This is a true copy of a forum debate about SBC where the Police
were shot by the Kelly gang in 1878. These following 25 pages were lost when one
of the participants complained to forum host ProBoards.com. Despite numerous
efforts to have the whole forum re-instated by me, this topic was one of several
threads on DEE's 'Ned Kelly Truth forum' that questioned the many
mythologized elements of the Kelly story, and is the reason for much personal
attack on those that may have alternative views of how Kelly history is
recorded. Bill Denheld May 2014
The Great Debate about Stringy-Bark
Creek PAGE 2
Post by bill on Feb 20, 2014 at 11:30am
Thank you Sarah, Dee
I will answer Sarah first.
Perhaps we are getting all too technical.
The issue is to explain why the two huts site is the place where the
police camped and were shot.
The water course starts near the top of the range on what was the
Engelke farm land and this gentle undulating land forms a gully.
On this farm is the head of the SBC gully, so you can see it is a pretty
un remarkable gully heading down hill.
As it heads down the hill the gully still does not hold water as a
Picture of the head of SBC.
Here is a picture of the farm to the right of the above scene
When it rains the water quickly soaks down
into the sandy gravel soils but does not run off on top of the ground,
rather this rain water permeates down to a hard rock bottom some 300
metres below. But as the downhill slopes as per the Geology cross
section map shown on page 1, eventually the ground surface meets up with
the hard granite rock bottom where some what lowerdown the water oozes
out - we call a spring just UP from where the two huts are. From there
this water flows freely down the gully gutter we now know as SBC and it
keeps flowing and flowing all year round because of the massive sponged
water storage up above.
You are right the spring is higher up than where the police camped. But
because just to the south of the camp there is a steep slope that levels
to a flatter area on top- this has been described as the little hill in
The Herald newspaper only 12 days after the shootings. You can read
about this in my document
( print out page 36 and 37)
The map page 36 shows contours only on the west bank but the creek has
cut through this country for millinia forming very steep sides leading
up from the two huts to where the spring actually is located. From the
police camp you cannot see the spring, or from the spring you can not
see the police camp because of the little hill in between. But from the
top of the little hill you probably could be able to see both. Please
read part of the Herald report transcript on page 37 and relate the red
numbers to the map.
The point being, Dan was sent back to the spring area because from the
police camp you could not look past the little hill - the slope in the
back ground of the Burman photo.
In 1985 I was able to walk in to see the spring, maybe fifty to eighty
metres, there is a pool water hole that had been damed up but was
breached. Further up the gully it was dry. Due to the bush fires in
2005, the whole area is overgrown with some sort of scrub and the area
is now almost impossible to pass. I gave it a go a few years ago and
could not get further than 8 metres.
Last Edit: Feb 20, 2014
at 11:35am by
bill: Repeat chaned back -miss read.
Post by Dee on Feb 20, 2014 at 12:29pm
Thanks Bill I
enjoyed reading that! You've been doing this for so long!
So you’re saying that the spring is NOT a long way from the two huts
site as suggested by Sarah? And do you agree it makes sense as Horrie
says, that there must have been changes to the exact contours and layout
of the land given what's been taking place ever since?
Post by Guest on Feb 20, 2014 at
What Bill is referring to is possibly what was a damned off section of
the creek done by earlier occupants of the area. Now ruined. He
discovered this when he ventured up the creek back in 2003 or 2005
This does not constitute a spring. There is no spring at or near the two
This was discussed and agreed upon previously on the SBC forum.
Hence Bill’s offer to me to join him in locating the source of the
spring. This was January last year.
Nothing has changed since then.
Post by bill on Feb 20,
2014 at 7:19pm
Regarding Horrie and Dee's question,
Dee, As we can see it is difficult to get exact meanings as
Sarah has pointed out.
Quote Horrie- To expect
everything today to be identical with the Burman photographs of
1878 is a bit rich.
Quote Dee - And do you agree
it makes sense as Horrie says, that there must have been changes
to the exact contours and layout of the land given whats been
taking place ever since?
spoken to Charlie Engelke in 2003 (now deceased), he lived at
the top of SBC road. He, as a youngster walked up and down SBC
road, he said that while most of the land east of the SBC road
were 'rung' ring barked it was never cultivated, and the "dry
trees still standing shot out saplings, and all the bush has
grown up in the last 50 years, ( now 60). We can take from that,
the creek, the bush, and contours are untouched.
