Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 2:49pm
Brian, which 90% of Bill's claims are
It is difficult to decide anything when there is a
washing-machine full of old gripes and misinformation always
chugging away in the background.
Let's see the CSI presentation, without all the accompanying
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 3:11pm
Please note; I remain neutral and will not take sides for or
against the csi Team/Denheld. However, I will openly voice my
opinion upon our investigation to date.
Yes, I agree. Misinformation is riff on both sides of the fence.
However. Bill's investigation is leaning more on the lower side
of the scale. Why is this so? well you need not look far!
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 3:21pm
I'm glad Dee speaks up as she does!
After her shabby treatment on the Ned Kelly Forum boards, where
the nameless moderator took sides against her, it is ludicrous
to suggest that moderators like Bruce, Trent, Brad and others do
not express their opinions. They do so by censoring comments,
providing critical 'reviews' and commentaries, and expelling
members with unwelcome views.
Let Freedom Ring, Dee!!!
Post by sarah on Feb 27, 2014 at 3:39pm
Feb 27, 2014 at 1:46pm Brian said: Here we go again
You should know Brian as you are one of
them. Funny how Dee had a go at me for accusing people of being
from there, yet does not say anything to the Forum Jar Trolls
who accuse me. It just goes to show that what is being said
about you all is true.
Last Edit: Feb
27, 2014 at 3:42pm by
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 3:45pm
Brian, I think you
meant 'rife' - a riff is a musical interlude. But that isn't why
I am having trouble with your posts.
'our investigation'. What investigation is that? Bill's
investigation, you say, is on the lower end of the scale. What
scale is that? We need not look far, you say, to understand.
I got the Bill
is 90% wrong jibe. I just don't get what you are trying to say.
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 4:02pm
Sarah !?!? You're still here. Why?
The other day you promised you were off:
"I'm not wasting anymore of my time with the uninformed here".
But you are still here, and still using the word 'trolls' that
Dee objected to.
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 5:05pm
Indeed I visited the jar on several occasions and wanted very
little to do with it after only a few visits. The Jar was no
place for me.
lmfao thanks for pointing out the spelling error.
Dee, I wish you well as I do for your forum.
Post by Dee on Feb 27, 2014 at 6:08pm
Glenn I am sorry if you think I am patronising
you. It was not my intention. I don't really understand why this
issue has become such a divisive one in the Kelly Community, or
why it seems to have become so very personal but as you all seem
to want to keep discussing it, I am trying to get you all to
focus on an issue and not just sledge one another.
I have already made my position in regard to SBC quite clear
both on this forum and on the one that chucked me out : there
are no irrefutable facts that conclusively settle the argument,
just arguments based on interpretations of various bits of
Now Bills latest contribution IS impressive - whether you agree
with his conclusions or not, he has made some careful
observations and constructed a really interesting case. Even you
admitted that. But my point, made in my last post was this "The
crucial step is working out what are shadows and what is
sunlight falling on the various surfaces." If you agree with
Bill about what is shadow and what is sunlight then the rest
follows - but if not, it doesn't. Bills entire argument hangs on
that tiny thread right there, that what he says is shadow and
what he says is sunlight is irrefutably true. But is
it? Obviously you don't think so.
What I wish you would do Glenn is put up your photo and
demonstrate the difficulties you have with the light angles so
we can all see what you're taking about. Please don't think I am
trying to set you up, I would like to have both arguments up so
people can read them and make their own minds up. And then maybe
we can move on and discuss something else perhaps?
A point that is important for me about SBC is that events at SBC
did NOT take place in one PARTICULAR spot but over quite a wide
area which included the Gangs hut, the Kelly Tree, the site of
the ambush, the place where Kennedy got to, and so on. The whole
place is full of history, not just one spot where there was a
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 6:22pm
Fair enough. Thanks Dee
Post by sarah on Feb 27, 2014 at 6:45pm
If you are not one of those who have mounted a hate campaign
against all Kelly related authors, forums and members of those
forum I apologize. Your remark, “Here we go again ... forumjar.”,
lead me to believe you were one of them. How many of them have
you visited as there is more than one and a lot that have been
deleted because of their hate campaign and slander. It is not
hard to recognize who are from there and posting here, you just
have to look at the comments!
