Angela de Jong thinks the Joran van der Sloot cuddled by John van den Heuvel Extraordinary Ranzig. “I don’t really understand why you have to help sell a book,” she says.
It is incredible: after the fierce criticism of his Gordon soap, John van den Heuvel again makes a huge blunder. The crime journalist of De Telegraaf and RTL Boulevard has written the preface of the book by Joran van der Sloot and thereby contributes to the spots of the greenhouse of a murderer. There is really no one who understands it.
John’s reputation
Angela de Jong thinks it’s good that Renze Klamer has tackled him a lot on television. “I also had the idea that John van den Heuvel didn’t expect it anymore and didn’t really enjoy it either.”
Her colleague Gudo Tienhooven then in the AD Media Podcast: “It seems that John van den Heuvel did not think about this in advance whether he should do this and whether this is useful for his reputation as a crime reporter.”
Hypocritical
It is hypocritical anyway, says Angela. “What surprises me the most: two weeks ago I was sitting with John van den Heuvel at Bar because he as a newspaper is quite blamed for us that we have that Keith Bakker series on the website. I fully agree, but this is actually a bit in the same category for me. “
“I think that’s crazy. I don’t really understand why you have to help sell a book and why you would also do a pre -publication in De Telegraaf from that book. We do have a strange fascination nowadays for people who are clearly apparently wrong, (…) but you don’t have to cooperate with that? “
Pendate
John has to silence that Joran, says Angela. “Let the boy there whining in that cell where he is. He is demonstrably not and has only stabbed someone again. Let him sit there. Why do I have to read that it is hard for him there and that there are two women who are concerned about his destiny? ”
Colleague Manuel Venderbos agrees with him. “Great that he writes a book about that, but then John van den Heuvel does not have to praise that.”
Matthijs vs Joran
Angela also does not understand that that book is published. “I don’t understand that you want to spend that too, but that’s me. Somehow: Holleeder at College Tour, the whole hassle that Matthijs has to go back and we just have to forget it all … “
Manuel: “I think that’s something else.”
Angela: “No, that is not something else, because that also has to do with the fact that the victims are never considered. How is this for the victims of Joran van der Sloot that we must now read how pathetic he is in prison? We shouldn’t want that. Point.”
One -hope
Manuel thinks this is going very far. “Yes, but I don’t think you can throw that in a lot with Matthijs van Nieuwkerk.”
Angela: “I throw what Matthijs van Nieuwkerk did not do a lot with Joran van der Sloot. It is only a tendency that you see that we are only busy with the fact that there is a completely passed by victims. ”
Manuel: “Can we now take John van den Heuvel seriously if he is incorporating any reality soaps around Gordon and this kind of books?”
Incorrect exit
Angela cannot give an unambiguous answer to that. “It is a very good crime journalist, but he sometimes makes a turn that I really don’t understand at all.”
Manuel: “So he took a wrong turn again?”
Angela: “If you summarize it that way, fine.”
Manuel: “And he has done that before?”
Angela: “Well, with that Gordon docu, yes. And when I hear him again about such a series about the Mocro-Mafia and you are going to put someone down as a kind of hero who confesses that he is constantly sniffing Coke (she means Gordon, ed.), Yes, that is all there for me there Not in, but okay. ”