Editor’s Note: Leo Frank was a Jewish-American businessman who raped and murdered a 13-year-old female employee named Mary Phagan. Frank then framed the Afro-American janitor. In court, Frank used a flurry of anti-black racist slurs, including the n-word, which is a product of the deep-seated anti-black racism held within Judaism. However, his false accusations against the janitor did not hold up. The judge sentenced Frank to death, but after the lobbying of powerful Jewish members of the local community, the sentence was reduced. Citizens of the city decided to kidnap Frank from jail and deliver the death sentence themselves in August 1913.
In tragic irony, the group Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith was formed in October 1913, citing Frank’s murder as the impetus, claiming that his lynching was due to “antisemitism,” rather than the fact that he was a rapist and a murderer, and also a racist who wanted to pin his heinous crime on an innocent black man. The ADL claims to be an organization “fighting against hate and bigotry,” while their very foundation is built on protecting anti-black bigotry, and even more morbidly, the anti-black bigotry of a rapist-murderer.
To this day, the ADL lobbies to exonerate and repair the image of Leo Frank in order to protect its own sick, perverted criminal past of having their organization be created in order to cover up the crimes of Jewish supremacism by crying “antisemitism.”
Thanks to the work of the Nation of Islam Research Group, which has published an entire volume on this case entitled The Secret Relationships Between Blacks and Jews Vol. 3, the evidence derived from primary sources not only continues to keep alive the ugly origins of the ADL but also maintain that Frank was indeed guilty and indeed a racist.
How can the ADL – which is founded in covering up the anti-black racism of a rapist-murderer by crying “antisemitism” like the boy who cried “wolf,” and also foments rabid Islamophobia and Iranophobia in order to justify the mass slaughter of the farcical “War on Terror” – claim to be combating hate? They are only trying to distract the masses from finding out who the most racist, hateful group of people are by pointing the fingers at everyone else, and when their own crimes are exposed, they simply slander their opponents as “antisemites,” when they are neither Semites (the pro-Jewish book Jews of Khazaria by Kevin Alan Brook busts such a myth) and those who expose their crimes are not against Jews as people, but are against their actions. People cannot help how they are born, but they can help how they act. Instead of facing the music on their actions, Jewish supremacists falsely accuse their opponents of simply hating them for the sake of their very existence and incidence of birth.
Now that the ADL is actively pushing for censorship both online and offline – including a censorship-promoting hub based in Silicon Valley that lobbies the major social media giants for more strict “community guidelines” – it is vital for the people of the world to know that the ADL is a beacon of hypocrisy rooted in the barbaric act of rape and murder, in addition to anti-black racism and the framing of an innocent black man.
Can they get anymore hypocritical than using Sacha Baron Cohen – who has made a career making movies centered around negative, racist stereotypes of Middle Easterners – while claiming to “combat hate”? Clearly they are only interested in protecting Jewish supremacism from public discovery.
This article is a compilation of two articles written by the NOI Research Group that should shed more light on the Leo Frank case and pull off the mask of “tolerance” and “anti-bigotry” that the ADL wears in order to cover up the fact that their entire purpose is to protect and defend the bigotry and intolerance of Jewish supremacists and the Zionist regime occupying Palestine.
The Leo Frank Case: Documented Findings
The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Volume Three: The Leo Frank Case, The Lynching of a Guilty Man is a 536-page study referenced with thousands of footnotes and illustrated with maps, diagrams, and graphics that touch on every aspect of this controversial case. Here are a few of The Secret Relationship’s documented findings (and the page numbers where full references can be found):
- Frank was not targeted by an unruly mob. A 23-member grand jury that included five prominent members of the Jewish community voted for the indictment of Leo Frank. In other words, they all believed there was enough evidence to convict Leo Frank as the sole murderer of Mary Phagan. (See page 52, notes 102-106.)
