Leo Frank to create evidence to support him. They bribed and threatened witnesses, put forward and spun together half-baked frivolous court appeals through every possible legal channel, all the way up and down the Georgia State Superior Court, Georgia State Supreme Court, the District Court of the United States and the United States Supreme Court, multiple times ad nauseum.

A Request for a New Trial: on 31 October 1913 – Judge Roan denied the motion for a new trial

More specifically, immediately following the Leo M. Frank murder trial, Frank’s defense team requested a new trial. The presiding judge Leonard S. Roan denied the appeal.

Another motion for a new trial was denied by the Georgia Supreme Court in February 1914 after much review. More specifically on 17 February 1914 – the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the verdict of the lower court by a vote of 4 to 2.

25 February – the Supreme Court of Georgia, unanimously overruled a motion for rehearing.

7 March 1914 – Frank was sentenced for the second time to death by hanging on April 17th, Leo M. Frank’s birthday.

16 April 1914 – at the eleventh hour, an extraordinary motion for a new trial was filed and death sentence on Leo M. Frank’s 30th birthday again stayed.

22 April 1914 – Judge B. H Hill, former chief justice of the Court of Appeals, who had succeeded to the Judgeship of Fulton Superior Court, denied the extraordinary motion for a new trial.

25 April 1914 – The day before the anniversary of Mary Phagan’s death, Frank’s sanity was examined and he was declared sane.

Motion to set the Verdict aside as a Nullity

Beginning in June 1914, Frank’s defense appealed to the Fulton County Superior Court to set aside the guilty verdict. Fulton County Superior Court denied the appeal, as did the Georgia Supreme Court (December 1914).

14 November 1914 – the Georgia Supreme Court again denied a new trial.

18 November 1914, the Georgia Supreme Court refused a writ of error.

23 November 1914 – Mr. Justice Lamar, of the Supreme Court of the United States refused a writ of error.

25 November 1914 – Mr. Justice Holmes of the United States Supreme Court, also refused a writ.

7 December 1914, the full bench of the United States Supreme Court refused a writ of error.

9 December 1914, Frank was re-sentenced to death to hang on January 22, 1915.

21 December 1914 – United States District Judge W. T. Newman of Georgia, refused a writ of habeas Corpus.

28 December 1914 – Mr. Justice Lamar granted an appeal and certificate of reasonable doubt to the United States Supreme Court.

15 April 1915 – the Supreme Court of the United States 4 to 2, with Mr. Justices Holmes and Hughes dissenting, dismissed the appeal.

Ultimately Leo M. Frank had fully exhausted completely every possible court appeals process.

Georgia Prison Commission

9 June 1915 – the State Prison Commission submitted a divided report to Governor Slaton, Commissioners Davison and Rainey voting against and Commissioner Paterson for commutation.

As five courts upheld the original decision of the jury in Leo Frank’s case, Frank then applied for clemency with the Georgia Prison Commission to commute his sentence from death to life in prison. This application was denied.

During the two Year Appeals Process, The National Letter Writing Campaign and Emotional Appeals Process Was in Full Force

With every possible court appeal fully exhausted, Leo M. Frank’s last hope was utilizing the full extent of his 2 year old flush bankroll of his legal defense fund which was made possible by advertising magnate A.D. Lasker and newspaper mogul Adolph Oct the owner of the New York Times. With a swollen treasury of hundreds of thousands of dollars, the culmination of a vast 2 year political bribery and manipulation machine had been unleashed across the United States and even some major cities throughout Europe. The Governor of Georgia had been flooded with more than 10,000 letters in support of Leo M. Frank from people who never read the official trial record in the case which included all the facts, testimony and evidence against Leo Frank. See Brief of Evidence in Primary Sources.

Criminal Governor

Lastly, with absolutely no more court appeal options left for Leo Frank and the Prison Commission denying his request for clemency, there was only one last option, a commutation by the corrupt Governor of Georgia, John M. Slaton. Frank applied to Governor John M. Slaton for Executive Clemency.

Last Hope: 31 May 1915 – Frank’s plea for commutation of sentence to life imprisonment was heard before the State Prison Commission.

