Sorry but i think yall should check out Mary Phagan's book... The Murder of Little Mary... There's alot of people out there sayin that my family just wanted to blame it on the Jewish guy and that we are just a bunch of racists but the same people just turned around and blamed it on the black guy... Leo Frank was a twisted killer and he got what he deserved. Dont forget they pardoned him here in Georgia... they didnt EVER say he was innocent...
share[deleted]
[deleted]
Try reading more than one book, and make it one not written by your relatives. ;) The entire legal case was a circus and a shame from the get go and no man on earth could have survived a trial in those conditions and come out with a fair plea.
There is so much heresay by all those who were quoted at the time that its a wonder Frank lasted that long.
The O.J. Simpson trial is scarily the reverse of Leo Frank. With Frank many knew he was innocent, but the mob demanded a patsy. With Simpson, guilt was not the issue, the issue was what was the verdict going to conclude.
Seriously, do some more reading on the Frank case, once you realize how awful the whole trial was conducted, it will make you rethink.
Sounds like a family member cashing in with this book. I mean its written by Mary's great niece??!?!? What could she possibly have to add to this after so many years? She wasn't even alive then; most of us weren't!
There were 2 victims in the end, Mary and Leo.
I think the author of the book is the same person who started this topic. She has been told by her relatives that Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan and has no reason to doubt them. She is obviously stating that everything else that has been written about the murder and trial was inaccurate or slanted to show sympathy toward Leo Frank because he was lynched. If a person reads several different books regarding a historical event and all of them are consistent with each other, the person is likely to believe what he has read. That's why I think that Jim Conley murdered Mary Phagan.
The author may hold the same views regarding Jews as the people in Atlanta at the time of the trial. It sounds like she supports the lynching, as well as what followed. Among other things, the revival of the KKK.
Leo Frank may have lived for two years after the trial, but his life basically ended when he was found guilty by the intimidated jury.
His life really ended the day he was arrested. According to the movie & book (by Mary's niece, also named Mary Phagan) Frank was extremely nervous, agitated, and told a rambling story. He should never have spoken to the police without a lawyer present, but I guess people didn't get "lawyered up" in that period of time.
shareThe police equated Frank's nervousness with being guilty of the crime. Who wouldn't be nervous if the police came to their house at the crack of dawn, for any reason, let alone to inform them that one of their employees had been murdered? That doesn't make him a murderer. Frank became the prime suspect because the police did not have sufficient evidence on the night watchman who found the body.
I did go to several bookstores and even the city library to find the book written by the victim's niece, but could not find it. However, I may know why. I looked on Amazon.com and read reviews from people who have read the book. Almost all of these reviews are negative. Some even go so far as to state that Mary Phagan(the author)does not prove what she set out to prove, that Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan. Some reviewers were even more convinced of Frank's innocence after reading the book. Others could not understand why the author put a photo of herself on the cover.
I found my copy on eBay. You might also try amazon (they also sell used books).
share[deleted]
There is no way anybody with half a brain who has seen this film or read about the case could conclude that Leo Frank had any part in the murder. Jim Conley was the murderer, he did it unassisted, including writing semi-illegible notes in an attempt to cover his ass. When it became obvious that he wrote the notes, Conley had to cover his ass again by claiming that Frank dictated what was written in them. Leo Frank was convicted based on lies, innuendo, and hostility. Jim Conley was a worthless waste of humanity who committed perjury with the help of his attorney(who later turned against him), and the prosecutor who wanted to turn up the drama by painting Frank as a pervert to win the case and fulfill his own agenda.
There is a mountain of evidence proving that Leo Frank is guilty. The Frank forces tried to pin the crime on the Black night watchman, Newt Lee, using a planted bloody shirt. Then they planted fake evidence (a bloody club and pay stub) trying to implicate the Black sweeper, Jim Conley. The Frank forces were caught faking this evidence in 1913, and no one then or now disputes that it was faked.
These are not the acts of an innocent man.
They are still trying to convince people that Conley did it. Conley had just been paid more than five times what Mary Phagan had in her purse. They want us to believe he killed her for $1.20. Sure he did.
