Home
Does road rage driver Jason Wells deserve the social media campaign against him?

Writer Jon Ronson thinks the social media campaign against Jason Wells is an example of the kind of dangerous shaming he spent two years researching for his book So You've Been Publicly Shamed. But he also thinks the failure of the judicial system to deal with road violence against cyclists is "a story that should be told".

In case you've been in an isolation tank for the last week, Jason Wells is the owner of the Brew chain of cafes in South London. He was recently fined £90 for a public order offence after an incident in which he passed a cyclist dangerously close. Wells then told the rider the presence of witnesses was the only reason he didn't launch a physical attack.

The rider, who has asked to be known just as Micheal, videoed the incident. Wells has a total meltdown, unleashing a tiurade of threats and abuse against a bike rider whose only offence was not to be narrow enough for Wells to avoid hitting him.

On Tuesday Ronson tweeted about the case:

A lengthy conversation followed between Ronson and various Twitter cyclists including me.

Some highlights:

There was a lot more, and you can read it all for yourself on Ronson's Twitter page

Unarguably, the response on social media to Wells' action has been, shall we say, enthusiastic. Cyclists have spread the word about Wells' actions and encouraged people not to frequent his cafes, one of which has a bike repair service.

A boycott and campaign of negative publicity seems perfectly reasonable to me. Wells has a business that courts cyclists, but has displayed utter contempts for us.

As you can see from his comments, Ronson is concerned at the negative effects such a campaign of public shaming can have. He cites PR flack Justine Sacco who lost her job after getting on a plane and tweeting: "Going to Africa. Hope I don't get AIDS. Just kidding. I'm white!"

In my opinion that was a joke about white privilege, but an easily misinterpreted one.

But there's a very big difference between Wells driving his big black car at a cyclist and an idiotic remark on Twitter.

I'm not generally a fan of the way mobs with virtual pitchforks and flaming torches assemble on social media about trivia. When pub landlord James Walker was the subject of Twitter ire over what was clearly a piss-take aimed at his friends I spoke to him and was convinced he was genuinely sorry.

Walker handled the situation well, responding to people who contacted him to have a go, apologising directly and explaining the background. He didn't fall silent and let things fester, while issuing a brief communication via a PR agency as Wells did.

Wells made it worse with his mealy-mouthed PR nonpology. He didn't apologise for hitting Michael, or for threatening to beat him up, he merely apologised for "any offence caused". It's the wording we've heard time and again from someone who is only sorry that they got caught.

Ronson is right on the money when he talks about "glee" in the response to Wells. After years of the police and judicial system failing to adequately punish those who endanger cyclists, here was someone we could hit back against directly.

As well as the #boycottbrew campaign on Twitter, TripAdvisor has been inundated with negative reviews of his cafes though according to the Evening Standard these have now been deleted. In the Q&A section, people are instead asking "I normally have toast for breakfast, but I understand the owner "eats cyclist for breakfast" can I ask, how do you cook your cyclists?" and "I cycle a lot to keep fit. Will you use foul language and threaten me?"

Brew Cafe's Facebook page is also stuffed with negative reiews and condemnation of Wells' behaviour.

None of this would be necessary if a number of things had happened differently. Firstly, of course, Wells could have simply waited until it was safe to overtake, rather than trying to squeeze his big black car into too small a gap.

Then, when Michael yelled at him, he could have simply apologised, instead of going off on a now-infamous threatening rant.

But more importantly, the police could have brought a more serious charge of at least careless driving. Dangerous driving would seem more reasonable. Actually hitting another road users seems to sensible people to meet that offence's standard, driving that's "far below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver" and "obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous".

Michael says he was "disappointed with the fine, because I'm pretty sure [Wells] can afford it". Had Wells been dealt with properly by the law, I wonder if Michael might have kept the video to himself.

Several of us made the point to Jon Ronson that CPS and police failure to properly deal with motoring offences against cyclists was a large part of why torches and pitchforks were out.

Ronson's been there himself. Before he knew that Wells had been fined, Ronson tweeted: "I think the cyclist should have taken the footage to the police, not posted it on social media. However one time a driver was a lunatic to me on my bike and I went to the police and they couldn't have cared less."

That driver, Ronson said, "was fucking terrifying".

