NewJeans’ Mothers Raise Concerns Over HYBE’s Alleged CCTV Cover-Up and Missing Hanni Video Ignored

On October 6, an interview with the mothers of NewJeans members revealed that Kim Joo-young, CEO of ADOR, reported that crucial CCTV footage concerning Hanni’s bullying incident had been lost. They questioned, “How is it possible that only the clip of Hanni interacting with another group is preserved, while the footage featuring the concerning ‘ignore’ comments has vanished?”

Earlier, during a live stream on November 11, Hanni recounted an incident where, while waiting in the HYBE corridor, she greeted another artist but was later instructed by her manager to “ignore” them, leaving her visibly shocked. As a result of this situation, the National Assembly’s Environment and Labor Committee nominated both Kim Joo-young and Hanni as witnesses for an inquiry into allegations of “idol bullying and workplace harassment.”

A mother of one of the NewJeans members explained, “Hanni’s mother first brought this matter to our attention around late May, expressing her distress and anxiety upon hearing about it. At that point, the ADOR board had completely changed. Since this involved a different label, it was practically impossible for former CEO Min Hee-jin to handle the issue effectively due to her isolation on the board. However, we were actively advocating for change. We reached out to the newly appointed CEO Kim Joo-young and the revamped ADOR board, urging them to prevent similar issues in the future. Regrettably, they merely delayed and ultimately informed us that the critical footage had been erased.”

Another mother shared, “It’s been four months since the incident, and despite raising the issue in June, there has been no resolution. Now, they say they will review the CCTV footage.” She continued, “Would it not be more efficient to meet with Hanni directly? Why prolong this matter? Ultimately, we were told that no such footage exists.”

Commenting on the situation, another member’s mother said, “When I questioned why only that particular footage was deleted, they explained it was removed by someone who had resigned, and they had no insight as to why. The security team pointed fingers at their superior for issuing work orders, while the superior blamed the departed employee.”

A mother reiterated, “When Kim Joo-young stated the CCTV footage had no audio, I asked, ‘Even without sound, can’t you perceive the atmosphere and body language?’ I then requested to view the complete footage from that day. They claimed to have searched through a month’s worth of recordings, which I found absurd. A large corporation should maintain thorough records, and they eventually sent the materials on September 25, which left me stunned regarding their content.”

She continued, “They provided us with Slack messages that contained instructions, but the request process struck me as unusual. If this matter involves subsidiary labels, shouldn’t HYBE maintain impartiality in this investigation? They seemed to be seeking related materials from Belift Lab. The request for the CCTV footage should have originated directly from ADOR to the security team or the workplace harassment department within HYBE. It raises suspicion as to why the ADOR board sought help from Belift Lab to obtain it. Moreover, in the Slack conversations, a security officer mentioned finding footage of the greeting, to which Belift Lab replied, ‘That’s a relief.’ I don’t understand the intention behind such communication.”

The member’s mother asserted, “This feels like asking the suspected party to locate the evidence. When we proposed forensic recovery of the footage, they said that technically it couldn’t be accomplished. How can we trust this?”

During the meeting on the 23rd, Hanni confronted CEO Kim Joo-young, stating, ‘You claimed that only the victim can verify this, but when I sought to inspect the CCTV, the security staff wouldn’t meet my gaze and seemed uncomfortable.’ In reply, Kim Joo-young remarked, ‘Aren’t I looking directly at you?’ which left everyone stunned. Earlier, she had told Hanni, ‘You ought to have voiced your concerns sooner; the video was deleted after a month,’ despite Hanni addressing the issue immediately. This left her feeling as though she had done something wrong. During the discussion, Kim Joo-young suddenly began to cry in front of the NewJeans members, which was startling. For these impressionable young individuals, such emotional reactions could inadvertently induce feelings of guilt, especially as we recounted our own experiences of victimization.”

Another mother mentioned, “During our meeting, I shared my fears regarding unauthorized recordings from the members’ training days possibly leaking to the media. Just two days later, CEO Kim Joo-young replied, suggesting that fans had reported the media conduct and advised us to wait for the outcome. In her subsequent email, Kim Joo-young indicated that the members could pursue a civil lawsuit for violation of portrait rights but cautioned that such actions might be perceived negatively. Without clear evidence of the leak, our chances of winning might be slim. She noted that ADOR had reached out to Source Music in August but received no reply. As violations of portrait rights do not carry criminal repercussions, if Source Music is vindicated, it could pose challenges for us. They advised waiting for the fans’ report results. I’m baffled as to why they claim there are no criminal consequences yet urge us to await those reports. Nevertheless, they did provide avenues for the members to initiate a lawsuit if we opted to. This inconsistency is perplexing.”

In conclusion, the mothers of the NewJeans members expressed their fears, stating, “Such matters often transpire in shadows away from public eyes, raising concerns that they may ultimately be brushed aside over time. We are deeply worried about the children’s well-being within HYBE.”

Source: Daum

Source