And Conley would have had to kill her right next to the unlocked front door, in the highest-traffic part of the building, where anyone could walk in at any time, and where several people had walked by in just the last few minutes -- and within 30 feet of his boss. Wow, what a plausible story.
Besides the victim, there were only four people in the building. And three of them obviously didn't do it. That leaves Leo Frank.
See the American Mercury's article, "100 Reasons Leo Frank is Guilty" for all the details.
I have no idea who your family is and I don't care. The fact that a man who was close to death confessed to seeing Conley dispose of the body, and who was threatened by Conley if he ever told, is pretty conclusive evidence.
The fact that Conley's own lawyer regretted his coaching on Conley on the stand, and started pressing for Frank's sentence of execution to be commuted, is just icing on the cake.
You don't cite one single pertinent fact or persuasive argument in your post above. You entire argument consists of tautologies and attempts to shift the blame to "alot [sic] of people out there" but you say absolutely nothing to support your belief as to why you think Frank did it. You're trying to confuse the discussion by accusing those who think Conley did of racism, instead of addressing the topic--who killed Mary Phagan? You're welcome to your beliefs of course, but if you expect us to take them seriously, you have to come up with an intelligent argument.
The niece who wrote the book also stated reasons on a web link why she believes Leo Frank murdered Mary Phagan, one of which made my laugh my ass off. She claims that Frank wrote the murder notes because the word negro was used. Her theory is that a Northener, such as Frank, would use that word to describe a black person, whereas a Southerner, such as herself or Jim Conley would have used the word colored in the same context. She has got to be f-in kidding me. That is the most ridiculus, absurd theory I've ever heard. The notes were written to try and pin the crime on someone other than the person who we all know actually did it.
shareWhile I am so far to Frank's side I am nearly falling off the edge, that reason's very significant. However if Jim Conley and Newt Lee could pull off a murder that no one's been able to crack for almost 100 years, I'm sure they thought of using the word "negro" rather than "colored." Those notes are still completely vexing.
Frank was an uptight perfectionist and an overall odd man. When he got that call in the middle of the night it was unfair not to tell him the nature of the accident, for he nearly went off of his handle. He was about 29 when this all happened, he was managing a factory - and suddenly someone there dies and the entire South begins to turn against him. He's more to be pitied than anything. Whoever started this forum, be you a member of the Phagan family or not - he must be pitied. It is inhumane not to. I read someone's post here that Mary and Leo were both victims of this case, and I believe the same staunchly.
To all of this I have to say that it's incredible how this has stuck in people's minds after (almost?) everyone involved in the case has long died, how it's still another argument that stands between the North and the South, how angrily and insistently people argue in forums about it!
I believe also that Mary Phagan's niece's mind was manipulated by her family. There was a lot of anger and hate there. I'm sure her parents weren't telling her all about the kind superintendent of her great aunt's factory, Leo Frank.
God, isn't there anything more they can do? Isn't there enough interest to find the real killer once and for all, with no doubt? Does anyone know if there is anyone at all in this country still dedicating themselves to this case? This kills me. I have a friend who's heavily into the paranormal and who really wants to conjure up Leo somehow to talk to him. LOL. Anything!!
I state, and will tie my name securely to this statement, just as tightly as that rope was tied around his neck on that day in 1915, after errors and imperfections in the rope suffocated and caused him to bleed to death by an opened wound across his neck, killed unjustly for a crime he did not commit: Leo Frank was completely and utterly innocent and was a victim of rock-hard Anti-Semitism, was a pawn in a fight between newspapermen and government men, and a victim of Southern bitterness and pride. His murder - and yes, it was a murder - was unjustified, inhumane, and deplorable, just as criminal as was the act committed by the still unknown murderer of Miss Mary Phagan.
Um....no he didn't. They found hard proof that Leo Frank couldn't have done it (Alonzo Mann testified seeing Conley commit the crime). They completely cleared his name of the charges back in the 90s. Your refusal to accept something that facts can prove shows your complete ignorance. Yeah, I totally want to read your family's book now. Especially since your logic is so reasonable.