Apart from 'new roads' ( maps 1884 courtesy Sheila Hutchinson's
book Heritage and History on My Doorstep'), at the time were not
formed in any way except fence lines defining properties and
road reserves, public tracks along these reserves up and down
dale, numerous low spots (Charlie said in his time) were
impassable bogs during the winter months. But at the time of the
police camp there was no such roads only 'bridle tracks', - no
maps. However what the CSI team refer to being their 'Spring'
would later become one of those bogs where natural water run off
formed a little soggy bit of ground - this was just down a
little dip south of the Kelly tree not far- today it runs under
the road today from west to east through a six inch pipe. But if
this was the likely spring referred to by CSI, there would be
little need for Dan Kelly to go there in case the police came
back from that direction, because if the Kelly tree site was
where the police had camped, Dan would not have needed to have
gone 'down' to this hollow 'spring', rather Dan would have just
needed to get a view across that low spot to see if the police
came from that direction. If this is not proof enough the
CSI@SBC spring is nonsense, I'd be happy to be a monkey's uncle.
Horrie, to answer your question, the little corner where the two
huts is situated is virtually unchanged.
On the other side of the creek opposite, East of two huts, the
east bank was dug up for gold for about fifty metres or so.
However this does not constitute any change in contours except
for a number of digger holes and mounds.
Up the creek apart from a small dammed section nothing would be
changed and yes, a lot of timber may have been got out in the
1930's but only if fairly easily accessible. I can show you the
tracks they left behind. Remember most of the land became free
hold by 1884 /5 but timber cutters did not access the area till
45 years later when McCashneys built the sawmill over Kelly camp
in 1929. It was said to be in virgin bush according to Charlie
Engelke whose father was the engine driver for the mill. However
one tree was not so luck was the original Kelly tree- the one
everyone knew had bullet lead in it from the shoot out was cut
down by Harpers sawmill of Benalla as I remember in 1908.
The SBC road went straight past the two huts fireplaces which
are about 26 metres in from the road. This road in order reach
the top of the ' little hill' most of that part of the road is
fill. This means we cannot now not stand on the original ground
where the police tent was pitched - on below where the road is
today. But non of this has changed the contours relevant to the
Burman photos topography.
I will show one view of the two huts site that has never been
shown before. It is a panoramic view of approx 120 degrees.
Click link to see full size.
Post by Guest on Feb 20, 2014 at
Smoke and mirrors again. Bill.
Still trying to disguise the fact that there is no spring at the two
If the creek and contours are untouched. Why did you find the need to
alter the creek alignment on your scaled layout? Not enough distance for
the tent perhaps?
70yards from the creek places it to the other side of SBC road.
Interesting how things move around to suit your particular scenario.
Post by Dee on Feb 20, 2014 at 9:26pm
I can see you guys are never going to agree! But I am sure you’re both
genuine in your desire to find the precise spot, but its clearly not
obvious. and we haven’t even started on the third site!
For me - getting back to Bills point about knowing exactly where a thing
happened - Stringy Bark Creek is exactly where it happened. For most of
us I think it would be enough just to be in that area and walk about in
all that bush ,up and down the gullies and the creeks, the springs bogs
and spear grass, all of which was the domain of the Gang and of the
Police at the time, all of it has been a witness to the Kellys, the
police, the murders, the search parties, everyone who came after to
satisfy their curiosity, to pay homage to the Police , hunt for
souvenirs, to re-imagine what happened, commune with nature or the bush,
or even the dead...all these things happened in that broader space, not
just in one small corner of it. Just to be there would be enough for me.
How come nobody wants to talk about anything else?