When it was pointed out just how common this was, Ronson replied:

I hope that means we'll see a Jon Ronson article about the issue of the system's disregard for road attacks on cyclists. I doubt anyone would read a whole book about it, but a well-researched story by a respected journalist would help push forward the campaign for justice on the roads.

Footnote: Cycle paths and the Highway Code

In the aftermath of this incident, I've seen claims that there's a speed limit for cyclists on cycle paths, and that the Highway Code recommends faster riders use the road and not cycle paths.

Both of those beliefs are wrong.

This misconception comes from a bit of proposed advice to cyclists mentioned on Bikehub's Cycling and the law page.

That page says "According to this advice issued by the Department of Transport, cyclists likely to be riding 18mph or faster should use roads not cycle-paths."

The provided link takes you to a notice that the page has been archived, and then refers you to the archived page.

It turns out that 'ride on the road if you're riding over 18mph' was never offical Department for Transport advice.

It was suggested, but not officially issued as advice, in a consultation exercise about a code of conduct for cyclists on cycle paths.

The archived DfT page says (my emphasis):

The following key messages are suggested as the basis for a code of conduct notice for cyclists. The code could be posted at points of entry and at intervals along the route. This will be especially useful when the facility is new.

Ride at a sensible speed for the situation and ensure you can stop in time. As a general rule, if you want to cycle quickly, say in excess of 18 mph/30 kph, then you should be riding on the road.

I have not been able to find any evidence that this was ever official government advice. It is definitely not in the Highway Code's Rules for Cyclists.

Our official grumpy Northerner, John has been riding bikes for over 30 years since discovering as an uncoordinated teen that a sport could be fun if it didn't require you to catch a ball or get in the way of a hulking prop forward.

Road touring was followed by mountain biking and a career racing in the mud that was as brief as it was unsuccessful.

Somewhere along the line came the discovery that he could string a few words together, followed by the even more remarkable discovery that people were mug enough to pay for this rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work. He's pretty certain he's worked for even more bike publications than Mat Brett.

The inevitable 30-something MAMIL transition saw him shift to skinny tyres and these days he lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.

62 comments

Avatar
zanf [1020 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I like Jon (he managed 'The Men From Del Monte', an indie band back in the day and co-wrote the screenplay for 'Frank').

I can understand his viewpoint that there is a certain amount of glee people are taking in seeing Jason Wells ship sink but I think there is a direct correlation between that and the impunity with which drivers injure and kill cyclists (in fact, the vast amount of road deaths in this country alone that seems to be collectively accepted by its populace without even a murmur).

I made a comparison to Gerald Ratner to Wells on Twitter in conversation with Jon, in that Ratner gleefully espoused his contempt for his customers and the 'tat' he sold that htey lapped up, and it bit him on the arse.

Wells decided to use his vehicle as a weapon then verbally threaten the person, all while it was being filmed (and remember when in public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy - and because of incidents like this, bike cams are now prolifically in use). The contempt he showed has got peoples backs up and so they have chosen hit him in a manner that is the only thing that matters to most people: financially.

I cant agree with Jon on several fronts that he presented: this isnt a facebook bullying of someone for a characteristic they have, a sexual orientation, or a fetish they have. This is the public shaming of a man who thought it was ok to drive aggressively then act verbally violent to try scare people into submission, has an complete lack of remorse for his behaviour, and is now feeling the wrath of 'the herd' that sees it as socially unacceptable.

I have no sympathy for the guy but in two weeks most people will have forgotten his name (who thinks about Emma Way and her dumb tweet nowadays?) but will he take anything away from it or just become more bitter because he refuses to accept the responsibility for his actions?

I look forward to an article by Jon on how injuring and killing cyclists goes largely un(der)punished.

Avatar
jasecd [550 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

Quite frankly fuck him - there are millions upon millions who are genuinely persecuted on a daily basis, all of which deserve consideration before Jason Wells.

Wells brought it on himself - he's indicative of much of what is wrong with our society so it's no surprise that many of us are quite happy to see him reaping the consequences of his actions, where so many others do not.

The law may have failed but public opinion appears to be quite an effective punishment.

