The Murder Of Constable Fitzpatrick

It had been claimed that Ned Kelly had taken up arms in April 1878 for the intention of shooting police but as six months had passed since the alleged shooting of Constable Fitzpatrick (who would later be dismissed from the police force as a liar, drunkard and perjurer) and the Stringybark Creek tragedy, there was not a robbery or any other offence reported of having been committed by Ned or his brother Dan. After his mother was convicted (and two innocent men) for aiding and abetting in the shooting of Constable Fitzpatrick, (Judge Barry sentenced Ned to fifteen years gaol without a trial?) Ned returned (was Ned involved?) with the intention of working a still to make whisky, as it was the only means to obtain money quickly to procure a new

The police had openly boasted of shooting the Kelly brothers rather than arresting them. (The four policemen they were disguised as prospectors, armed to the teeth and had leather straps especially made for their horses to carry the bodies out of the Wombat Ranges) Constable McIntyre’s evidence shows that Ned did not intend to murder the police, as he swears himself that Ned could have shot them without saying a word and it stands to reason that four men with the intention of murdering two men would have shot them at the first favourable opportunity. They would never have called on the two policemen to bail up and throw up their arms. Constable McIntyre’s evidence shows that Ned had him covered when he threw his arms up and surrendered, so if his intention was to take life he would have shot McIntyre when he had him first covered but according to McIntyre’s own evidence, Ned took his rifle off him and covered Constable Lonigan as he was in the act of running to a tree and drawing his

(Ned Kelly stood trial for the murder of Constable Lonigan) Judge Barry said that it is unlawful to disarm the police (the police were not in uniform but in plain clothes) but then one needs to know the difference between disarming them and with the full intention of murdering them. (Judge Barry refused Ned Kelly the option of self defence) Even police evidence shows that Ned and the Gang were anything but bloodthirsty as they never mistreated man, woman or child and always refrained from doing a cowardly act. The Crown Prosecutor even tried to make a point of Ned Kelly’s bloodthirstiness in wearing armour but Ned believed the armour enabled the Gang to rob the guarded banks (many of the banks in North-East Victoria were guarded by artillerymen) and disarm the police without taking life. Even at Glenrowan Ned was determined to capture Superintendent Hare, Superintendent O’Connor and the blacktrackers for the purpose of exchanging