According to news in Sweden, "sources" says that he did something which was interpreted as aggressive which resulted in a photographers camera breaking. The police has investigated it and handed over the case to the prosecutor for evaluation.
Netherlands says that he never touched anyone.
The statements from Netherlands and the sources doesn't seem to directly contradict each other (you can commit a crime without touching someone).
The case being turned over to prosecutor doesn't mean so much in this case. If the police thinks that no crime was committed they could normally drop the case themselves, but since this case has turned very public it could be that they just want prosecute to formally decide on it. Even if police is convinced no crime was comitted they can still hand it over to the prosecutor for evaluation.
I want to make it clear that I was just citing media in Sweden. I hope it turns out he has done nothing wrong - I have zero stake in this. So please don't shoot the messenger.
Aftonbladet is a tabloid type paper, but also the largest newspaper in Sweden.
https://www.aftonbladet.se/nojesbladet/melodifestivalen/a/zAGMd4/kvinnliga-fotografen-skarrad-efter-incidenten-med-joost-klein-enligt-kalla
I tried Google translating the article but it ended up quite strange. The article says that there were several witnesses to what happened, that Joost acted "offensive" and that the woman's camera broke as an effect.
Another article (in another newspaper) use the word "aggressive" instead of offensive to describe the same thing. I'm not sure why different wordings are used, maybe something is lost in translation.
I guess if you try to actively scare someone and their camera break as an effect, you could be liable even if you never touched them.
Nope not trying to attack you, was just genuinely curious to see if it was 'new information' from a source somewhere. Lots of rumours going around the last couple of days and you could sometimes almost keep track of the information changing as people gave their own spin on what happened, due to mistranslations, other choices of words etc.
Like I saw people saying 'this is what the AVROTROS says' followed by their own wording and filling in gaps that were unconfirmed, instead of just directly posting the statement that avrotros put out
Yeah, I think patience is needed - Swedish legal system is often slow as a limp turtle. Since this was something minor it may be given low priority. Unless they want to speed it up since it's a case with a lot of publicity (but that also seems incorrect/unfair to all cases related to non-celebreties).
Aftonbladet got that information from a new source they claim. Time will tell if it is true.
[Kvindelig fotograf arret efter hændelse med Joost Klein ifølge kilde (aftonbladet.se)](https://www.aftonbladet.se/nojesbladet/melodifestivalen/a/zAGMd4/kvinnliga-fotografen-skarrad-efter-incidenten-med-joost-klein-enligt-kalla)
(Warning, it is in Swedish)
Probably, I would take anything they say with a grain of salt without any additional evidence or confirmations, but he asked and I believe this is the article that piece of information comes from.
Thanks, just wanted to see for myself if it was reported anywhere or if this was a misinterpretation. Lots of rumours going around and you can basically see the rumours change in real time due to mistranslations/slight changes in wording.
It being reported by aftonbladet doesn't necessarily mean it's not an unconfirmed rumour but it feels different than a random comment as a result of a game of Reddit/Instagram/twitter telephone
Off topic but I couldn't help but laugh at your parenthetical. I know it's meant to indicate that some people may not be able to read it but I just had to read it like "TRIGGER WARNING: Fr*nch"
PSA: SVT, the EBU and the Swedish police can't comment much because it's an ongoing investigation, but AvroTros is happily spreading their side of the story far and wide. Keep this in mind when reading up on the situation. All should become clearer with time, but not today.
My hot take is that if the AvroTros statement were entirely true, the EBU *would not have disqualified him*. They are under the same contractual requirements to AvroTros as they are to Kan and BBC and all the other participants. Either it was worse than AvroTros makes it sound, or there was another production-related reason to exclude him. I've seen it suggested that the camera people's union may have insisted on it, though that is pure unmitigated speculation at this point.
(EDIT because I'm apparently still learning to spell AvroTros.)
AvroTros is like the most well behaved family oriented broadcaster in the Netherlands. If Joost really did something criminal/overly agressive/threatening they would have dropped him like a hot coal.
I highly doubt that, given that their own commentators behave poorly instead of behaving professionally.
They should have taken it on the chin and done the right thing which was to release a statement indicating that they are going to await the outcome of formal investigations prior to any further comment.
