New witnesses of the tragedy called in front of the police in Karlovac: 'The weather worked, here is the real truth'
In Karlovac, a dispute emerged over the conditions under which citizens waited outside a police station due to extreme heat. Multiple witnesses have come forward to challenge the police’s initial account of the incident. According to these witnesses, including Eric Mišić, who visited the police station to collect documents, the air conditioning was functioning properly, and the interior was comfortably cooled. They claim that staff directed all individuals, regardless of age or need, to wait outside in the heat, despite the availability of climate-controlled space. The police had previously stated that most people chose to wait outside voluntarily, that entry was free, and that priority was given to elderly, disabled, and parents with children. Witnesses like Hrvoje Stanišić and Mario Klemenčić assert that they personally observed the situation and confirm that the police were misleading the public by claiming the air conditioning was broken. A video shared by Mišić on Instagram further fueled the controversy, showing the alleged misrepresentation by police staff.
A dramatic confrontation unfolded outside the Karlovač police station on Thursday, as dozens of citizens waited in the sweltering heat under a canopy, according to multiple reports. The incident, which has sparked public debate and conflicting accounts, involves Eric Mišić, a 27-year-old local resident who claims he challenged the police over their handling of the situation. His actions led to a viral video and a subsequent official response from the police authority. According to Mišić, who arrived at the police station to collect his personal documents and driver’s license, the temperature outside was nearly 40 degrees Celsius. He described seeing more than 30 people waiting in line, including children and elderly individuals. Despite the extreme conditions, he entered the building to collect a form, only to be told by a female officer that he should return to the queue outside due to the lack of air conditioning. This contradicted his initial impression that the interior was comfortably cool. Mišić claimed that upon returning to the queue, he noticed his mother struggling with the heat. He then went to a nearby store and bought three bottles of water, which were shared among the waiting crowd. As he continued speaking with others, he became increasingly concerned about the situation and decided to re-enter the police station to confront the officers. There, he asked why people couldn’t wait inside and was informed that the climate control system wasn’t functioning properly. He recorded the exchange, stating that he did so to document the explanation given by the staff. According to Mišić, the indoor temperature was around 27 degrees Celsius, making the claim of faulty air conditioning seem contradictory. When the officer instructed him not to record, he left the premises and called the gathered citizens to enter the building, offering them shade and relief from the heat. The police responded swiftly, arriving within minutes. They reportedly supported Mišić's account, noting that the staff had changed their behavior significantly after the incident. However, the police authority later issued a statement clarifying that the entire building’s cooling system was down, leading to uncomfortable conditions for all visitors. They emphasized that the entrance remained open throughout and that citizens had chosen to wait outside voluntarily, with priority given to the elderly and disabled. New witnesses have since come forward, supporting Mišić’s version of events. One, Hrvoje Stanišić, stated that he personally witnessed the whole incident and confirmed that the air conditioning was operational. Another, Mario Klemenčić, corroborated this, adding that no special treatment was given to any group, and everyone followed the order based on the number they received. Martina Pevec Zorić also backed Mišić, confirming that the air conditioning worked and that the officers directed everyone to wait outside. In contrast, the police maintained that the system was indeed malfunctioning and that the decision to wait outside was made by the citizens themselves. They noted that while the interior was cooler, the high external temperatures made it impractical for anyone to remain indoors. The police also mentioned that they had attempted to assist the affected individuals, providing water and other support during the ordeal. Despite the police’s formal response, the public reaction has been largely supportive of Mišić. Many have praised his actions as a stand against perceived injustice, highlighting the need for transparency and fairness in public services. Some have even suggested that the incident could lead to broader discussions about how such situations are managed in the future. Mišić himself has acknowledged that his actions were controversial, admitting that he violated regulations by recording the scene. However, he maintains that his intent was to expose what he believed was an unfair treatment of the public. He has expressed no regret over the consequences, emphasizing that the situation was unacceptable and that he felt compelled to act. As the situation continues to unfold, both sides await further developments. The police have indicated that a formal complaint will be filed against Mišić for unauthorized recording and disruption of public order. Meanwhile, the community remains divided, with some calling for greater accountability and others urging restraint. What remains clear is that the incident has ignited a wider conversation about service delivery, public expectations, and the role of individual action in challenging institutional norms.
Go to the primary sources (2)
The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.