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 6:49pm
I will wait a
while and see if the SBC forum is re opened first.
Will also need to talk to the other members before deciding if
we want to proceed with this.
So continue on without me for the time being.
Post by Dee on Feb 27, 2014 at 8:17pm
Sarah I did indeed ask you to refrain from
accusing people of being Trolls from ForumJar.
I have re-read a number of your posts and it seems ForumJar is a
special interest of yours. I presume you know what you are
talking about when you say there have been a lot that have been
deleted, and you are able to recognise people who post here on
the basis of their postings there. Its apparent that you have
been following and dare I say probably contributing to it for
some time. That is your right.
I also said, and I will say it again, that what people do on
other forums is nobodies business but their own. What I care
about is what people do on THIS forum. I don't care about the
identity of anyone on this Forum, if they are trolls or members
of other Forums or Kelly Haters or Kelly Sympathisers. What I
care about is what people WRITE on this Forum and I won't allow
this Forum to become a place where all people do is attack and
abuse and accuse other members. I am becoming concerned at the
tone of your posts and that you have continued to do something
that I specifically asked you not to do.
I am not going to ban people from this site, which is what
happens on other Forums, because I believe in allowing free
speech. However there are limits to what is acceptable. What I
WILL do is remove Posts after giving Posters a fair warning.
Please try to be constructive and debate the subjects rather
than the Posters in future, because I really don't want to
be forced to remove Posts.
Last Edit: Feb
27, 2014 at 8:18pm by
Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 9:47pm
I had a horrible premonition that CSI would
pull out at the last moment.
If CSI ever present their site, everybody will have forgotten
That's why this is the Never Ending Story.
We'll be back he said, we said, he said again.
Post by Guest on Feb 28, 2014 at 10:11am
That is fine. lets move on and put it behind us and get into the
spirit of a friendly and intelligent debate.
P.s After a lengthy discussion with Chuck (
stringybarkcreek.forumotion.com/ ) he has finally agreed to
open the forum to all visitors.
Post by Guest on Feb 28, 2014 at 3:18pm
Here we go again.
Playing the man seems to be the only way DENHELD can continue an
argument (it’s certainly not a discussion!) His selective
recollection stated in his posting of Feb 26, 2014 at 6:59pm
about his “discussion” with Linton Briggs (a man of great
integrity and knowledge of the area around and about the Creek
precinct – Linton has utilised this country for over 40 years in
his pursuit of commercial bee keeping activities and “knows the
country like the back of his hand”) needs comment.
On that occasion referred to by DENHELD there was also present :
Me, Gary Dean and Glenn Standing) so let us not blindly accept
DENHELD as the repository of all conversations.
IN FACT on that day the discussions were many and the one that
DENHELD ascribes to was about the matter of the distance from
the Creek to the police camp site/Tent and if McIntyre was
ABSOLUTELY ACCURATE in his distance of 70 yards then the tent
position would have been approximately just off the road reserve
on its western edge. A perfectly reasonable assumption to make
except of course for DENHELD who simply could not as he had his
spot further to the South.
Now much work subsequently by the then 4 member CSI Team, and
allowing for a variation of McIntyre’s 70 yards (he certainly
did not carry around with him a tape measure) then the tent’s
position could fall within an area of a lesser distance or in
fact a longer distance which if a lesser distance would place
the tent position to the Eastern side of the road reserve.
SO let’s not get too excited about the DENHELD statement.