Grow up and learn to accept the fact that your family made an awful mistake that ruined a man's life. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Even if your family didn't MURDER him, his reputation never would have been the same. All because your family are a huge batch of antisemitic, ignorant people that give people from Georgia a bad name.
~*~Would You Light My Candle?~*~
Founder of the APJLAA
To S&M
And I'm sure that book would provide a fair and unbiased assessment of what took place...
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I have done no research into this, however I just watched the film and found it very engrossing. Have to say though that I am a little disgusted at some of the posts on this thread. Whoever did it how about having some understanding here? There is a lot of bitchiness directed at the OP. How about remembering that ,yes Leo Frank may have been unjustly punished, but the family of Mary Phagan still have to deal with her being murdered. The only clear cut fact that I have seen about this is that Mary was brutally killed. You can't aim abuse at her family for going with the verdict that law at that time decided.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
[deleted]
"Grow up and learn to accept the fact that your family made an awful mistake that ruined a man's life.".......Is that not a criticism of the Phagan family? And don't patronise me, darling.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
[deleted]
Yet strangely enough, I don't really care.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
[deleted]
I never said he did. I simply stated that you can't be overly critical that Mary's family at that time believed he did, because that is what the judical process at the time decided.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
[deleted]
They were also a family who had to deal with a little girl being horribly murdered. Or does that become irrelevant when it comes to arguing Leo Frank's innocence? Innocent as he may have been at the heart of this case is the fact that a little girl was raped and killed.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
[deleted]
Likewise I am not disputing what happened to Leo Frank. These were the days of white-anglo-saxon-protestantism, hell I wouldn't have been treated too well myself in that town. It just irritates me how what happened to Mary is often sidelined in the course of protesting Frank's innocence.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
[deleted]
Couldn't agree more, darling.
You are not a human being, Lola, you are an epidemic.
First of all it's "a lot"
and second, have you seen how scrawny Leo Frank was? I seriously doubt someone like him did it.
I hate Georgia because of people like you. You southerns k now everyone hates you cause you hate everyone who isn't white and Christian...hey PS Jesus was a Jew and that black guy DID kill Mary pahagen, someone witnessed him dragging her body in the basement. Does that mean anything to you?
"And then I was being chased my an improperly filled in bubble screaming 'None of the above!' ".
Very well put, pixie.
If hate were people, I'd be China! -Phil Berquist
I saw this movie back in 1988, and Peter Gallagher did a fantastic job of acting ...
Also Jack Lemmon.
I remember either TV Guide or Parade magazine did an interview about the movie, and how they had to shoot upwards(filming the old buildings) in order to keep with the history/time of the film.
Also as i remember , the peter gallagher character, was indeed a victim of anti-semitism, being blamed mostly due to his religion, and that at the end of the film , a much older man came out and admitted it was one of the older black gentlemen that killed that girl. Remember in the film they would hang around and harrass the kids at the end of the day when the kids were getting out of work??? It has been over 20 years, but i do remember that.
but guess what!! THIS TV has it on tonight!!! And if you miss it, don't worry, This TV will show it again in a day and a half!
If you're innocent and on trial for a heinous crime wouldn't you be eager to speak? Oh sure, Frank gave a personal statement, allowable under Georgia law. He was not under oath and the prosecution were not allowed to cross-examine him. All the prosecution witnesses, the young girls that testified as to his propositioning them constantly, the girl that was in his office looking for him at the exact time of the murder and didn't see him there (she didn't just look in, she waited some 5 minutes), all these spoke under oath, and most people took oaths seriously those days. Why was Frank so scared of being cross-examined? I think the answer to that is pretty obvious.
I do urge people not to make their minds up on the basis of this movie. Go read the trial transcripts. Also ask yourself why Leo Frank's wife left strict instructions before her death that she did not wish to be interred next to her husband or even in the same crypt. (She apparently told several people later that Leo had confessed the crime to her in his cell and asked her to smuggle in a pistol so he could kill himself.)
Frank was guilty, his sentence should never have been commuted. The Governor who commuted it just happened to be the old law partner of Frank's defense attorney. He should have recused himself.