Last Edit: Feb 20, 2014
at 9:27pm by
Post by Guest on Feb 20, 2014 at
I did not suggest "the lie of the land" generally had changed. But it is
obvious that the logs featured in the Burman photos are long gone, so
too is the apparently flat ground in the Burman photos (and the hut
post). If this is the spot, and I believe it is, things have obviously
changed over 136 years. Not the general topography - but the smaller
I don't know if Burman's original camera exists, but none of the experts
have ever discussed the various perspective distortions caused by
cameras then and now. Maybe focal length, depth of field, etc., etc.,
could explain some of the visual anomalies.
If the site was identical today, as it was in 1878, there would be no
argument would there?
Post by Guest on Feb 21, 2014 at
I understand what you are saying. The whole area is important and should
be respected. To some the exact locating of events doesn’t matter to
others it does.
Up until 1992 the site was recognised as being near the Kelly tree. It
was around that time that Ian Jones announced that in his opinion it was
As he has such a high profile few would question him. So the site was
moved. Thousands of people now go and stand in the wrong location trying
to imagine it all.
Through extensive research and new information that has surfaced in
recent years we now know that Ian’s site is wrong.
That is something Bill and I can agree on.
Of course just to say it should be at the Kelly tree area would not be
enough. So the CSI@SBC team have gone to extensive lengths to test the
This was done on both sites, Bill’s and ours. The land was
professionally surveyed, distances measured in feet and yards. Etc.
It was not by pure co incidence that the Kelly tree location was chosen.
On the surface Bill’s site can be very convincing. Unfortunately, unless
the information is manipulated it does not match.
The spring being one example.
Post by Guest on Feb 21, 2014 at 10:23am
Much of the land remains the same although some areas have been done
over. The flat land as in the Burman images remains mostly as it was.
Sadly the spring area on the other side of the road near the Kelly tree
was bulldozed as a fire break when the fires went through in 2005. All
the trees were flattened. Gradually the swamp gums etc are making a
As is the spring. Behind this location the surrounding hills form
something like a little valley, the ground in this area is hard, the
water collected makes it’s way down under the surface to form the
spring. Much as it does with there creeks in the area.
From there it makes it way both under and over the road down towards the
creek. ( I know nothing of a 6” pipe under the road though. This may
have been put there in the last 4 months)
A good point. This has been previously extensively discussed on other
forums. I agree it would be difficult if not impossible to take anything
like the Burman images with a modern camera.
This could be discussed again but will open up another can of worms and
take us off on another tangent. It may encourage Bill to whip out his
viewer scope again. Quite honestly I am over that thing.
Post by bill on Feb 21, 2014 at 10:25am
In my document just in case you did not see or understand my home made
apparatus, the Viewer Scope.
If you or any of the readers were to come to SBC with me and looked
through the Viewer Scope with the features of the Burman photo etched
onto the clear glass, a sliding peep hole to look through can be changed
for any focal length in or out.
You wrote quote-
"If the site
was identical today, as it was in 1878, there would be no argument would
I can set the scope
up for you to look through, except for the trees, you will see the
landscape shape matches the etched image exactly.
Horrie, you will find no other place anywhere along SBC that matches the
Burman photo except for at the two huts still today.
For those that have seen this demonstrated there is no argument.
Post by bill on Feb 21, 2014 at 10:33am
I reply to the Post by Glenn Standing -last post by Glenn on page 1,
Quote- by Glenn
" When you present images
like those "Then and Now" pictures above. How about doing them to scale.
The figures and the logs are disproportionate to the image. E.G. The log
on which the man sits is approx. 24ft long. Show 24ft on the ground.
Show someone actually
standing in Kennedy’s position. Otherwise they are meaningless and
totally misleading to some.
I think you will find
that your camera position will need to be moved much further back
therefore the slope height diminishes.
You know full well
there is a slope just south of the Kelly tree. Higher in fact than the
one you have demonstrated. To say there is not is simply not true. Again
You have said: "If
some one can show me I am wrong I would gladly concede I am wrong.”
Can I really believe
Again I ask.
With regards to the
StringyBark Creek Forum, saying you just had to give up, Mmmm.
Bill, you can still
access and post on that Forum but choose not to. I suspect that because
there is many an unanswered question I put to you in relation to the Two
Huts, the shingle hut and the one a few Yrds behind which the police
tent was pitched.
