site banner

Small-Scale Question Sunday for September 17, 2023

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Well it seems very unlikely that a 1910s Georgia judiciary would believe a black man accused of raping and murdering a white girl over a Jewish man unless the evidence swung in that direction.

Furthermore, the ADL is a very powerful organization and was founded on this particular case. The balance in terms of who is writing history (and whose history will get cited on wikipedia as the historical consensus) is rather one-sided.

This is very weak evidence - 1910s juries hardly always convicted black men, and it avoids contesting the specific reasoons modern historians believe frank was innocent

The fact that the jury (who watched hours and hours of questioning of everyone involved) convicted Frank makes me think it's pretty likely that he's guilty. I don't see how it could be "beyond any doubt" though, there just isn't any solid evidence either way.