Frank had one last hope. The Governor of the State of Georgia, John Marshall Slaton who was in office from June 28, 1913 to June 26, 1915. Slaton would save the life of Leo Frank at the eleventh hour, as Frank was on Death Row registered to be lynched on June 22nd 1915 by Sheriff Mangum.

Well before the dramatic soap opera of the eleventh hour on the infamous day of June 21st 1915, the treacherous and criminal Governor of Georgia, John M. Slaton, was made a senior law partner in the very firm representing and defending Leo M. Frank at his July 28th 1913 to August 26th murder trial. The firm was called: Rosser, Brandon, Slaton & Phillips.

John Marshall Slaton, Clemency, Commuted Leo M. Frank’s death sentence to life in prison.June 21st 1915, The 11th Hour.

On June 21 1915, one day before Leo M. Frank was to be hanged to death, John M. Slaton, when at the exit as an outgoing Governor of Georgia, in an absolutely gross conflict of interest, commuted the death sentence of Leo M. Frank to life in prison. The clemency was based on a half-baked hokey commutation order that insulted the intelligence of the elite of Georgia, Southerners, Legal Scholars, Judges, Lawyers and the people of the United States of America, when the commutation was compared against the dry leaves of the 1913 Brief of Evidence.

John M. Slaton, Governor of the State of Georgia Betrays the People

A commutation hearing was held in Atlanta on June 12-16, 1915. Representing Leo Frank were William M. Howard of Augusta, Manning J. Yeomans of Dawson, Harry A. Alexander and Leonard Haas of Atlanta speaking for the defense.

On June 21, 1915, just six days before Nathaniel Edwin Harris, the newly elected governor, was to take office, and one day before Frank was scheduled to hang (June 22 1915), Slaton commuted Frank’s death sentence to life in prison. There was public outrage, primarily because John M. Slaton, was a law partner and business associate in the law firm hired by Leo Frank, making Leo Frank Slaton’s client and because Slaton in a gross conflict of interest had betrayed the constitution and his oath of office. The Southern population reached ascended to boiling crescendo of rage and were indignantly furious to a fevered pitch at the insolence of the clemency decision made on behalf of Leo M. Frank, especially after every level of the United States Legal System had reviewed meticulously and upheld the evidence supporting the conviction. More than a dozen judges had affirmed the conviction and Leo Frank had made a near confession on August 18 1913, when he told the Jury he made an unconscious bathroom visit inside the metal room during the time Phagan was murdered there.

John M. Slaton, feigned moral and emotional consternation, saying: “I can endure misconstruction, abuse and condemnation,” Slaton said, “but I cannot stand the constant companionship of an accusing conscience which would remind me that I, as governor of Georgia, failed to do what I thought to be right…. [F]eeling as I do about this case, I would be a murderer if I allowed this man to hang. It may mean that I must live in obscurity the rest of my days, but I would rather be plowing in a field for the rest of my life than to feel that I had that blood on my hands.”[1]

Slaton’s commutation disregarded volumes of trial evidence and testimony against Frank, but Slaton also chose to not disturb the Jury’s verdict and in a sly and underhanded sort of way affirmed the murder conviction. Slaton, also suggested, that the Jewish Communities charge of race hatred as being the reason Frank was convicted was unfair, as it was certainly not true, because numerous other legal tribunals reviewed the evidence and testimony, and felt it was strong enough to convict Leo M. Frank. None of the appeals courts could be falsely accused of being mob terrorized or antisemitic, as the Jewish community put such false accusations and slander against the murder trial Jury.

In order to protect Leo Frank, he was transferred from Fulton Tower in Atlanta to the prison farm outside Milledgeville.

July 17 1915 – Leo Frank Gets Shanked

Frank was attacked at the State Farm Prison in Milledgeville on July 17, 1915, by a fellow convict named Green who cut Leo’s throat with a 7 inch butcher knife. Two inmate doctors got to him in the nick of time and stitched him up. Frank lingered between life and death for several weeks, but finally recovered. The wound never fully healed. The wounds were slow to heal in the boiling and humid heat of the Georgian Summer. Those wounds would split open again a month later, during the culmination of the Leo Frank case.