Following much further investigation by the CSI Team we
concluded that the more likely position for the tent was on the
Eastern side of the road reserve. Including by the use of the
Burman pics wherein the tree known today as “The Kelly Tree” can
be seen as a far younger tree in the Burman A fact able to be
considered by talking with and site visits by a qualified
Now as to DENHELD’s statement somewhere amongst his stuff that
no hut remains can be found at the CSI site – ABSOLUTE RUBBISH
and he would know it: The team has identified the remains of a
hut nearby (its documented in our report) and makes the
observation that Ned asked McIntyre “Who was in the hut” (Now
why would he need to ask if he was allegedly with McIntyre
standing between or near the two stone piles?
I also recall that when work was done by others at the two rock
piles that it was demonstrated that the distance from the creek
to these piles fell a significant distance short of the 70
yards. But no problem, DENHELD would subsequently say that the
course of the Creek cannot be used as it would have been altered
by mining activity or whatever (Note it was then a Creek, and
not a Spring!!) so distance became a useless measure of
assessment. WELL Not at the CSI suggested location though).
And for those who find it objectionable to purchase a copy of
the report try asking for your local library to do an
inter-library loan and obtain the report for you OR visit either
the State Library of Victoria, or the National Library Canberra
as it is in both their holdings (The State Library has TWO
Post by Guest on Feb 28, 2014 at 7:53pm
Are we there yet?
Kelvyn, nobody can accuse you of being brief and to the point.
I have read the above four or five times and still can't make
any sense of it.
Surely there is someone on your team who can do dot-points?
If the above is the CSI presentation in response to Bill's, I'm
We want more than he said, we said, he said, over and over.
Where does that get us?
I'm almost tempted to get the report on inter-library loan. But
promise me it isn't as dreary as suggested above, and that it
isn't just a 97-page attack on Bill.
Post by Guest on Feb 28, 2014 at 8:36pm
OK, I reread the long post and finally got it. I
had to slow right down to slow conversation pace.
But this threw up other problems. Surely Ned asked McIntyre who
was in THE TENT, and not who was in The HUT?
There were no standing huts near the police camp at either site.
Linton is a bee-keeper, and Gary a Glenrowan shop-keeper who
believes Dan Kelly escaped to Qld. You, I think, are an ex cop.
How can the CSI Team conduct investigations or research or
analysis when you are just a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs?
Post by Guest on Feb 28, 2014 at 11:33pm
Has anything changed? This has been going on
forever and a day!
Alan Crichton did this blog about Bill Denheld and the CSI Team
at the 2012 Ned Kelly Weekend at Beechworth (http://www.ironoutlaw.com/html/powder_dry_24.html):
At 9.30 I took my seat in the
Town Hall and was surprised to see the room fill almost to
capacity. The presenters for this event were to be Kelvyn Gill,
Gary Dean, Glenn Standing and Linton Briggs, but due to
unforseen circumstances, the presentation was left in the hands
of Kelvyn Gill and Glenn Standing. When three burly coppers
walked in and stood at the back of the hall, I started to get
very excited. “You bloody beauty, I thought, she’ll be on now.”
What I was hoping for was the appearance of Bill Denheld, and
who should walk through the door … Bill Denheld.
To give you all a little insight into this presentation, it’s
all about locating the exact position of the police camp, where
two police officers in 1878 were shot and killed by the Kelly
Gang at Stringybark Creek in the Wombat ranges. A third officer
was shot and killed in a running gun battle with Ned Kelly and
died some distance from the police camp.
Now I admit that I am no expert on this subject, but the men I
have just mentioned have been studying this subject for many
years. Some years ago Ian Jones declared that through his
investigation, the police campsite was found to be on the East
side of Stringybark Creek and released papers in November 1993
at a seminar in Beechworth to prove it. Now all was well and
good until another expert on this Sringybark affair, namely Bill
Denheld comes along and tips Jonesy’s apple cart over and says
the camp is on the West side of the creek. With the Governing
bodies backing Mr Jones, they go ahead and build a fancy walking
path through the supposed campsite. Well this was like waving a
red flag in front of a bull, namely Bill Denheld.