Your conclusions and
the huts just don’t add up. Either your conclusions are wrong or your
critique of the CSI@SBC report is wrong or both. Questions which up
until now have done your best to avoid.
These question are an
integral part of the story and need o be addressed.
Perhaps this should be
continued on this forum for all to see. Yes? "
Readers please notice how Glenn and his CSI team don't put anything up
Glenn says my images 'Then and Now' are not to scale !
Glenn, Why don't you put up your 'Then and Now' images
whether they are in scale
in scale or not !
Glenn, You say there is a slope just south of the Kelly tree 'Higher in
fact than the one you (me) have demonstrated.
Glenn, for us readers your slope need not be higher than in the Burman
photo, JUST show us a picture as per the Burman photo so we can all see
that Burman could have taken his photos there. ( at or near the Kelly
But Glenn, make sure your image is divided into 3 three parts, a bottom
third for the flat ground portion on which the logs sit /lay, then the
slope up one third, and what is left is trees and sky. One third for
PLEASE show us
your photo Then and Now.
Glenn, you can ask me all the questions you like, but until you provide
any the evidence for the Kelly tree site, it is no use nit picking about
' a few yards this way or that, or behind which hut a tent was pitched,
or what is a spring etc, etc, it is all irrelevant nonsense.
Glenn and his CSI team have relied mostly on written text by McIntyre
from his Memoirs that Mc himself states was not completed till 1902, or
24 years after the event. In his memoirs Mc will have re read all his
notes and tried to re write some to make them as coherent as possible,
but we cannot really be sure if when he wrote 70 yards he did not mean
70 feet, when 20 yards we read were steps, by either a long or short
legged person. We would doubt if MC did go back with a tape measure in
hand. There are typo errors -there are estimates and most is just guess
questions for which there are no answers.
If McIntyre said they pitched their tent behind an old hut, we could
then assume that hut must have had a front.
We do not know if there was the remains of a third hut that stood
besides, on or near the Bridle track ( now the road way) so we will
never know all those details. There were a party of three prospectors
occupying the spot when one Walter Lynch burnt down Percy Broomfields
'new hut'. We know of 2 ruined huts fireplaces and one had been burnt
down as reported in the local paper 15 months before the shootings and
the court witness was Sergeant Kennedy! Was the tent pitched behind the
remains of this hut?
In his memoirs Mc said the entrance of the tent faced East to the creek.
In the Herald account the 'special reporter' said the tent faced North.
The special Herald reporter is thought to be non other than G Wilson
Hall *, the prop of the Mansfield Gaurdian who six months later wrote
the Book The Outlaws of the Wombat Ranges.( *no proof but the Herald
wrote 'report' from our special reporter representative who has intimate
Glenn, you and
your team have provided nothing to substantiate your CSI case for the
Kelly tree scenario.
You have some allies over on another bad attitudes forum presenting
absolute lies about me- where one Poorflower is throwing up rubbish to
do with leaning trees, which last year I have answered conclusively see
Readers please, for the fun of it see their pathetic simpleton view of
nature. Science does not come into their heads.
These Poor flower people publicaly challenges me to provide further
answers to their silly questions as if I am a member of that hate forum.
Let me tell the readers, some little time back I did try to join up so I
could at least defend myself but was and remain rejected by them…. Had I
tried to register as a pseudonym they would have welcomed me, but I
refuse to be a pseudo that they all are. My attempt to registration was
around the same time Dee was struck off their list.
Glenn, we know you and Kelvyn Gill have fallen for Linton Briggs's half
baked Kelly tree scenario.
I remember well the day we all listened intently to Linton showing us
where the tent had stood - 20 feet west of the road and we all looked
around for where the logs in the Burman photo would have been laying.
Where was that slope?
continued next post
Last Edit: Feb 21, 2014
at 10:44am by
Post by bill on Feb 21, 2014 at 10:37am
Linton said he had believed in this spot
for 40 years, he was absolutely convinced and we all went about checking
the place out. I decided to do the slope test as in the Burman photo
with a long string line and spirit level protractor, For the highest
angle I could get was a mear 4 degrees- if looking south west. See map
page 11 view 3A.
When I pointed out this could not be the spot as there was no slope,
Linton was speechless me telling him that.
