The core belief of people who defend Ned Kelly is that Kelly only became a criminal because of the harassment and abuse that he and his family received at the hands of the police. They believe his life was an heroic stand against police maltreatment and persecution of himself and his family. Here is part of a larger statement about Ned Kelly that they love to quote in support of this belief:
“If my life teaches the public that men are made mad by bad treatment, and if the police are taught they may not exasperate to madness men they persecute and ill treat my life will not be entirely thrown away. People who live in large towns have no idea of the tyrannical conduct of the police in country places far removed from Court; they have no idea of the harsh and overbearing manner in which they execute their duty or how they neglect their duty and abuse their powers’…..”
However, contrary to the Kelly apologist’s belief, these words weren’t ever spoken by Ned Kelly: they were made up for him in August 1880 by his solicitor David Gaunson, as part of his attempt to soften Kellys image before his upcoming trial for murder. But much more importantly, this claim that Kelly was a ‘police-made’ criminal is simply not true. What the historical record shows is that the police and the courts responses to Kellys earliest brushes with the law were nowhere near as harsh or punitive as they could have been, and seemed to be aimed at supporting him and encouraging him to escape the downward trajectory his life seemed to be on. Sadly, for all of us, those attempts were unsuccessful and Kellys downward spiral into worsening criminality continued to its ultimate conclusion on the gallows in the Old Melbourne Gaol.
I previously showed in Facebook posts how when aged 14, Kelly got away with an assault on a Chinese merchant, and how his mother got off a charge of selling illegal liquor, when in both cases, if Kellys complaint about harsh treatment and persecution had been true, convictions could have been obtained with ease. The fact that they escaped conviction exposes Kellys complaints about persecution and harassment as just the usual immature whining and complaining that lawbreakers indulge themselves with, in place of acting like a grownup and taking responsibility for the mess they created for themselves.
Today I have yet another example of police leniency to discuss: the dropping of several charges that were laid against Kelly when he was 14, for the many serious crimes he committed alongside Harry Power, the notorious highway robber. When Power was caught, he was sent to prison for 15 years, but Kelly, who admitted to helping Power, walked away scot free.
What happened was that Kelly was arrested in early May 1870, and charged with several counts of highway robbery under arms. The charges related to several armed robberies of innocent and terrified travellers. However, Harry Power was still at large and the police were desperate to catch him, so Superintendents Nicolson and Hare made a special trip to Benalla to interview Ned Kelly themselves, a highly unusual intervention.
Clearly, Kelly gave Nicolson information about Powers whereabouts, because the next month, with some additional help from one of Ned Kellys uncles, Power was caught. In return, the Police told the Benalla Police Court that they were unable to find the two witnesses who could identify Kelly, and so the charge of Robbery in company at Kilfera on March 16th, and another of Robbery under arms near Seymour on the 30th were dropped. We know police bent the rules in making their deal with Ned Kelly because the following month it was reported that the two witnesses, Murray and O’Leary , complained that the statement that they had failed to identify Kelly at Benalla was ‘erroneous. They were not confronted with him’. Claiming to be unable to locate witnesses was the excuse the police gave to the Court to justify dropping the charges against Kelly.
Kelly next faced the Kyneton Court and a third charge of Robbery under arms, this time at Lauriston on April 20th. After an initial remand, that charge was also dropped, and Ned Kelly was free to go. Kelly borrowed £2 from the generous local sergeant James Babington for a short stay in a local hotel and then another 25 shillings for his brother-in-law Alex Gunn when he arrived penniless to take Kelly home. Kelly broke his promise to repay Babington who eventually was reimbursed by the Police department. Kelly famously later wrote back to Babington asking if he could help stop the rumour about Kellys betrayal which led to Kelly believing everyone regarded him as a ‘black snake’.
Its also reported that while in custody Nicolson had a ‘serious talk’ with Ned Kelly and “got him to listen favourably to a proposal to quit the bad company he was in and go to a station in New South Wales. Kelly had not then committed any offence and seemed somewhat eager to go, but one of his relatives got hold of him, and took him back to Greta. The opportunity to save him from the career of crime upon which he subsequently entered was thus unhappily lost.”
The notable feature of these crimes is that Kelly apologists have never denied they happened, whereas most of the others they’ve tried to explain away or justify in various ways – Kelly didn’t assault Ah Fook or shoot Fitzpatrick, he only killed in self-defence, his ‘crimes’ were acts of war…but Ive never read a Kelly apologist deny that Ned Kelly was Harry powers ‘Apprentice’!
The other important feature of these crimes is that they occurred in what we might call Ned Kellys formative years, as far as his criminal career was concerned and his treatment was more than fair. This was supposed to be the time when Kelly and his family were being treated harshly by police, and persecuted, but the record proves the opposite. It also shows how the Kellys were more than happy to co-operate with police when there was something in it for them: in this case, Ned betrayed Harry Power for his freedom and his uncle betrayed Power for a massive financial reward: £500 in 1870 is the equivalent of almost $150,000 in 2026!
These facts expose Kellys allegations of police persecution and harsh treatment being the cause of his criminality as not just disingenuous but as lies and utterly hypocritical. And this is the guy the Kelly apologists think was a righteous crusader…
Isn’t it staggering how rapidly the Kelly mythology collapses in disarray when the historical facts are exposed? The Kelly legend is a con job on the Australian people. The rumour about Kelly being a ‘black snake’ was proved to be true.