With extensive research on his website, along with thousands of
posts on a forum, he had now, from what I can gather, got the
support of the four men who have just released this CSI@SBC
report which also concurs to an extent with Mr Denheld‘s. But
that’s not the end of the story. Before long, the forum implodes
with cries of copyright breaches, and a big shit fight had long
time researchers and members pulling their posts out left right
and centre, and heading for the hills. I don’t know what has
happened of late, but it now has Mr Denheld not totally agreeing
with the four blokes who used to be his mates. Thus my
excitement at Bill Denheld’s presence at the CSI event. We shall
With Kelvyn Gill heading the presentation, a back screen,
laptop, and Glenn Standing being the pointer and filling in on
what Kelvyn had forgotten to say, or to explain in more detail
what Kelvyn was trying to say, all things were going well.
The whole reasoning behind this study is to locate the true
location of that police camp. The screen was filled with aerial
photographs, diagrams of geographical study, weather conditions
at the time re. flooding creeks, slopes of trees, slopes of
ground, Burman photos of the crime scene taken just after the
shootings,etc,etc. It was all up there for everyone to see.
From what I had just seen and heard, the campsite could well be
under where the public lavatories now stand. I just don’t know.
I do know one thing, the sword grass is called Ghania/Sieberiana
… I think. There’s something else I know: Kel, if you’re doing a
presentation like this, without a laser pointer, have a bit of
pity for your mate, Glenn Standing. I reckon Glenn covered more
than a few miles running up and down those steps leading to the
stage every time you pointed your finger into the screen of the
laptop. Well done Glenn.
There was one person who was also well versed in the story, and
that was Thomas McIntyre’s Granddaughter, who also happened to
be in the audience. As the presentation came to an end, it was
now question time, and I could see the beads of sweat forming on
Kelvyn Gill’s forehead as Bill Denheld stood up with his
shopping list of Stringybark questions. With each question
asked, you could tell by the disgruntled look on Kelvyn Gill’s
face and his rising voice, that there would be no agreement
reached here today. A voice, aimed at Bill Denheld, rose up from
the rear of the hall from one of the hefty coppers. Bill turned
sharply, and with a voice of sheer defiance, asked the question
… Who are you … the Sheriff??
Post by bill on Mar 1, 2014 at 5:45pm
That was a pretty good write up
- we laughed all the
way through and as before when Alan first posted it.
The interesting thing was that I was alerted to their CSI
presentation and it seemed possible that I might get to present
my case on stage as a formal debate. I applied for that but I
was knocked back. One can only assume ‘The Beechworth festival’
was being run by mates of CSI, so what hope would I have of
Although Alan captured the 'non-event' beautifully there are a
few things that I should mention, one being how the CSI team was
In May June 2009 I was invited to be part of the documentary "
Ned Kelly Uncovered" about the archaeology of the Glenrowan Inn.
My involvement was about the Stringybark Creek 'start of the
Kelly gang and the Inn siege was the end'.
Director of Renegade Films Alex
West visited me, and we discussed how SBC could be woven into
the script being the place where the Kelly gang evolved. I had
created a simple story board and an outline of the disagreement
about the actual location. Mine being diagonally across the
creek from the Jones site, so Ian’s site was not far out from
being the true site.
Filming was to begin two weeks later and a phone call was to let
me know when I would be required to be on site. That phone call
never came, and it is my assertion Ian Jones saw to that.
Seemed the last thing Ian Jones
wanted was for someone like me to stand up in the middle of an
important film shoot with Ian and UK presenter Tony Robinson (of
Time Team fame) and for me to say sorry Ian but it was over
there. So, not surprisingly I was replaced by Linton Briggs who
also happened to be owner of the Glenrowan Inn site and on whose
land the doco was being filmed, and Linton and Ian were scripted
into, and my being replaced by Linton must have seemed a
convenient compromise. But Ian must have known Linton also had
ideas about where the shootout had occurred, but apparently this
would be smoothed over – or Ian had hoped !
