Well not quite the smoking gun I was hoping for, unfortunately. While he does state he replaced it back on his windshield, it still does not mean he was behind it in the first place. However, it does answer the inconsistency associated with the picture. But I still remain unconvinced of either his guilt or his innocence. But since I believe in innocent until proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, I have to side with innocent, and that it was not a hoax.
It’s hard proof that the first photo was staged.
Add to that that he only admitted this AFTER being caught out.
This therefore proves that at least part of his story was intentional misrepresentation.
At this point it’s no longer reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt on the rest, especially since we are talking about a high-profile, long time anti-gun activist (proof of motive and malice).
If he filed a police report with the initial claim as-is, he’d be looking at jail time right now.