OPEN LETTER TO PBS (@PBS) (@NewsHour) ABOUT IT'S BIASED DOCUMENTARY SEGMENT ON THE LEO FRANK CASE | POSTED APRIL 26, 2026 Dear PBS Board of Directors: Paula Kerger, President Chair Catherine Robb, Co-Chair Geoff Sands and Jayme Swain Members: Delores Fernandez Alonso, Mark G. Contreras, Bob Culkeen, Mildred Garcia, Anne Gates, Susan Goldberg, Chuck Hagel, Shae Hopkins, Marvin Irby, Larry Irving, Michael Isip, Gunjan Kedia, Becky Magura, Carla McCage, Sandra Cordova Micek, Luis Patino, Greg Petrowich, Vivian Riefberg, Tina Sharkey, Amy Shaw, Holden Thorp, and Ed Ulman My name is Mary Phagan-Kean (@PhaganKean). I am the great-niece and namesake of little Mary Phagan (1899 - 1913), the thirteen-year-old girl murdered at the National Pencil Company in Atlanta on April 26, 1913. [1] I am writing to express serious concern about Episode One of Black and Jewish America: An Interwoven History, specifically the segment from approximately 39:36 to 46:00. [2] The program presents a highly inflammatory and contested interpretation of the Leo Frank case in a way that gives viewers the impression that key factual disputes have long been settled, when in fact some of the most important claims in that segment remain deeply disputed or are presented without necessary context. [3] One of my chief concerns is the repetition of the famous claim that crowds outside the courthouse shouted, “Hang the Jew or we’ll hang you,” at the jury. Steve Oney, whose 2003 book has often been treated as a major modern account of the case, later said plainly that this story “didn’t happen” and that it was a later embellishment that became embedded in subsequent retellings. [4] At the same time, accuracy requires another clarification as well. Frank’s lawyers did later during appeals allege hostile public sentiment and mob domination in court, but the United States Supreme Court summarized the state courts’ position as being that those allegations had been “not sustained.” [5] A documentary shown on public television should make that distinction clearly. It should not blur the line between a later allegation, a later legend, and a fact established by the official record. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the sufficiency of the evidence at Leo Frank's trial to convict him. The program also frames the undercurrent of Frank’s prosecution chiefly through antisemitism, but Frank’s own recorded statements complicate that picture and should not be omitted. In his 1914 interview with Abraham Cahan (founder of the Jewish Daily Forward), Frank said, “Anti-Semitism is absolutely not the reason for this libel that has been framed against me.” [6] That full statement matters. A fair documentary should not quote selectively in either direction, it should strive to be objective rather than an advocacy piece. It should let viewers see the complexity of the defendant’s own words rather than forcing the record into a simpler ideological paradigm. In contemporaneous reporting as well, Frank publicly blamed a Black man for the crime. [7] Leo Frank also altered Newt Lee's time card, erasing 4 timestamps to incriminate him for the Mary Phagan murder. The death notes found next to the victim, Mary Phagan, described Newt Lee physically, including a misspelled version of his job title. The legal record also deserves greater precision than the program gives it. Frank’s conviction was not left to a single unreviewed jury verdict. More than a dozen appeals and related petitions were pursued by his defense team and all failed. [8] The U.S. Supreme Court rejected his federal due process claim in Frank v. Mangum. [5] None of that, by itself, settles the historical debate for all time. But it does mean that a documentary owes viewers a careful distinction between later interpretations of the case and what the courts actually held at the time. The pardon history is also frequently misstated and should have been handled more carefully. In 1983, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles declined to grant Frank a [full] pardon [of exoneration] because it said it was impossible to decide conclusively his guilt or innocence. [9] In 1986, the board did grant a half-pardon, but it did so “without attempting to address the question of guilt or innocence.” [10] That was not a legal exoneration. [10] Any documentary that leaves viewers with the impression that innocence was officially established by the state is telling them something the pardon itself did not say. In 1995, Rabbi Steven Lebow, Philip Goldstein and others had the historical marker removed at the Phagan family grave plot because they were unhappy that the sign made clarified that Leo Frank had not been vindicated. In part 4 beginning at 20:25 of this PBS series, Mr. Gates misinformed the public about the Nation of Islam’s book series: The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews.  