Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1913-10-22
JURORS
DEFENDED
Of BIAS
Probity Of HensIee and Johen-
ming UpheId-InfIuence of
Cheering on Jury Denied.

Some 80 affidavits to support the
States contention that Leo M. Frank
had a fair trial were made public
Tuesday by Solicitor Dorsey. They
will be used Wednesday in the fight
against the defense's motion for a
new trial before Judge L. S. Roam.
Some of the affldavits defend the
probity and character of A. H. Hen
slee and M. Johenning, Jurors who
were accused of bias some attack the
trustworthiness of atlantis for the de-
tense. and others assert that no In
fluence could have been exerted on
the jury by the Cheering" and dem
onstrations" on which the defense rs
basing much of it's theme of appeal
Samuel Aaron, whose affidavit was
quoted as attacking the sincerity of
Juror Henslee, was himself attacked
by T. NJ Webb, whose impeachment
was in the usual form, that he would
not believe Aaron on his oath, hav-
ing known him many years.
Calls NeiII Bad Character.
w. P. Neill, the defense's affiant,
who stated he saw a spectator talk
to one of the jurors and grab him by
the hand" is referred to in the affi
dsvit of w. ]. Clayton, of the Cen
trail Carriage Company, as of bad
character and one whom Clayton
would not believe under oath
Plennie Miner, Deputy Sheriff, also
refers to the affidavit OF Neill He
states, under oath, that one day in
the courtroom he thought he saw a
spectator say something to juror.
without rising, or touching him, or
making any other gesture. He (Miner)
at once went to the spectator, in or
der to take him before the judge, but
the man denied having addressed any
juror, and another man, sitting mex.
him, also assured Miner that his COM
panion had not spoken to any juror,
so the deputy let the incident close.
T. S. Halves, of cambridge, Ga.
mpeached r. G. Gremmer, stating
that he had known the defense's af-
fiant twenty years and that he would
not believe him under oath.
Time Element Enters.
In the interval of preparing the af-
fidavits Mr.. Dorsey stated that he
fancied those atlantis who had sworn
to hearing Henslee say in GAINESVILLE
some time in June" that he had been
drawn on the jury would be puzzled
on hearing that Henslee, as a matter
of fact did not know himself that
he was drawn on the jury until Fri~
day, June 25, at o'clock in the aft
ernoon; that he remained in Atlanta
Saturday and Sunday. and did not
start for home until Monday.
The Solicitor evidently had been
calculating on the various dates on
which Henslee might have been
charged with saying he was ION the
Frank jury" but what deductions he
had made would have to appear later.
For the rest Of the prosecutions af-
fdavits, Henslee praised Johenning as
Juror without bias or prejudice; Jo-
henning praised Henslee in similar
terms, and ]. r. Ozburn, F. E. Win
burn, w. F. Medcalf, w. NJ, Jeffries,
d. Townsend and A. L. Wisely, fell
low jurors, commended both Henslee
and Johennlng as high minded ex-
amples of justice and moderation.
Henslee Doubtful of Guilt.
1t was the invariable testimony OF
his fellow Jurors that Henslee was the
only Juror to cast doubtful" bal
! lot. indicating that he was the most
reluctant TO make up his mind OF
what all the rest Of the jurors seemed
| to have agreed on.
There was much testimony in re-
gard to the cheering and "demonstra e
I tons" al tending TO show That the
Continued on Page 5, Column 1.