- The claim that a mob chanted “Hang the Jew or we’ll hang you” at the trial is simply false. The ADL’s own expert, author Steve Oney, told the Jewish Journal: “It didn’t happen.…Jews were accepted in the city, and the record does not substantiate subsequent reports that the crowd outside the courtroom shouted at the jurors: ‘Hang the Jew or we’ll hang you.’” (See pages 163-64, 173-187.)
- Leo Frank himself told a Jewish newspaper publisher, “Anti-Semitism is absolutely not the reason for this libel [murder conviction] that has been framed against me. It isn’t the source nor the result of this sad story.” (Page )
- Anti-Semitism was virtually absent from the case, but anti-Black racism was brutally present: Leo Frank, as leader of B’nai B’rith, publicly and openly referred to Blacks as “niggers.” His defense attorneys used the word “nigger” and other racist slurs dozens of times in court. His main attorney told the jury: “If you put a nigger in a hopper, he’ll drip lies.” And: “Is it possible that you Anglo-Saxon men have forgotten the nature of the negro?….Conley is a plain, beastly, ragged, filthy, lying nigger. Have I overstated that?” Another of Frank’s many attorneys addressed the jury, stating that Conley came from “a law-breaking race.” (Pages 121-23, 128-29, 131-33, 362.)
- Frank argued in court that the many Black witnesses should not be believed—simply because they were Black—and that “negro testimony” was by definition inferior and unreliable. Further, Frank argued to the all-white jury of his peers that murder, rape, and robbery were “negro crimes” and thus, he, a white man, could not have committed the murder of Mary Phagan. (Pages 124-136.)
- Atlanta police did not “frame” Frank; nor did they arrest him because he was Jewish. Both private detective agencies hired by Frank concluded that Leo Frank was the murderer of Mary Phagan. Another attorney hired by Frank similarly found and stated openly that his client was guilty. (Pages 31-34, 47-48, 50-52, 65-66, 91 note 187, 147, 247.)
- Jim Conley was the second Black person that Leo Frank publicly accused of Mary Phagan’s murder. Newt Lee, the night watchman who found the body in the factory basement, was actively targeted by Frank’s hired private eyes. They actually planted a blood-soaked shirt in the innocent Black man’s home, and then told the police where they could find that damning “evidence.” At the same time, Frank altered Lee’s work time card in order to make Lee the prime suspect. (Pages 35-44.) Frank’s attorney, the famous Luther Rosser, had this exchange in open court with the medical expert, related to the planted bloody shirt:
Rosser: The shirt had the odor of blood on it when you first got it, didn’t it?
Yes.
Rosser: Then, wouldn’t the odor of blood have killed the odor of nigger?
No.
Rosser: Then, if a nigger had just put on his shirt and had taken it off in an instant, your nose would “get him”?
Have you ever smelled a negro, Mr. Rosser?
Rosser: More than you ever smelled. I was smelling them before you were born. [Pages 134-135.]
- Leo Frank’s own Black cook, Minola McKnight, signed an affidavit saying she overheard Frank’s wife and mother discussing how Frank had confessed to the murder. She (and her husband) also gave damning evidence of Frank’s movements on the day of the murder that conflicted with Frank’s already weak alibi. (Pages 34, 378-79, 423-428.)
- Leo Frank was caught lying so often and so unapologetically that he was actually his own worst enemy. He refused to take an oath on the Bible, and then refused to be cross-examined by prosecutors. But James Conley withstood sixteen hours of cross-examination—under oath. (Pages 92ff, 122, 136-140, 362-382.)
- After Frank’s conviction powerful Jewish leaders rallied to his defense, but in private documents they admitted that they could not stand Frank’s personality and that he probably was guilty. Albert Lasker ran the top advertising agency in America and financed Frank’s legal defense. His private view of the B’nai B’rith president was harsh and disturbing: “It was very hard for us to be fair to him [Frank], he impressed us as a sexual pervert. (Pages 216-217, 254-255, 322.)
