More evidence that the son tore the sign - Dupe

[JPJones]

OK, BullGooseLoony did catch this - second to last sentence.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x829092





In the son's hand is a piece of the poster - part of the H and the stars from the flag.

I hope this isn't a dupe.

Edit: And, those two are related - look at those friggen' noses.

[rumguy]

1. what was the other evidence?

please tell me this stupid picture isn't getting play in the media (other than Drudge)...

[yardwork]

6. The photo and caption was on AP last night

painting Kerry supporters as mean vicious thugs who attack little girls. There were newbies posting this all over DU last night telling us "we" should be ashamed of ourselves.

[ClassWarrior]

19. Here's your photographic evidence:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x829092

[BlueEyedSon]

2. IF that is in fact the son or other co-conspirator

[girl gone mad]

3. We still need more photographic evidence..

to be able to identify him as Parlock's son.

He could also be another family member.

[Goldmund]

4. I think there's no doubt that the guy on the left ripped her sign.

He has a union T-shirt. The only remaining unproven thing is whether the guy is indeed the son.

[JPJones]

7. The two issues are connected

Look at that friggen nose. The two are related. The next step for them would be to deny that the son ripped the sign. That's why it matters who tore the sign.

[Goldmund]

11. Your post says that you've found "more evidence"...

...that the guy on the left tore the sign. But the thing is, even Drudge agrees with that. That's not the issue at all. The issue is whether the guy who tore the sign is the son. Your "evidence" does nothing to help prove or disprove that.

And yeah, of course it matters whether it was the son or not. It's just that your "evidence" has nothing to do with that.

[JPJones]

13. See post 12 nt

[Goldmund]

14. Right, he/she shares your confusion.

[Guaranteed]

17. Yeah...where IS Phil Jr. in those photos?

Because we KNOW that he was there, from the Herald-Dispatch article.

[Goldmund]

18. great point -- there are multiple photos from the scene.

When they start denying it, that's the question they should be asked.

Although, my crystal ball says that this guy will be outed as a puke scammer on Olbermann tonite.

[JimmyJazz]

5. I see your crying kid and I raise you one...

[On the Road]

8. Notice How the Crowd is Backing Off

it's just that one guy standing there with the torn poster looking a the girl. The father is staring at the ground despite the fact that someone just tore something out of his hands right in front of his daughter's face.

The facial expressions are all wrong for the situation they supposedly describe.

[LTR]

9. And why is the son smiling in all the pictures?

Doesn't look like an angry union guy.

That drew a red flag last night. It told me something wasn't right.

[gardenista]

10. Yep. Me too. I couldn't put those two together. Now it makes sense.

[Killarney]

12. that's the first time I've seen the sign in the son's hand.

good find!

[shrub chipper]

15. I'm sorry, but

could the "Union Guy" and the Father look any more alike?

Same coloring, same hair, same nose and the "Union Guy"'s body language is far too relaxed for just having had a confrontation with the Repukes, IMO

[The Great Escape]

21. The "Union Guy" Is A Dead Ringer For Parlock Sr.'s Real Estate Photo....

[ewagner]

16. The story said his

son and daughter were there too....

Where are they in this picture?

Why wasn't the son protecting his sister?

If the guy in the Union shirt isn't the son, then where is the son?

[LisaL]

20. He was there with 2 sons, and a daughter

The little boy on the right of him is his son Alex.
The guy on the left could be his other son? He certainly looks a lot like Mr. Parlock.