Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
she and her kids were "attacked" too ...
Taking pictures while sitting there on a bench (and remember, he was there first) does not in any way constitute an attack.


and now stone ( and the peanut gallery ) has attached her again by suggesting the only reason she didn't
want to have her photograph taken was because she was "fat and ugly" ... ( like all fat / ugly women? )
and if she was a "beautiful person" she would have relished the extra attention she was getting.
That was not the same woman, same situation, or same photographer.


if ming and stone did nothing wrong .. the lady did nothing wrong either ...
she didn't want a stranger who had been staring/spying at her and her kids
for 3-5 minutes photographing them.
Stone was not involved in either situation; he just made a comment. There is nothing to indicate that ming had been staring/spying at them. If a kid is jumping over a bench right between two people (which lots of folks would call misbehaving), then watching that kid can hardly be called staring, and sitting on a bench in plain view while so doing can never be called spying.


if a person with a camera is going to take grab shots
( and if the subject is upset all the better ) then the photographer
gets what he paid for if/when the subject calls them names, verbally abuses them and/or calls the police.
Yes, it comes with the territory. But it doesn't justify the name-calling and verbal abuse, or the general overreaction.