Comparison Of Eric Edgar Cooke And Ned Kelly

858 Words4 Pages

Introduction:

The expression, “Something that's good can still have a little bit of bad in it, and something that's bad still has a little bit of good.” Is a perfect illustration of Eric Edgar Cooke and Ned Kelly, two of Australia’s most historical individuals. Cooke was a vilified serial killer who terrorized the City of Perth, that appeared good sometimes. Whereas Kelly was a glorified hero who also committed crimes. As a result, both individuals portray the concept of good vs evil equally. This essay explores the idea of Eric Edgar Cooke and Ned Kelly being either represented as glorified or vilified, regarding one another's inhumane or humane behaviour.

Paragraph 1:

Eric Edgar Cooke has been vilified for his inhumane crimes, however there are aspects about him that suggest he …show more content…

One quote that highlights why Ned Kelly was considered a bad person, comes from Judge Redmond Barry, who dealt with Kelly’s court case. As stated, “You, Edward Kelly, stand condemned of wilful murder. You are a disgrace to your own countrymen.” This quotation not only emphasis Kelly’s unlawful crimes, but saw Kelly as a disgrace, who inflicted significant damage to property’s and people. According to Detective Ward, who in which was involved with the investigation of Ned Kelly, “Kelly was a dangerious criminal who threatened the saftey and security of the people of Victoria.” This quote suggests that, Ned Kelly was viewed as a criminal who presented himself as a threat to the community,as a result of his unethical decisions. It is crucial to acknowledge the negative consequences of his actions, rather than romanticizing him as a hero. Although it is difficult to defend Kelly’s behaviour as anything other than a criminal, his actions were illegal and harmed other people. Therefore, it is understandable why people may view him as a villain rather than a glorified