The Phagan family has recognized their superior scholarship with respect to the Leo Frank Case (Vol. 3) and we would challenge Mr. Gates and the producers of the PBS series to examine their 536-page work.  No other study of the case has been as comprehensive and analytical and all serious scholars of the case have acknowledged the Nation of Islam’s contribution including Dr. Jeffrey Melnick. Current efforts to revisit the case only make accuracy more important. In April 2025, a spokesperson for the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office said that the Conviction Integrity Unit had the Leo Frank case file under review and that a decision would be announced when the review was complete. If public institutions are going to revisit a 1913 conviction in 2026, then the public deserves full transparency about what new, verifiable evidence is said to justify that review. [11] My concern is not simply that your documentary took a side. My concern is that it presented a highly contested side as though it were settled history and omitted major pieces of evidence and procedure that would have helped viewers judge the matter for themselves. A PBS documentary presumably carries a high-level of public trust. That trust is weakened when a program promotes partisan advocacy and repeats disputed claims without telling viewers that even widely cited modern accounts reject some of them. When a documentary blurs the difference between allegation and proof, and when it leaves out evidence that complicates its thesis in only one favorable direction, that's propaganda, not truth seeking, that's "agitprop," not objectivity. The Leo Frank case is controversial enough without additional partisan smoothing, over simplification, or selective presentation. A public audience deserves better than a one-sided retelling dressed up as settled history. I respectfully ask that PBS and the producers correct or clarify this segment, or at minimum make room for the omitted documentary record, including the defendant’s own words, the procedural history of the appeals, and the exact language of the 1983 and 1986 pardon decisions. Thank you for your time and attention. Respectfully, Mary Phagan-Kean | Posted on X, April 26, 2026 Great-niece and namesake of Mary Phagan LittleMaryPhagan.com cc:  Mr. Henry Louis Gates Jr (@HenryLouisGate2 on X), @pbsteachers @realDonaldTrump @PressSecDOW @KingsleyCortes #LeoFrank #MaryPhagan #PBS #Atlanta #Georgia Enclosed a 1913 photo of Mary Phagan colorized with AI on April 26, 2026 References 1. HISTORY.com Editors. (2025, May 27). Murder in Atlanta pencil factory leads to lynching of Leo Frank. HISTORY. 2. Public Broadcasting Service. (2026, February 3). Let My People Go. In Black and Jewish America: An Interwoven History. PBS. 3. Melnick, J. P. (2000). Black-Jewish relations on trial: Leo Frank and Jim Conley in the New South. University Press of Mississippi. @melnickjeffrey1 4. Finnigan, D. (2004, February 5). Q & A with Steve Oney. Jewish Journal. Also see Oney, S. (2013, September 24). The People v. Leo Frank. Atlanta Magazine. @steveoneywriter 5. Frank v. Mangum, 237 U.S. 309 (1915). Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center. 6. Berger, P. (2013, August 30). Leo Frank case stirs debate 100 years after Jewish lynch victim’s conviction. The Forward. Also see Telling Story of Leo Frank From His Jail Cell. The Forward. 7. Mary Phagan’s Murder Was Work of a Negro Declares Leo M. Frank. (1913, May 31). The Atlanta Constitution. ProQuest Historical Newspapers reproduction surfaced via library scan. 8. Anti-Defamation League. (2009). The People v. Leo Frank teacher’s guide. Also see National Archives. (2025, May 29). Progressive Era: Leo Frank Petition. @ADL 10. Jewish Telegraphic Agency. (1986, March 12). Leo Frank is posthumously pardoned by Georgia board. Also see Leo Frank pardon denied. (1983, December 23). The Washington Post. 11. Dinnerstein, L. (2020, August 11). Leo Frank case. New Georgia Encyclopedia. 12. Quinn, P. (2025, April 3). With Broadway’s “Parade” in Atlanta, Fulton County DA says Leo Frank case is “under review”. Atlanta News First.