Now, although I was not actually present at SBC on the day of
the filming, I have been told what took place. It goes something
Ian Jones was showing Tony his east bank site and all was going
well when Linton interjected (out of script), and confronted the
pair to say no no no Ian, you’re wrong the site is way over
there. All great for a documentary as Alex had told me things
only work well if there is an element of surprise. The cameras
were rolling but soon came to a stop as there was too much
controversy for Alex to allow. Where would it all lead? Linton
took over the show changing location with camera and sound crew
following in hot pursuit- they ended up at Linton’s spot near
the Kelly tree on the other side of the road, and by all
accounts fisty cuffs nearly occurred, but exasperated Ian spat
the dummy and stalked off down the road being chased by Tony.
The show was over and consequently not much footage of the SBC
segment was used.
The following days and week- filming continued at the Glenrowan
Inn site. Carla and I visited the site but did not see Ian or
Linton there while archaeologists were scraping and digging out
what looked like a cellar. The next day the TV stations cameras
were all there, including ABC TV Stateline presenter Cheryl Hall
and crew who Gary had directed over to me to ask if I knew SBC
and could I take them there. Of course I said, but not only
that, Heritage Victoria had that same day announced that SBC and
environs would finally be given official ' Heritage listing
status, which I had nominator back in 2004.
Because of the dispute between Ian and Linton at SBC, a few
weeks had passed when Gary suggested there should be a proper
investigation into SBC, for firstly there was Ian's east bank
patch, them my two huts site, then Linton's Kelly tree area, not
to mention the picnic ground and Sheila Hutchinson and Fay
Johnson's parish plan maps that showed a 1885 map where the
Kelly’s shot the police some 160 metres further down the creek
from a similar map only one year earlier near the Kelly tree. It
was time to do something about it. Then I started to organise
Previously 2008 I had spent a weekend with Gary and friend
Linton clearing the Glenrowan Inn site of scrub and rubbish so
they could conduct a Geo Magnetic scan of the block to see if
they could locate the cellar that Dan and Steve may have got
into when the fire destroyed the original Inn, However, I got to
know Linton and he had told me he did not agree with my two huts
site scenario of which I had given him a printed copy. However
if we were ever going to have a proper investigation Linton
should be on the team as should Ian Jones, but after what had
happened between them at SBC, not to mention Ian's
un-willingness to concede he may be wrong, it was not seen as
possible for Ian to be part of the team although I just hoped it
was possible as he is the person who could settle all this. No
name for the investigation had been decided, although I had
headed emails and field notes for the members with ‘SBC
I had much earlier on had good email exchanges with Glenn
Standing who had been reading my webpages, he was questioning
and analysing some finer points of the shoot-out – he was man
for detail - so he was a possible member. There was Kelvyn Gill
who was still trying to have his book published. We have Gary
Dean who was present the day I found one of the fireplaces and
whom, with me had undertaken one preliminary archaeological dig
of a rubbish hole near the larger of the huts fireplaces which
turned up some interesting stuff - all with permission of the
We have Gary's friend Linton the senior member with great
interest for the Kelly story and Glenn Standing. On the surface,
a better cross section of well-balanced heads to sort out SBC
once and for all, so I thought. To suggest we were all mates no,
just interested bodies.
As organiser for the team I had emailed all parties the
parameters for the investigation. We would all put our thoughts
on paper and the table to discuss the whys and wherefore and
this angle or that to eliminate all that was not supported by
primary sources or texts. In addition I would record all
discussions on site where possible using digital voice recorder.