I had thrown him off ? The next day we continued on site and I showed
him the Burman photo again. To that Linton said he had re considered
everything and decided to turn his scenario around by 90 degrees!
I thought, wow, so much for a forty year old belief ! His next best
scenario is shown as 3B on map page11.
After turning his orientation around by 90 degrees, forgetting all the
shadow detail on the Burman photo which shows90 % coming from behind the
photographers left shoulder, we now have to have the sun high in the sky
to the south. gurrrr.
I stepped back and thought, I'm dealing with some very unscientific
people here and I took this photo-
You can clearly see there is no slope to be seen. - except maybe, just
maybe way across the creek some 200 metres east through the trees on the
east bank of SBC. What a joke.
Glenn, I can barely believe a man of your intelligence can keep coming
back without putting up anything that re-enforces your case. You need to
go by only primary source material that fits on the ground evidence and
you will pin point the spot.
Again we can see the aim now of the CSI team is to create doubt in the
readers mind that I am wrong, - and in the process they diminish their
For all readers if you have not been here before please read the CSI@SBC
Please remember all the blue text is mine to alert the team of their
weird wacky CSI report.
Last Edit: Feb 21, 2014
at 10:39am by
Post by Guest on Feb 21,
2014 at 1:24pm
So many questions in one go.
Bill. When you run away from another forum when things don’t go in your
favour and laugh it off tells me many things. You were not kicked off
but chose to go away.
Yes. The SBC forum may be a closed members only shop. But you can still
post. I have asked you politely to answer the questions I put to you on
that forum. On several occasions.
Then that is done dusted and finished.
Until such time you get what you get.
You now bring your thoughts across to another forum and start all over
again. You have bagged myself and the CSI@SBC team from the outset.
Insulted me on more than one occasion.
Wrote things on your web site which I/we could not respond to.
So I do thank you for giving me credit for some intelligence. But it is
kind of back handed when you say Kelvyn and myself have fallen for
Linton’s half baked Kelly tree scenario.
Yes. When you first showed me your site it was very convincing. As
things progressed and tested it unfortunately for you it did not fit.
5 members started out on the Investigating team. 4 came out. One
yourself against. I’m sorry to have disappointed you.
The team never intended to slam our findings down peoples throats.
Copies of the report were sent to DSE and the like for their
consideration. If people want a copy of the report they can buy one. Not
ideal but that’s the way it goes.
The cost covers the printing charges and the proceeds go to the
Glenrowan improvement society. The CSI@SBC team make no money nor want
money from the report.
Your comments on the report? Questionable.
I have presented a huge amount of information previously on other forums
– Stringybark Creek Forum / Kellycountry2000 forum.
The information in regards to the spring and descriptions near the Kelly
tree should really be enough for now.
As there is no spring at the two huts site.
Post by Guest on Feb 21, 2014 at
There should be a little private chatroom here for Glenn and Bill to
sort out their differences.
Then they can post what they agree on here.
Post by Dee on Feb 21, 2014 at
Bill I am going to read the CSI Report that you provided though I
realise that the final one might not be exactly the same and therefore
the CSI people will feel I am wasting my time. In the end I have a
feeling I am not going to pick sides. I feel I already know where it all
But what I want to say right now is that you all seem to have an amazing
passion for that place and an intense interest and knowledge about all
the goings on down there. It seems a pity that you agree so much about
almost everything but are so bitterly divided. Its not a war. Respect
each others passion opinions and knowledge and agree to disagree.
The photos that you have posted Bill are quite wonderful - I look at
that lovely bush and its hard to imagine that such a peaceful and
beautiful environment could be the place where such an appalling series
of violent murders took place. I think the most ghastly scene would have
been the hunting down of Kennedy, finally to stand over him collapsed in
the bush, pleading to be spared and then that final shot at point blank
range echoing through the bush and then silence returns....I am sure you
all think about this sort of thing in quiet moments when you are
Post by bill on Feb 21, 2014 at 6:57pm
Thanks Horrie, Dee and Glenn,
Thank you, a nice thought to get Glenn and I together for a chat.
