User talk:North Shoreman/Sandbox8


 * Many of the gaps in the narrative existed even before the text was moved back to the beginning of the year. IMO the following issues need to be addressed:


 * What was the physical evidence against Frank -- This includes what was found in the basement, what was discovered on Phagan's body, and what was found on the second floor. The initial crime scene was believed to be the second floor and there was blood and hair evidence that apparently supported this, but later investigaton threw all of this into doubt.


 * What is the significant testimony reflecting on Frank's guilt or innocence -- The prosecution based its case on Frank's behavior when confronted by police, Conley's eyewitness testimony, Frank's moral failings, and the establishment of a timeline showing Frank had the opportunity to commit the crime. The defense case involved explaining Frank's behavior when confronted by the police, refuting the moral issues, challenging the inaccuracies and inconsistencies of Conley's behavior, and providing an alternative time line.


 * On the moral issues, the article needs to explain both the trial info. as well as the rumors that circulated before the trial. Much of  rumors that  were not credible enough to make it to trial nevertheless effected both the public reaction and the prosecution strategy.


 * On Conley, his trial testimony needs to be discussed. He did an excellent job for the state and this needs to be said.  He was also greatly inconsistent and this needs to be shown.  The defense made major errors in how it handled him and this needs to explained.  And finally, the evidence that wasn't brought up and trial but which Conley's attorney and Governor Slaton relied on needs to be fully explained.


 * Coroner's inquest and Grand Jury hearing It needs to be explained what these hearings showed and what evidence (in general) that they considered.  The effort of the Grand Jury to indict Conley with Frank and the state's effort to prevent this should be explained.


 * The appeals process needs to be explained Each level was restricted in what issues could be addressed.  It needs to be clear that in fact there never was, until the clemency hearing, an opportunity to have old evidence reevaluated and new evidence considered.  It needs to be explained why Frank pursued clemency rather than a pardon from Slaton.  The clemency hearing exposed the strongest case for Frank's innocence.