( all copies available on CD)
We would not make any public announcements unless we all agreed,
that was the deal. We had several on site meetings for show and
tell but Gary only came the once on our last onsite meeting and
on that occasion he remained undecided although he said to me he
thought the two huts site 'looked about right. This was just
before the Glenrowan Siege Dinner 26 June 2009.
Then at that dinner, without my presence ‘they jumped the gun’
announcing the so named CSI@SBC team had agreed to the Kelly
tree site. This was far from what was agreed as we were still to
come to a conclusion in order to make our investigations public,
I then up loaded this webpage while still a work in progress.
At this point of time SBC forums sprung up, the first being on
KC2000 which hosted 6 forum threads on the subject by Nov 2009.
Right from the start forum participants formed groups –there are
those that quickly lend support to very shaky suppositions
without having any evidence to back it up - with truth being the
victim time and again. There were splits between pro and con
sympathisers and their descendants, where certain subjects could
not be discussed in fear their precious forums may not appeal to
the majority audience.
I have never seen anything so divisive as Kelly enthusiasts
squabbling over a foot, a yard or a bone. Despite years of
careful analysis we still have east bankers, Kelly tree neigh
Sayers opposed rational debaters. It is as if forum pages have
become gang land turf stamping grounds.
As wonderful as forums are there remains a huge problem when a
guest can just jump in using any name they like, accuse, abuse
write derogatory remarks towards genuine people who elsewhere
are denied access to reply, where they censor, delete important
postings that do not suit their argument, where they start out
as open forums then when the purpose of their argument does not
go their way they tweak settings so critical images, links in
postings don’t work or cannot be seen by anyone who accesses the
webpage, they then close to members only.
What a way to waste your time.
We have to thank Dee for creating this genuine open Ned Kelly
Dee, stick to your guns and delete all those postings that do
not add to the debate on any specific topic thread.
It shows Kelvyn Gill with his back to the only slope along SBC
which proves the true site.
Notice how the foreground tree is lit exactly the same way
without shadows as in the Burman photos.
The picture was taken around 2 pm or a little later. You can see
the shadow lines coming from behind
the photographer over his right shoulder which fits exactly with
the Burman photos.
Kelvyn is standing near where Constable Lonigan was shot.
Post by Guest on Mar 1, 2014 at 5:55pm
Horrie go get the report as you certainly need to spend some
A. Reading it,
B. taking the effort to consider the material therein which is
ALL about the investigation and the results concluded from this
C. We don't waste any paper "bagging Bill" but his site gets a
mention as to our recommendations on how it should be recognised
D. Bill leads with his pathetic "Bagging" as if such tripe will
sway the interested person to his (BD's) point of view. He has
now for at least 2 years spent much time playing the man as it
seems it is the only way he can get his head around the fact
that his site does not meet the many other PRIMARY (a word he
likes to use) matters of evidence which he has NEVER ADDRESSED
LET ALONE REFUTED.
E. So, thanks for the lecture, and repeating Alan's somewhat
myopic and slanted story. I have a video of the presentation so
I was well able to see my "Performance" Alan's florid crap about
"beads of sweat" just shows the vein in which he penned his
F.AND I spent an hour with Thomas's Granddaughter after the
presentation and her discussion with me was most cordial and
So there are your dot points preceded with letters of the
alphabet in case you don't understand this way of mine.
PS A complex investigation is NOT A DOT POINT way of doing
justice to the CSI Team's work.
And now I am going to make this a really long posting, so I hope
you can sustain your concentration.
Go get on a good pair of walking boots, and walk the length of
Stringybark Creek Road, but do it like this -
Walk about 5 metres to the west of the road, then retrace your
walk this time 5 metres to the East of the road (or vice versa
if you wish). Keep an eagle eye out for where you can see Spear
Grass (You need the CSI report to understand the characteristics
of this grass and the growing conditions it needs to survive and
flourish). Make a note of the ONE AND ONLY area along the road
where you find this grass. (Clue - its no where to be seen at
By for now I have other matters Kelly to work on.