August 17 1915 – Knights of Mary Phagan, Founding Fathers of the Current Ku Klux Klan (KKK)

Two months later after the commutation, Leo M. Frank, was abducted from Prison by a group of men from the State of Georgia’s highest social, legal and political strata, they Knighted themselves as the Knights of Mary Phagan, they drove Frank 175 miles to Cobb County, and Lynched him near an intersection at Frey’s Mill. A mature oak tree helped fulfill the most perfectly executed slow strangulation lynching of Leo M. Frank, that is just after the dawn dew kissed a glorious rising sun on August 17th 1915.

Lynching of Leo Frank – August 17 1915

See: The Lynching of Leo Frank

August 18, 1913, Lucille Selig Frank Leaves Atlanta to Bury Leo M. Frank in New York City

Mrs. Lucille Selig Frank boarded a train for New York City on August 18 1913, Leo Frank’s body was returned to New York on August 20, 1913, where he was buried at New Mount Carmel Cemetery.

The Burial of Leo Frank

Last Name, First Name Location Date of Death
FRANK, LEO 1-E-41-1035-2 8/17/1915

Section: 1
Block: E
Map:
Path: 41
Lot: 1035
Line:
Society:
Grave: 2

Cemetery Gates Close at 4:00 P.M.

Lucille returned to Atlanta where she opened a dress shop and became sporadically active in the work of The Temple.

Lucille’s asexual, dumpy, androgynous, and butch physical appearance, plus her weight issues and having been married to Leo Frank, along with the rumors of extensive extracurricular whoring activities surrounding him, and including the grueling and grissly crime leading to his conviction (two years of higher court affirmation), had tended to severely diminish and limit Lucille’s dateability and sex appeal. Lucille Frank never remarried, and always signed her name as “Mrs. Leo M. Frank,” until her death at age 69. In her later age, her weight seemed to normalize.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Lucy Selig died on April 23, 1957 (1888-1957). Even then, in 1957, Frankites have suggested: her family was unsure of burying her in Atlanta, and it wasn’t for another number of years that nephews buried her ashes between her parents’ graves in Oakland Cemetery, but without a marker.

Lucille died 42 years after Leo M. Frank was lynched, what was equivalent to a life time as the life expectancy in the early 20th century was around 40 years and she was very clear about her own ultimate verdict in the Leo Frank Case, her wishes were very clear and stated that she wanted to be cremated and NOT buried next to or with her deceased husband Leo M. Frank. It was a sad and final verdict coming from the woman who stood by her husband loyally throughout the whole ordeal, even though her cook Minola Magnolia McKnight had tipped her hand revealing Lucille knew approximately what really happened. The official records indicates Lucy Selig knew the real score, In truth what could Lucille really do?.. other than the only option she really had, cognitive dissonance and double think, her honor, the honor of her family and the Jewish community was on the line. Lucille did what any good loyal wife would do in this situation, stand by her husband – right or wrong.

Infallible Wives and Mothers

We can not hold the same black and white, right or wrong lens to loyal mothers and wives who stand by their sons and husbands invincibly, and we do not live in a black and white world, but one of subtle shades and variations of gray. The moral lens of what is right and wrong, can not be applied to mothers and wives who loyally stand by their children and husbands, even if deep down they know of their guilt. Lucille did what she had to do, which was a hard decision and she should not be negatively judged for fiercely standing faithfully by her husband loyally all the way to the end, even though cosmetically she had to put on veneer pretenses and appearances, pretending publicly her husband Leo Frank was not guilty of the murder. On some level it was probably difficult for Lucy Selig to trick herself into not believing the dozen or more employees who came forward and suggested Frank was a sexual predator, pedophile and whore monger (in essence), some suggesting he was regularly whoring on the Sabbath and trying to turn out girls at the factory.

