Johan Derksen arouses suspicion with his twist in the candle story. Both Op1, Jinek and Shownieuws reacted with suspicion last night. “He’s trying to bend it all.”
Johan Derksen confessed on television on Tuesday evening that he penetrated an unconscious woman in the past. He made a pushing gesture: “There was such a big candle and we put it in it and then we left. (…) Technically, a prosecutor will be able to interpret it as rape.”
distrust
Now Johan claims that he did not put the candle ‘in’ the woman, but put it between her legs. “He changes the story,” SBS 6 colleague Evert Sankrediets remarks in Shownieuws. “It seems to be a bit of a turning around to limit the damage somewhat. (…) Johan sometimes doubts my words, but today I doubt his.”
Colleague Bart Ettekoven points to Johan’s original words that his act can be explained ‘technically’ as ‘rape’. That doesn’t apply to putting a candle between someone’s legs, he notes. “Yeah, that’s weird, because if you put something between your legs, it can’t be.”
TV connoisseur Rob Goossens agrees, he tweeted. “If you’ve only put a candle between the legs of someone who’s already undressed for you, why call it ‘technically rape’?”
No doubt
Angela de Jong tells in Op1 that she does not believe Johan’s turn either. “I think he said it very clearly. We have just seen the fragment: ‘We put him in’ (makes a gesture, ed.), and ‘it was punishable’.”
Presenter Charles Groenhuijsen: “No doubt, right?”
Marcia Luyten: “He said: ‘You would go to jail for it.’”
She wants VI off the tube. “Those men, not only Johan Derksen but also Gijp, simply have to get off the tube. Just immediately. (…) This is just real food for all right-wing conservative males who increasingly complain that their masculinity has been compromised.”
Disbelief in Jinek
Marjan Olfers, professor of sports and law, tells Jinek that she finds it ‘nauseous’. “He said, ‘I put the candle in’, and makes a similar move,” she says. “I think it’s quite hypocritical that he (…) now suddenly comes up with a different type of story… Yes, then I think you’re cowardly and very mean, also towards the women. It’s just so serious.”
Actor Jon van Eerd: “It really drives me crazy how that man thinks he can twist himself in all kinds of shapes and turns to bend a statement. It’s shocking what happened. Of course we don’t know what exactly happened, because that’s what he’s turning around now.”
Arno Kantelberg: “He is now scribbling back with that candle and I suspect, but I don’t know because I was not there either, that this [nieuwe] version, but yesterday he was going to make it exciting, because everyone laughed and he went along with that.”
Luuk Ikink, RTL Boulevard colleague of Arno, objected on Twitter: “Why would you say you put a candle IN someone, if you didn’t? Then you work yourself in a lot of trouble for nothing.”
Eva critical
Eva Jinek is very sorry for the woman this has happened to. She wonders how she feels when she sees this now. “I think what you mean, Marjan, that people then feel like victims again because people laugh so much about it.”
Marjan: “I hope that we will decide together here that we just don’t want this on national television.”
Arno: “How? If the program just goes on and there’s a million people watching it and there are people in the audience who are just laughing too. How?”
Eva then hints at an advertiser or viewer boycott. “Maybe if people stop advertising around the program or if you don’t watch it yourself. That’s the only thing.”
Fragment
The difference between the original and modified story by Johan Derksen:
