Eva Jinek thinks it’s strange that she can still say cremated croquette, but not Yvonne Coldeweijer. “For everyone who was in a panic at home: we can all keep saying it.”
It was the week of the cremated croquette: Rachel Hazes got the judge so far that Yvonne Coldeweijer can no longer call her that. “Upset about the judge’s verdict, because why can I use the term cremated croquette, but not Yvonne Coldeweijer?” Eva Jinek wonders in her talk show.
Expression
Saskia Belleman, court reporter for De Telegraaf, explains. “Everyone now thinks that this is a restriction of freedom of expression and that is not the case. The judge’s ruling is really very specific about Yvonne Coldeweijer.”
The rest are therefore still allowed to curse with croquette, but under specific conditions, says Saskia. “It doesn’t mean that absolutely no one is allowed to use the term ‘cremated croquette’. That is actually quite allowed, just not in this context, not in this way, not for personal gain, not if it is not about a general wrongdoing. Then it’s just not allowed.”
Paupergnome
Eva is reassured. “So for everyone who was in a panic at home: we can all keep saying ‘cremated croquette’.”
She finds it a bit strange. “Teun, comedians sometimes make jokes and comments like this. For example, Lil Kleine was called ‘pauperkabouter’ by Peter Pannekoek. Mindful of what you just heard and that statement too: do you understand what the difference is?”
Satire
Table guest Teun van de Keuken: “That’s satire, that’s allowed.”
Eva: “Of course that was not what Yvonne Coldeweijer did. That wasn’t satire either.”
Saskia: “Look, if she presents it as a fact without being able to substantiate it or make it plausible and it is not with a wink…”
Fellow guest Kees van der Spek: “Yes, but of course you can never make it plausible that she is a cremated croquette.”
Saskia: “That is indeed difficult.”
Meaningful
Eva wonders what exactly Rachel has achieved. “Everyone in the Netherlands now uses the term ‘cremated croquette’ and everyone associates a name and a face with it. Did it make sense for Rachel Hazes to make a case out of it, even though she was right?”
Saskia: “I can imagine that she brought that case because of the video that Yvonne Coldeweijer had put online, but she might have been better off leaving that cremated croquette out of it, because that will of course follow her for the rest of her life.”
‘What nonsense!’
Sports presenter Milan van Dongen: “We do have a wonderful country that a judge will simply rule on whether or not a cremated croquette is allowed.”
Eva: “Then we are doing pretty well, but that was a serious complaint this week, that people said: there are so many cases. You’ve been here so many times, Saskia, for cases that haven’t been solved. Rape cases, major crimes. We have an overloaded judicial system and then this is needed at once.”
Saskia: “I must also honestly say that I avoided this case, because I thought: what is this about, please. The judiciary is so overburdened and very important cases are left on the shelf or never come to court. And then they have to spend time on this kind of nonsense!”
Fragment
The croquette issue in Jinek:
