Just try to come up with a scenario where the second pic, the one with the pristine flyer with just one crease, can possibly exist, if his revised story is true.
It can’t be. That flyer can’t have fewer creases AFTER being removed from his car than before.
The only logical explanation is that the second photo came before it ever touched his car. Nothing else fits the evidence.
It could be an illusion, due to angle etc. It could also be that he made a copy. Right now I think the printer angle is the best evidence to work with. If the printer can be matched to a printer he has access to, well then he has some real explaining to do.
So in summary, this is a hoax hoax.