William J Burns Detective Agency of New York

The alleged persistent theme of the Leo M. Frank Case according to Frankites was Jew York City vs. Georgia. Detective William Burns the keystone cop style sleuth employed by the Leo M. Frank team, who was originally dismissed for being too obvious in his bribing, threatening and criminal activity, received a telegram from Marietta Georgia after the lynching of Leo M. Frank. The Telegram sarcastically told him to come down quickly and investigate the lynching, signed H.H. Looney Chief of Police. William Burns had been driven out of Georgia with threats of lynching when it was discovered he was hired by the money bags supporting the Leo Frank defense to try to bribe any witnesses he could and turn the Mary Phagan murder investigation into a carnival side show by publishing grandiose announcements in the local newspapers.

1980’s – Pardon without Exoneration

Alonzo “Lonnie” Mann – 1982 / 1983

March 7, 1982,

A questionable and suspicious chapter was unfurled for the public. The Nashville Tennessean published a special breaking news report about a story in which Alonzo Mann, Leo Franks former office boy in 1913, said he saw janitor Jim Conley carrying Mary Phagans body to the basement of the National Pencil Company in Atlanta, where Mr. Frank was the superintendent. Mr. Mann asserted that Conley killed Mary and Frank was innocent.

1982, About 70 years after the murder of Mary Phagan and Lynching of Leo M. Frank, Alonzo Mann the former office boy of Leo M. Frank came forward in an other doctored up media expose pushing the Jewish Defense position at the behest of the Jewish Community. Now nearly 83 years old, the senile and ailing Alonzo Mann with a mountain of medical bills came forward to say he had seen Conley carrying Mary Phagans body on the first floor.

Alonzo Mann produced an affidavit seven decades after the Leo M. Frank drama, thus giving the Frankites more odious support for their position, but however, because of the Frank Defense’s history of obtaining suspicious and questionable affidavit through criminal means and bribing to defend Leo M. Frank the affidavit was not taken seriously by anyone familiar with the case. Especially since, Alonzo Mann testified he left at around noon and in his old age had a mountain of unpaid medical bills.

Moreover, Alonzo Mann brought absolutely nothing new to the Leo M. Frank Case or Trial and his new testimony sounds fake, because Jim (James) Conley had admitted to being an accomplice and that he participated in bringing the dead body of Mary Phagan to the basement at Leo M. Frank’s request.

In a statement that makes absolutely no sense and does not pass the scrutiny of common sense, Alonzo Mann said, that the Negro Jim Conley threatened his life if he told anyone about seeing him with the dead body of Mary Phagan and when Alonzo Mann told his family and parents, they allegedly told him to keep quiet about it.

Despite Alonzo Mann alleged “taking a lie detector test” and signing an affidavit, the Alonzo Mann’s story lacks the common sense test, truth and veracity, because at the time “Negroes” were second class citizens, and no White Family or Parents would tell their White Children to be quiet about a negro allegedly murdering a White Girl. Even today in modern times, no White Family would ever tell a White boy to be quiet about a Negro murdering a White Girl. It doesn’t make sense and comes off like total bullshit, to be blunt. There was something about Alonzo Mann’s testimony that tends to affirm Jim Conley was called in to work on a holiday to sit in his usual place under the stairwell and watch for Leo Frank.

Alonzo Mann State’s Adds More Evidence that Leo Frank Lied on the Witness Stand

What is more interesting is that Alonzo Mann’s 1980’s revelation, is that he said he saw Jim Conley numerous times in the morning and early afternoon on April 26, 1913, sitting on a box under the stairs on the first floor. Because Mann says it was from the morning till noon, this eye witness account may further prove that Leo Frank lied on the stand on August 18, 1913, about Frank not knowing Jim Conley was sitting on a box under the stairs on the first floor, acting as a watchdog and look out for him. Leo Frank said he had come and gone from the factory in the morning, and would have seen and known about his roustabout lackey waiting there for him, (Read the August 18, 1913, murder trial testimony of Leo Frank)

Alonzo Mann: Dead Man’s Affidavit

However, the ADL of B’nai B’rith, American Jewish Committee, Atlanta Jewish Federation and numerous other Jewish organizations used the affidavit after Alonzo Mann died to push for a Posthumous Pardon and Exonerate Leo M. Frank for the murder of little Mary Ann Phagan.

First Pardon Failed

Attorneys for three Jewish organizations petitioned the State (Georgia) Board of Pardons and Paroles to pardon Leo Frank, but the petition was denied on December 22, 1983.

Pardon Achieved: Posthumous Pardon without Exoneration – March 11 1986

Pyrrhic Victory for the Jewish Community

After successful pressure from the ADL of B’nai B’rith, and other Jewish Organizations, they get the Georgia Board of Paroles to pardon Leo M. Frank, but they would not exonerate him of the Crime.

Jewish Power and Political Correctness Prevailed

On March 11, 1986, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles granted Frank a pardon, citing the state’s failure to protect him or prosecute his killers, though they stopped short of exonerating Leo M. Frank of the murder of Mary Phagan. Leo Frank’s murder conviction is still today black letter law and binding legal precedent. The Judge and Jury have the last word, as do the vigilante lynchers who were never prosecuted.

Spun Pardon and Pyrrhic Victory

The Jewish Community saw the Pardon at face value as vindication of Leo Frank, but it was really a Pyrrhic victory. First, because in order to pardon someone of a crime, the person has to be guilty, you can’t pardon someone unless you acknowledge they are guilty. Therefore the guilt of the individual has to be affirmed and in Leo Frank’s case it was indisputable binding settled law. So the Prison Board in the 1980’s basically acknowledged the veracity and truth that Leo M. Frank was guilty, but they refused to exonerate him of his guilt, though they forgave him of the Murder of Mary Phagan, because the state failed to protect Leo M. Frank and because his lynching prevented him from further appeals – there is only one problem with that…

Further appeals at any level of the United States Court System?

The prison board has a clear and full understanding of the law, and yet they made a bald face lie. They were patently in error concerning the lynching of Leo Frank preventing him from any further appeals within the appellate court system, because Leo M. Frank had fully and totally exhausted all of his court appeal options at every level of the State, District and Federal Appellate Courts, with the Supreme Court unanimously overruling any further review of the case, thus closing the door forever at all levels of the appellate court system. When there were no more options left in the court system, the prison board at the time refused a recommendation of clemency and even the bribed Governor John M. Slaton, refused to pardon Leo Frank and actually stated in his commutation letter he was NOT disturbing the guilty verdict given to Leo Frank by the Jury. Not a single legal body in the last 100 years has overturned the guilt of Leo Frank, but attempts to spin the truth have endlessly been made.

The Prison Board Affirmed Leo Frank’s Guilt By Proxy

The board affirmed Leo M. Frank’s guilt and quelled the powerful and wealthy Jewish Community, that has for 100 years has been vociferously screeching Leo M. Frank was a “noble and innocent Jew, Framed, railroaded and scapegoated in a vast Anti-Jewish conspiracy”, because in order to Pardon someone they have to have first committed a crime, you have to basically first acknowledge openly or in an unspoken manner, that the individual is guilty of a crime, before they can be pardoned.

References:

Leo M. Frank, Plaintiff in Error vs. State of Georgia, Defendant in Error. In Error from Fulton Superior Court at the July Term 1913. Brief of Evidence 1913: Brief of Evidence, 1913 (Click Here) .

American State Trials Volume X (1918) By John D. Lawson

Oney, Steve (2003), And the Dead Shall Rise.

Koenigsberg, Allen (2011) The Leo Frank Case and Leo Frank Yahoo.com discussion forum, see: http://www.LeoFrankCase.com

Mount Carmel Cemetery NY, where the lynched body of Leo Frank is interred http://www.mountcarmelcemetery.com/

Last Name, First Name Location Society Date of Death
FRANK, LEO 1-E-41-1035-2 NONE 08/17/1915

FRANK, RAY 1-E-41-1035-3 NONE 01/01/1925
FRANK, RUDOLPH 1-E-41-1035-4 None 01/15/1922
FRANK, SARAH 1-E-41-1035-6 None 08/01/1937
STERN, MARIAN 1-E-41-1035-12 None 04/02/1948
STERN, OTTO 1-E-41-1035-11 None 05/26/1963

Fair Usage Law

April 26, 2011   Posted in: Affirmative Action News, AIPAC, Anne Frank, Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

Secular Music from Christian and Jewish Spain | Free Mp3 Music …

Secular Music from Christian and Jewish Spain Before their expulsion in 1492, the Jews of medieval Spain developed a rich and lively culture, including an.