I've had many chats with Glenn, he's been to our house and we agreed
about a whole lot of things over maps - layouts to get a scale on the
two huts site in accord with the Burman photos.
Glenn, I am one for fair discussion and would never have expected the
vindictive nasty onslaught that I have had to endure. Iam simply
presenting the facts.
It's a great credit to DEE to form this N K TRUTH forum, as I believe
there is so much miss truth out there, it takes a lot of courage to
stand up to these bullies. Perhaps it is a reflection of how
intimidating the whole Kelly saga was on the population in those days.
There is a Kelly mafia out there for all to see.
Dee, regarding the right site at SBC, you and other readers may say 'Oh,
why does it matter' ? Well, I think its a disgrace that the authorities
allowed a very false place to be sign posted when all along I told them
it was wrong by all the evidence, but I was not included in the SBC
discussion group. The CSI @sbc report - for what I show is 90% of their
final and if I show the rest it is even more ridiculous than the issue I
show which is bad enough.
If we all continue to tell lies, what do we learn from history?
Lets agree to dis agree, I am not running away from any forum Glenn
alludes to, it started out as an open forum and as time went on they
began to close sections to the public when they knew they were losing
the argument. I know I am right, but is not a good debate because
Glenn and his CSI team are not producing the evidence for their selected
site at the Kelly tree.
PS, Dee, I was going to put up a picture, but why aren't my pictures
shown in above postings where I wanted them to be shown. Have you
changed the settings? Now there are only image links?
Last Edit: Feb 21, 2014
at 7:58pm by
Post by Dee on Feb 21, 2014 at 9:04pm
Thanks for drawing this problem to my attention. I had been impressed by
the way you were making your posts. I would like everyone to be able to
post nice big pictures like you did.
I have just spent a couple of hours trying to work it out, searching all
the Help Forums for this Forum Board , and haven’t really come up with
anything. I have tried posting a picture of my own and using the “Add
Attachment” button at top right the best I seem to be able to do is get
a Thumbnail size picture which, if you click on it will open up to the
full sized Pic. Another Member said they couldn’t Log In a few days ago
and I don’t know what the problem was there either. I get the feeling
this Forum Boards template we use is a bit “buggy” but I am not literate
enough in Computer things to be able to take it any further.
Keep trying - it may sort itself out again sometime.
Last Edit: Feb 21, 2014
at 9:18pm by
Post by sarah on Feb 21, 2014 at 10:14pm
Dee, I would like to point out more bias by you in your
description of events in the Kelly story.
“I look at that lovely bush and its hard to imagine that such a peaceful
and beautiful environment could be the place where such an appalling
series of violent murders took place.”
There were no ‘murders’ at Stringybark Creek and although there was
violence and death that happened, it was not ‘violent murder’ as you so
Do you really know what happened there and have you read McIntyre’s
accounts of how Ned tried to get them to ‘bail up’ (surrender)?
I am now totally disillusioned with this forum and your supposed
Post by Guest on Feb 21, 2014 at
What is the date on the CSI@SBC copy of the report that Bill provided ?
If you would like a current copy I would be pleased to personally
deliver one to you. Do you live anywhere near Croydon?
Bill, you have said that : The CSI @sbc report - for what I show is 90%
of their final and if I show the rest it is even more ridiculous than
the issue I show which is bad enough.
Is that not being vindictive yourself?
Their are 97 pages in the current report. Yet you say you show 90% of
Furthermore why would I persist in asking you to return to a forum - if
I were loosing the argument?
Yet you also say that if we continue to tell lies, what do we learn from
I am also for a fair discussion and an honest one.
So keep it straight and I will be more helpful.
What shall we agree to disagree on to start with?
Post by Dee on Feb 21, 2014 at 11:48pm
Glenn thats a kind offer - do you
mean Croydon in Sydney? I have downloaded the copy that Bill provided
but have been too busy to study it so far. If you want something to
agree to disagree on, am I right in thinking you disagree about the
orientation of the Burman Photos, based on where you think the light is
Sarah, if you look up legal definitions of murder I think you will find
it is accurate to describe those deaths as murders. I will open a new
thread so this one can be left to discuss the
More to come in due