Was the Leo Frank case the only court case where stormies claim the white man was guilty of rape and the black man was...

Was the Leo Frank case the only court case where stormies claim the white man was guilty of rape and the black man was innocent?

Was it also the only court case in history in which the phrase "the shit in the shaft" was entered into the court records?

He was a kike though. Until this day jews mourn the death of this pedophile. The evidence for his guilt is overwhelming btw.

Oh yeah the testimony of the guy who wrote the murder notes found on the body is really damning ””””””””””””evidence””””””””””””

Could you cite the proof that he was guilty?

>if he's (insert any single ethnicity on earth) hang him
>IF HE'S WHITE HE'S A JEW
>WHITES HAVE NEVER EVER DONE ANYTHING WRONG

Jesus Christ how delusional are you

There isn't any, that's why he was pardoned.

the Jews always jew too hard

Why do they always overplay their hand so much?

He is legit a jew though lmao. Just lol at your coping

>rednecks let an accused shady black man go and condemn a succesful rich jew (who were treated as equal to whites) and hang him

Just lol at all the butthurt. His case went all the way to the supreme court where he was still held as guilty, but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by the governor. So the local community felt offended and took matters in their own hand and killed him as all the previous courts had condemned him.

He was saved by a corrupt governor, after being found guilty by all possible courts (case went to the supreme court). His law firm was part of the defense counsel of Leo frank. But no, the idea that a jew could do something bad is anudda holocaust.

He wasnt even pardoned, his sentence was commuted.

*his law firm meaning the governors' law firm, giving even then reason to suspect him of conflictpunt interests

The supreme court didn't find him guilty you dumb stormbaby. That isn't how SCOTUS works, they refused to overturn his conviction on constitutional grounds, they didn't declare that he was guilty based on the evidence presented at trial.

So you mean they didnt find anything wrong with the case, and all the courts before it found him guilty? Sounds pretty guilty to me.

No, but like all antisemites you're arguing in bad faith, so this is your last free (You). Have some Sartre for your troubles:
"The anti-Semite has chosen hate because hate is a faith; at the outset he has chosen to devaluate words and reasons. How entirely at ease he feels as a result. How futile and frivolous discussions about the rights of the Jew appear to him. He has pleased himself on other ground from the beginning. If out of courtesy he consents for a moment to defend his point of view, he lends himself but does not give himself. He tries simply to project his intuitive certainty onto the plane of discourse. I mentioned awhile back some remarks by anti-Semites, all of them absurd: "I hate Jews because they make servants insubordinate, because a Jewish furrier robbed me, etc." Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. It is not that they are afraid of being convinced. They fear only to appear ridiculous or to prejudice by their embarrassment their hope of winning over some third person to their side. If then, as we have been able to observe, the anti-Semite is impervious to reason and to experience, it is not because his conviction is strong. Rather his conviction is strong because he has chosen first of all to be impervious."

>no, but

Stopped reading, thank you.

SEETHING

why is it always so hard for a chosenite to admit that a fellow chosenite did something wrong?

Lel this thread backfired quickly OP. What's the next part of your masterplan?

Even if he was guilty, nobody deserves being taken out of jail and lynched.

Some filthy pervert raping and killing a girl working in his child-labor factory deserves nothing imo

I agree, he should have died of old age in a tiny 8 by 8 cell, the people who lynched him did him a favor and gave him an easy out.

American retard detected.

Nope, european

What is the evidence that he was guilty?

>lynching is gud! We should bring it back!

>antisemitism
this word means critique of jews, of any kind. true or false, rational or irrational, concrete or abstract. it is a word meant to warp the perceptions of the gentile, to view an attack on jewry as more alarming as an attack on himself, to ensure he cannot bring himself to earnestly oppose jewish interests. this word is the embodiment of bad faith.