In Karlovac, a dispute emerged over the conditions under which citizens waited outside a police station due to extreme heat. Multiple witnesses have come forward to challenge the police’s initial account of the incident. According to these witnesses, including Eric Mišić, who visited the police station to collect documents, the air conditioning was functioning properly, and the interior was comfortably cooled. They claim that staff directed all individuals, regardless of age or need, to wait outside in the heat, despite the availability of climate-controlled space. The police had previously stated that most people chose to wait outside voluntarily, that entry was free, and that priority was given to elderly, disabled, and parents with children. Witnesses like Hrvoje Stanišić and Mario Klemenčić assert that they personally observed the situation and confirm that the police were misleading the public by claiming the air conditioning was broken. A video shared by Mišić on Instagram further fueled the controversy, showing the alleged misrepresentation by police staff.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the incident as a case of misinformation by the police, suggesting that their version of events is being challenged by credible witnesses. The emphasis is placed on the credibility of the citizens’ accounts and the potential misuse of public resources, aligning more closely with a
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the claims made by witnesses like Hrvoje Stanišić and Mario Klemenčić who assert that the police version is incorrect. It references the primary source document from KAportal and aligns with the testimonies provided by those present at the scene. The article does not i
Why objectivity (80): The tone remains neutral, presenting both sides of the story, Eric’s account and the police’s response. However, there is some emphasis on the eyewitness accounts supporting Eric, which could be seen as slightly more favorable towards his perspective.
Jutarnji listIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 8014 days ago
In Karlovac, Croatia, 27-year-old Eric Mišić entered a police station during extreme heat conditions (around 40°C outside) after seeing his mother and other citizens, including children and elderly people, waiting outside in the heat. According to Mišić, he was told by police staff to wait outside, but upon entering briefly, he noticed the interior was significantly cooler (around 27°C). He then confronted the officers, questioning why people couldn’t enter despite the cooler environment inside. He recorded the interaction and later posted it online, where it gained widespread attention. The police responded by stating that the cooling system was malfunctioning throughout the building, making the interior uncomfortably hot and stuffy, and claimed that citizens chose to wait outside voluntarily.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both perspectives, Mišić’s account of being instructed to wait outside and the police explanation regarding the malfunctioning cooling system. It does not favor one side over the other, providing direct quotes from both parties involved. There is no evident bias in language or o省
Why factuality (85): This article presents the events as described by Eric Mišić and corroborates the witness accounts from Stanišić and Klemenčić. It references the police statement but frames the conflict between the two versions. It stays close to the primary source and does not add unsubstantiated claims.
Why objectivity (80): The article maintains a balanced tone, reporting both Eric’s actions and the police’s official statement. There is no clear editorializing, though it emphasizes the public reaction to Eric’s video, which could be interpreted as giving more attention to his side.
tportalIndependentCenterFactual 80Objective 7514 days ago
In Karlovac, Croatia, citizens were forced to wait outside a police station in extreme heat (+40°C) while officials claimed the air conditioning was broken. One man, Mišić, became frustrated and entered the building to confront officers, recording their explanation that people had to wait outside due to the climate system failure. The police later stated that the AC was indeed malfunctioning and that citizens had chosen to wait outside voluntarily. However, witnesses disputed this account, claiming that staff explicitly instructed everyone to go outside immediately after receiving their queue numbers, despite the air conditioning being functional.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the police's explanation and eyewitness accounts without overtly favoring either side. It includes direct quotes from Mišić, witnesses, and the police authority, allowing readers to form their own conclusions based on multiple perspectives.
Why factuality (80): The article covers the incident as told by Eric Mišić and includes details about the video and the police response. It cites the primary source and the eyewitnesses, but places more focus on the consequences of Eric’s actions rather than purely factual reporting.
Why objectivity (75): The tone leans slightly towards portraying Eric as a concerned citizen acting out of empathy, which could be seen as subtly supportive of his position. The language used suggests a level of sympathy for his actions.
Net.hrIndependentCenterFactual 80Objective 7514 days ago
In Karlovac, Croatia, 27-year-old Eric Mišić recounted his experience during a hot day when he encountered a crowd waiting outside the police station. The temperature was nearly 40 degrees Celsius, and dozens of people, including children and elderly individuals, were waiting under a canopy. Mišić entered the building to collect documents but was asked to leave by a staff member who said the air conditioning wasn’t working. He then recorded the situation on his phone and shared it on social media. After questioning why people had to wait outside, Mišić raised his voice slightly, prompting the staff to threaten him with calling the police. However, a police officer arrived shortly after and intervened, helping to resolve the issue. The police reportedly filed a report against Mišić for unauthorized recording and disturbing public order, though he expressed respect for the officers' professionalism.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on an incident involving a citizen interacting with local police over a public service issue. It presents both the individual’s account and the police’s response without overtly favoring either side. There is no clear ideological framing or biased language, and the narrative is a
Why factuality (80): The article provides a detailed account of Eric Mišić’s experience and includes quotes from him. It also mentions the police’s response and the temperature conditions. While it aligns with the primary source, it focuses more on Eric’s personal narrative and the video he posted, which may give more w
Why objectivity (75): There is a slight bias toward Eric’s perspective, especially when describing his actions and reactions. The article uses emotionally charged language such as 'snositi posljedice' which implies a moral stance, though it doesn't overtly take sides.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
Croatia