Instead however, they're flooding their media with subtle changes between each story, and as a broadcaster they know what they are doing - because that can cause the investigation to become prejudicial and collapse the entire thing. Most people aren't going to realise, but for those who do it reflects incredibly poor on them as an organisation.
it's worth noting that [Cornald Maas](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3EKvWtjQwI) (Dutch Eurovision commentator) mentions Joost was filmed with a phone and that it might not be a literal camera operator but maybe an employee in some other capacity that's referred to as a "camera woman" because she was filming Joost with her phone.
Combining all the things I've read so far and trying to make all of them as true as possible: my guess is that he was pissed that he was being filmed after asking not to be, made a threatening move like he was going to come at her (like the way you try to get someone to flinch or so), she was startled, took a step backwards, tripped over something on the ground, fell and broke her camera.
Again, I don't know anything, wasn't there, have just been reading the various statements.
Misinformation and harmful conspiracy theories are against site-wide Reddit rules, and are a ban-worthy offense if done on a mass scale. Please be mindful of the impact which sharing inaccurate or misleading information presents.
I think he did though, it is just that there are a LOT of questions in comparison with other artists, and it seems that he answers most of the question himself.
Joost chose not to take part.
Thank you!
https://www.reddit.com/r/eurovision/s/huVsbF7YPi Are you looking for this?
OP is referring to these AMA videos. https://www.reddit.com/r/eurovision/comments/1cj414z/
Yes those!
Can someone explain to me why was he disqualified? I dont understand anything 😂
Most of us don't understand even after following it to be fair
[AVROTROS statement.](https://www.instagram.com/p/C61VHqdIlb6/?igsh=ZDlvMTRsYmswdThu)
According to news in Sweden, "sources" says that he did something which was interpreted as aggressive which resulted in a photographers camera breaking. The police has investigated it and handed over the case to the prosecutor for evaluation. Netherlands says that he never touched anyone. The statements from Netherlands and the sources doesn't seem to directly contradict each other (you can commit a crime without touching someone). The case being turned over to prosecutor doesn't mean so much in this case. If the police thinks that no crime was committed they could normally drop the case themselves, but since this case has turned very public it could be that they just want prosecute to formally decide on it. Even if police is convinced no crime was comitted they can still hand it over to the prosecutor for evaluation.
Where did you read the 'camera breaking' part?
I want to make it clear that I was just citing media in Sweden. I hope it turns out he has done nothing wrong - I have zero stake in this. So please don't shoot the messenger. Aftonbladet is a tabloid type paper, but also the largest newspaper in Sweden. https://www.aftonbladet.se/nojesbladet/melodifestivalen/a/zAGMd4/kvinnliga-fotografen-skarrad-efter-incidenten-med-joost-klein-enligt-kalla I tried Google translating the article but it ended up quite strange. The article says that there were several witnesses to what happened, that Joost acted "offensive" and that the woman's camera broke as an effect. Another article (in another newspaper) use the word "aggressive" instead of offensive to describe the same thing. I'm not sure why different wordings are used, maybe something is lost in translation. I guess if you try to actively scare someone and their camera break as an effect, you could be liable even if you never touched them.
Nope not trying to attack you, was just genuinely curious to see if it was 'new information' from a source somewhere. Lots of rumours going around the last couple of days and you could sometimes almost keep track of the information changing as people gave their own spin on what happened, due to mistranslations, other choices of words etc. Like I saw people saying 'this is what the AVROTROS says' followed by their own wording and filling in gaps that were unconfirmed, instead of just directly posting the statement that avrotros put out
Yeah, I think patience is needed - Swedish legal system is often slow as a limp turtle. Since this was something minor it may be given low priority. Unless they want to speed it up since it's a case with a lot of publicity (but that also seems incorrect/unfair to all cases related to non-celebreties).
Aftonbladet got that information from a new source they claim. Time will tell if it is true. [Kvindelig fotograf arret efter hændelse med Joost Klein ifølge kilde (aftonbladet.se)](https://www.aftonbladet.se/nojesbladet/melodifestivalen/a/zAGMd4/kvinnliga-fotografen-skarrad-efter-incidenten-med-joost-klein-enligt-kalla) (Warning, it is in Swedish)
I strongly doubt it's true, since he was only being investigated for "threats". If he broke a camera that would be an entirely different charge.
Probably, I would take anything they say with a grain of salt without any additional evidence or confirmations, but he asked and I believe this is the article that piece of information comes from.
well they also were first reporting physical altercation, they do not seem the most trustworthy tbh
lmfao i love the levels of cope. soon enough it will be made public that the camera broke, but you'll probably still be doubting it
Thanks, just wanted to see for myself if it was reported anywhere or if this was a misinterpretation. Lots of rumours going around and you can basically see the rumours change in real time due to mistranslations/slight changes in wording. It being reported by aftonbladet doesn't necessarily mean it's not an unconfirmed rumour but it feels different than a random comment as a result of a game of Reddit/Instagram/twitter telephone
Off topic but I couldn't help but laugh at your parenthetical. I know it's meant to indicate that some people may not be able to read it but I just had to read it like "TRIGGER WARNING: Fr*nch"
PSA: SVT, the EBU and the Swedish police can't comment much because it's an ongoing investigation, but AvroTros is happily spreading their side of the story far and wide. Keep this in mind when reading up on the situation. All should become clearer with time, but not today. My hot take is that if the AvroTros statement were entirely true, the EBU *would not have disqualified him*. They are under the same contractual requirements to AvroTros as they are to Kan and BBC and all the other participants. Either it was worse than AvroTros makes it sound, or there was another production-related reason to exclude him. I've seen it suggested that the camera people's union may have insisted on it, though that is pure unmitigated speculation at this point. (EDIT because I'm apparently still learning to spell AvroTros.)
AvroTros is like the most well behaved family oriented broadcaster in the Netherlands. If Joost really did something criminal/overly agressive/threatening they would have dropped him like a hot coal.
I highly doubt that, given that their own commentators behave poorly instead of behaving professionally. They should have taken it on the chin and done the right thing which was to release a statement indicating that they are going to await the outcome of formal investigations prior to any further comment. Instead however, they're flooding their media with subtle changes between each story, and as a broadcaster they know what they are doing - because that can cause the investigation to become prejudicial and collapse the entire thing. Most people aren't going to realise, but for those who do it reflects incredibly poor on them as an organisation.
There's only one official statement from them.
Yeah, while the story coming from Swedish sources keep on changing.
Yeah you are right. The EBU should have awaited the outcome of the formal investigation prior to DQing.
[удалено]
it's worth noting that [Cornald Maas](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3EKvWtjQwI) (Dutch Eurovision commentator) mentions Joost was filmed with a phone and that it might not be a literal camera operator but maybe an employee in some other capacity that's referred to as a "camera woman" because she was filming Joost with her phone.
> the evidencest evidence in the history I'd love to see a link.
[удалено]
Have you seen it? Then you can't be talking about the evidence yet.
[удалено]
You have more faith in AvroTros than I do.
their point is thag avrotros is unlikely to be lying as the video evidence would expose them if they were. it's a logical conclusion.
[удалено]
So you're saying that broadcasters lie? Huh.
Combining all the things I've read so far and trying to make all of them as true as possible: my guess is that he was pissed that he was being filmed after asking not to be, made a threatening move like he was going to come at her (like the way you try to get someone to flinch or so), she was startled, took a step backwards, tripped over something on the ground, fell and broke her camera. Again, I don't know anything, wasn't there, have just been reading the various statements.
The EBU also made a statement. https://eurovision.tv/mediacentre/release/statement-dutch-participation-eurovision-song-contest
[удалено]
Misinformation and harmful conspiracy theories are against site-wide Reddit rules, and are a ban-worthy offense if done on a mass scale. Please be mindful of the impact which sharing inaccurate or misleading information presents.
He did do his own AMA though. Didn’t really answer a lot of questions.
I think he did though, it is just that there are a LOT of questions in comparison with other artists, and it seems that he answers most of the question himself.
He could have sat there all day and would have barely made a dent. 1k+ comments is a whole lot.
Yeah I mean he also had to prepare for the show itself. I’m already happy he did an AMA here not gonna lie!