0034 Page – Leo Frank Georgia Supreme Court Appeals Records, 1913, 1914

Here is the extracted text from the image:

--6--
the roar
THAT we were usually taken direct from the courthouse to the
German Cafe, located midway of the block on Pryor Street, op-
posite from the courthouse, and it took us a very short time
to go there - I should estimate about three minutes at the outside.
Upon reaching the German Cafe, we were taken directly to a private
dining room in the rear of the building and the door immediately
closed; after being shut up in this room, we never heard any sounds
that in the slightest resembled cheering or applause; the only
cheering that was heard at any time while the case was being
considered was the cheering that arose shortly after the verdict
of guilty was read, when there was cheering both on Hunter and
Pryor Streets, and said cheering was loud and long; with the ex-
ception of this cheering, I never heard anything that had the
slightest resemblance to cheering, and I never heard any applause
except that heard by the Judge and only heard about the cheering
after having been discharged from the case. THAT the cheering
which occurred just after the reading of the verdict in said
case occurred during the time the jurors were being polled by
the court. THAT at the time the cheering was heard no objection
whatsoever was made by any one representing Leo M.Frank or by
the said Leo M.Frank himself, nor was any motion made at the time
by any of the attorneys of the said Frank or by the said Frank
himself, but the polling of the Jury which was going on at the
time the cheering began and during the cheering and after the
cessation of the cheering, was continued. THAT this cheering
did not in any wise influence or affect the verdict which had
already been made, nor did it have any influence whatsoever;
THAT deponent remained absolutely unaffected and uninfluenced
by the cheering or the surroundings and in answering on the
poll, deponent truthfully answered after he had heard the cheer-
ing that it was his verdict and in so answering, sustaining the ver-
dict, he discharged his duty and now subscribes to the correctness
of the verdict as rendered. THAT neither on Saturday,
August 25, 1915, nor on any other day or date, did any man or men,
other than the bailiffs in charge of the Jury ever walk with ex-