The rest is here:
Secular Music from Christian and Jewish Spain | Free Mp3 Music …

Fair Usage Law

March 26, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

This Day in Jewish History, August 18, 1913, the Leo Frank Murder Trial Confession. “Patron Father” of the ADL of B’nai B’rith.

Once in a Lifetime Something very unusual happened during the 29-day Leo Frank trial which was conducted within the courtroom of the Fulton County Superior Courthouse in the Summer of 1913. It was during that famous July term session of 1913, some would postulate that Leo Frank inadvertently revealed the solution to the contentious and […]

Fair Usage Law

August 18, 2011   Posted in: Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

This Day in Jewish History: August 17, 1915, the Mob Lynching of Leo M. Frank for the Bludgeoning, Rape and Strangulation of little Mary Anne Phagan (1899 to 1913)

Photo Archived at the Library of Congress. Leo Frank was Lynched at 7:17 AM, August 17, 1915, this photo was taken later that morning after word got out about what happened and people flocked to Frey’s gin creating a critical mass of spectators.A Very Rare Photo of Leo Frank More Than an Hour After the […]

Fair Usage Law

August 17, 2011   Posted in: Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

What does Islam say about the followers of the non-Abrahamic …

You are going to Hell ,just as christians and jews ,don't take it personally.

Fair Usage Law

August 7, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

Jewish-Christian Relations, IS DIALOGUE WITH ISLAM? By Father …

In the Roman Catholic Church, relations between Christians and Jews are part of the logic of ecumenism. We can even say that without biblical roots and thi…

Fair Usage Law

August 6, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

LDS Gospel Doctrine Plus: New Testament Lesson #29 "The Number of …

The term “Grecians,” alternatively translated as “Hellenists” “probably refers to Jewish Christians from the Diaspora [ Jews who had been scattered out from Israel by conquering nations] whose native language was Greek …

Fair Usage Law

July 18, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed

The Anti-Semitic Murder of B’nai B’rith President Leo Frank

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean, Publisher: New Horizon Press; 1st edition (September 15, 1989). The book, ‘The Murder of Little Mary Phagan’ authored by Mary Phagan Kean, the great grand niece of little Mary Phagan (1899 to 1913) is probably the most even-handed book written about the subject and its […]

Fair Usage Law

July 10, 2011   Posted in: Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

Jewish and Gentile Relations on the Brink: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan 98 years ago April 26, 1913.

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean, Publisher: New Horizon Press; 1st edition (September 15, 1989). Brief Biography of Leo FrankLeo Frank was born in Cuero, Texas on April 17, 1884. His family moved 3 months after his birth to Brooklyn, NY, where Frank was raised and educated, before attending college at […]

Fair Usage Law

April 26, 2011   Posted in: Anne Frank, Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

98 Years Ago in Jewish History, April 26: The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Leo Max Frank, on April 26, 1913.

Corporate Standard of the National Pencil Co. Circa 1913 The National Pencil Company was conceived in the Jewish imagination of 1907, and born on April 8th, 1908. The business became terminally ill Monday, April 28, 1913, when early-bird employees of factory found a tress of what looked like it could be Mary Phagan’s hair on […]

Fair Usage Law

April 26, 2011   Posted in: Affirmative Action News, AIPAC, Anne Frank, Anti Racism, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Ashkenazi, B'nai B'rith, Christian, Discrimination News, Holocaust, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank, Multicultural News, Race Relations, Racism News, Racist News, White Nationalism, White Supremacism, Zionism  Comments Closed

Secular Music from Christian and Jewish Spain | Free Mp3 Music …

Secular Music from Christian and Jewish Spain Before their expulsion in 1492, the Jews of medieval Spain developed a rich and lively culture, including an.

Fair Usage Law

March 26, 2011   Posted in: Christian  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."