The Great debate about Stringybark Creek   PAGE 5
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 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

Man stands at fireplace of one of two huts, the police tent stood behind where this photo was taken.The Kelly gang came from left of little hill above.


GuestGuest Avatar


Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 2:49pm

Brian, which 90% of Bill's claims are totally incorrect?

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 guff.


Guest Avatar


Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 3:11pm

Hello Pat,
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!



Guest Avatar


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!!!


Junior Member

sarah Avatar


Posts: 56

Post by sarah on Feb 27, 2014 at 3:39pm

Feb 27, 2014 at 1:46pm Brian said:  Here we go again ... forumjar.

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 sarah


Guest Avatar


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.

You mention '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.



Guest Avatar


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.



Guest Avatar


Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 5:05pm

Hello Sarah,

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.

Signing off.



Dee Avatar



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 evidence.

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 tent.



GuestGuest Avatar

Post by Guest on Feb 27, 2014 at 6:22pm

Fair enough. Thanks Dee


Junior Member

sarah Avatar


Posts: 56


Post by sarah on Feb 27, 2014 at 6:45pm

Hello Brian,

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!



Guest Avatar


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.




Dee Avatar


Posts: 100


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 Dee


Guest Avatar


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 Bill's presentation.

That's why this is the Never Ending Story.

We'll be back he said, we said, he said again.



Guest Avatar

Post by Guest on Feb 28, 2014 at 10:11am

Hello Sarah,
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 ( ) he has finally agreed to open the forum to all visitors.



Guest Avatar


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 botanist.
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 copies).
Sine Die



Guest Avatar


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 not impressed.

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



Guest Avatar


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?



Guest Avatar


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


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 continue...

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??


New Member

bill Avatar

























































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 that?

Although Alan captured the 'non-event' beautifully there are a few things that I should mention, one being how the CSI team was formed.

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 like this-

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 things.

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 Symposium’.

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 DSE.
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 truth forum.

Dee, stick to your guns and delete all those postings that do not add to the debate on any specific topic thread.


PS, Image.
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.




Guest Avatar

Post by Guest on Mar 1, 2014 at 5:55pm

Indeed Horrie go get the report as you certainly need to spend some time
A. Reading it,
B. taking the effort to consider the material therein which is ALL about the investigation and the results concluded from this work
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 stuff.
F.AND I spent an hour with Thomas's Granddaughter after the presentation and her discussion with me was most cordial and interesting.
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 BDs site).
By for now I have other matters Kelly to work on.



More to come in due course
Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25