- Frank’s main attorney admitted in open court that Frank’s lewd behavior was “a sign that we are getting more broad-minded…[D]eliver me from one of these prudish fellows that never looks at a girl and never puts his hands on her….” So powerful was the testimony of twenty adolescent girls about Leo Frank’s sexual harassment at the factory that none of his attorneys dared to cross-examine them—not one. (Pages 107-123.)
- Frank supporters tried to hire a Black woman to slip Conley some poison. She identified the plotters in open court. (Pages 262-263.)
- Frank was convicted in Atlanta, but most of the 13 appeals occurred outside Atlanta, and every one of those courts—including the US Supreme Court—upheld the conviction. (Pages 276-277, 282.)
- Prosecutor Hugh Dorsey has been portrayed as an “anti-Semite,” but it was Dorsey who allowed Blacks to testify at the trial, an unprecedented advancement in civil rights. Leo Frank’s attorneys fought this tooth and nail, and did everything they could to keep Blacks from participating in any part of the trial. It was Frank’s attorneys—not Georgia prosecutors—who used their power to eliminate Blacks from the jury pool. Dorsey later became governor of Georgia, whereupon he forcefully condemned the racial violence in his state and in America. The NAACP declared that Governor Dorsey’s stand “greatly enhanced the significance of the anti-lynching crusade.” Frank’s B’nai B’rith—and all Jewish organizations—were totally absent from the anti-lynching movement. In fact, Leo Frank’s main appeals attorney, Louis Marshall, as president of the American Jewish Committee, fought to undermine anti-lynching legislation, calling it “unconstitutional” and a violation of “state’s rights.” (Pages 88, 478-479.)
- Several of Frank’s strongest advocates—including his main lawyer and the man who financed his legal appeals—were both Jewish and open and active members of the American eugenics movement. A generation later Hitler would draw inspiration for his anti-Jewish policies from American eugenicists. (Pages 217, 221-222.)
- Pro-Frank embellishers have claimed that “thousands” of Jews fled Atlanta, but this is a complete myth. Jewish demographers show that the Jewish population of Atlanta actually increased over the weeks, months, and years after the Frank episode. (Pages 330-344.)
- Mysteriously, in 1982 a “witness” named Alonzo Mann materialized, claiming that he was at the factory in 1913 on the day of the murder and saw Conley carrying the body of Mary Phagan. The Nation of Islam meticulously examined those claims and shows conclusively that Mann had given many conflicting stories—in 1913 and in 1982—that are irreconcilable with the known facts and that the aged Mann was very likely coaxed by Frank’s advocates into making his 1982 claims. (Pages 435-464.)
Leo Frank: ‘He is a Murderer, Not a Martyr’
In a recent column in the Atlanta Jewish Times, Rabbi Steven Lebow calls for the Georgia House and Senate to pass a “nonbinding resolution” saying, “In the light of history it is fair to assume that Leo M. Frank was innocent of all charges.” This, he feels, would allow the South to “get beyond” its history of lynching and racist violence. It is incredible indeed that Rabbi Lebow could suggest that the exoneration of Leo Frank—the only Jew ever lynched in America—could ever be recompense for the history of racist terror suffered by Black people. It is estimated that many thousands of innocent Black men, women, and children were dispatched by bullet, rope, or fire, many of these wretched murders occurring after the victims suffered hours of grisly tortures. They received no trials and no judicial process in any form, before their horrifying demise. Rabbi Lebow minimizes these injustices and suggests that Leo Frank—a white man—stand in as the symbol to represent the suffering of all these Black Americans. This is, on its face, absurd.
Leo Frank was a pencil factory manager in Atlanta employing scores of child laborers who spent their precious school years under the worst sweatshop conditions. In 1913, Frank was convicted of luring a 13-year-old employee named Mary Phagan into a corner of the factory where he attempted to rape her, and when she resisted, he murdered her. Frank had the longest and most expensive trial in the state’s history up to that time. And because he was also the president of the Jewish B’nai B’rith, he was able to have the nation’s best lawyers and private detectives working on his behalf. A jury of his fellow white men found him guilty of the murder, and more than a dozen appeals courts—including the United States Supreme Court—reaffirmed the guilty verdict. To this very day, no Black man has ever seen this level of due process—even though the 14th Amendment was enacted to assist the Black ex-slave. The Georgia House and Senate—most certainly the Black members—should reject Lebow’s insulting initiative on that basis alone.
There is quite a bit more that is disturbing about Rabbi Lebow’s audacious proposition.
Lebow claims, “we are living in what I like to call the Newer South…a completely different landscape,” and he insists that we see Leo Frank as the historical marker that separates “old” from “new.” He paraphrases Henry Grady, a white man who championed Southern business development—but for whites and Jews only. Blacks, he stipulated, should be locked in agricultural labor as the engines of the Southern cotton economy, and as maids and servants in the homes of Jews and whites. There would be no “New South” for them. Lebow should ask John Lewis or Andrew Young whether Blacks experienced “a completely different landscape” after the 1915 lynching of Leo Frank.
Rabbi Lebow makes a peculiar claim: “Justice is the debt that the present owes the future.” Then what justice is due the young murder victim Mary Phagan? The Honorable Elijah Muhammad taught that “Justice is the greatest principle of fair dealing. Justice is the law that distinguishes between right and wrong.”
If Leo Frank is exonerated today, who then killed Mary Phagan? How will her death be accounted for? How, in Rabbi Lebow’s calculation, do Mary Phagan and her family receive justice? He avoids the issue for good reason. Unspoken in his directive to Georgia lawmakers (many of whom are Black) is that if Frank is deemed “innocent,” then a Black man named James Conley will be deemed guilty. It is a little detail that Rabbi Lebow deliberately “forgot” to include in his Atlanta Jewish Times commentary. In past writings, however, Lebow was more forthcoming and brazenly claimed, “The actual murderer [was] Jim Conley [who] later admitted to others that he had been the one who had killed that girl.” Both assertions are patently false, and Lebow can prove neither.
Lebow continues: “All bona fide historians now agree that Frank was innocent. Clearing Frank’s name should be easy.” Not so fast. James Conley was the janitor in the factory on the day of the murder. He was called up to the murder scene by a panicking Leo Frank, who ordered the Black man to help him conceal the body. The physical evidence so convincingly supported Conley’s sworn testimony that 12 white male jurors unanimously convicted Leo Frank. So convincing was Conley that Leo Frank refused to be sworn on the Bible in his own murder trial!
It is particularly galling for Lebow to have made such a statement, when he is well aware that one of the top bona fide scholars of the case is right here in Georgia. Mary Phagan Kean, a grand niece of the murdered girl, spent thousands of hours researching the case. She wrote a most fair, balanced, and well-respected book on the subject, titled The Murder of Little Mary Phagan. Her research quite handily confirms the reality that Leo Frank was guilty of that horrific crime. She says that the lynching of Leo Frank was “a very horrible thing,” but that “the truth isn’t really told about Leo Frank….He is not a martyr, he is a murderer.” Rabbi Lebow, the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, and those who have championed Frank’s posthumous cause arrogantly ignore the mountain of evidence confirming the work of Ms. Phagan Kean.
The Georgia House and Senate should understand that their support of Rabbi Lebow’s “resolution” exonerating Leo Frank also convicts an innocent Black man of a horrific crime. Multiple courts of law found that Mary Phagan suffered an appalling demise at the hands of an exploitative employer, Leo Frank. For a century, his supporters, the latest crusader being Rabbi Lebow, have turned Frank into a most undeserving cause célèbre, and in the process they have diminished the life of the young victim Mary Phagan—and they have sullied the name of an innocent Black man, James Conley. Georgia lawmakers should not lend themselves to such an ugly legacy. Leo Frank did irreparable harm to race relations in Georgia and America. Rabbi Lebow and his “resolution” only offer more of the same.
Original articles:
- https://noirg.org/articles/the-leo-frank-case-documented-findings/
- https://noirg.org/articles/leo-frank-he-is-a-murderer-not-a-martyr/