Avatar
RPK [108 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes
zanf wrote:

I cant agree with Jon on several fronts that he presented: this isnt a facebook bullying of someone for a characteristic they have, a sexual orientation, or a fetish they have. This is the public shaming of a man who thought it was ok to drive aggressively then act verbally violent to try scare people into submission, has an complete lack of remorse for his behaviour, and is now feeling the wrath of 'the herd' that sees it as socially unacceptable.

Agreed.

If you make a dick move, you deserve to be held accountable.

Avatar
tonyleatham [67 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I think one of the nastiest aspects of this whole sorry affair is the venom that has appeared in the comment sections of various news websites reporting this incident. It's clear on reading these comments that there is huge sympathy for the "all cyclists are scum and deserve to be squished" sentiment. I'm sure I'm not the only cyclist who's read this bile and hardened my attitudes towards this selfish, aggressive species of driver so eminently exemplified by Jason Wells, and for me, it's entirely appropriate that he suffers as a consequence of his actions.

I have tried, as I know others have, to combat the extreme views posted by the great unwashed. It's an uphill struggle, but I'm hoping that meeting the kind of crap you see with a cyclist's perspective and common sense will at least make some people think that driving at speed without the "obstructions" of cyclists is not a right enjoyed by drivers.

Avatar
Daveyraveygravey [684 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

This case is just the kind of publicity Wells' behaviour needs. He is FAR from the only driver that behaves like this; I think I meet one of them a month. OK, so very few of them have driven their vehicles into me, but I have had all the slanging matches you can imagine, I've had them turning round to block me, I've had them reversing at high speed trying to catch me (most of them don't have ability to drive forwards that well...) all because I point out their bad driving. It isn't acceptable behaviour, and he deserves every bad consequence that comes as a result of his actions.

Avatar
levermonkey [706 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

At some point you have to say enough is enough.

He did a stupid and dangerous thing and then compounded it with a vile and disgusting rant at his victim and other cyclists. He was in the wrong, but he is far from the only motorist to act in this fashion. The fact that the authorities have chosen not to punish him properly for his actions is neither here or there.

Collectively we have punished him and flexed our 'muscles' by hurting his reputation and his business. We have voiced our disapproval at his actions.
But it is time to stop!

If we continue this on too long then it will backfire spectacularly on us. We will become the bullies and he will become the victim. Public sentiment is a very fickle thing.

I'm not saying that we should forgive and forget, far from it. But I do think that the media shitstorm should end.

So I will repeat - Enough is enough!

Avatar
Beaufort [270 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

If everyone were not in such a hurry all the time these things would not happen. Slow down and respect each other.

Avatar
Grubbythumb [61 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I think Jon Ronson fails to understand that Wells has given all those thousands of cyclists, like me, who have taken evidence / video's of driving offences to the Police only to be dismissed, the chance to finally feel they can get a form of justice, even if that is just for Michael, rather than themselves.

There are too many bullies driving cars/vans/lorries, we have all been victim to them, Jason Wells happens to have offered a perfect opportunity for people to give him a social media 'slap'.

Avatar
KiwiMike [1421 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

These storms will continue to become more and more frequent, as technology advances the reduction in size and cost, and improvement in quality of cameras. The ONLY reason this (or any other 'cycle cam' event) is news is because of technology progressing.

What I hope will happen in very short order is that the general public will come to think that *every* cyclist is cam'd-up. Therefore there is a high likelihood that their actions will be reported with indisputable evidence, that will almost certainly lead to a prosecution. (yes, in this case the CPS didn't prosecute for dangerous driving - that's a separate issue and we should be told why). Some police forces are ahead of the trend on accepting and handling video evidence, hopefully ACPO will come up with a nationwide standard / best-practice.

I have just purchased a Cycliq Fly6 for club run use, after numerous close passes. We'll get a Fly12 when they come out. I've already announced to the local area Facebook page that motorists should expect *any* cyclist in the valley to have a camera recording them. There is simply zero argument against this. The innocent, considerate motorists have nothing to fear.

Avatar
Username [242 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

Jon Ronson only needs to rewrite his original tweet as:-

"Ferocious man is filmed terrorising a stranger with meat-cleaver and Twitter terrorises the man." to understand how stupid it is to be trying to defend, or even feel sorry for, a psychopath who uses his 2.5 tonne truck as a weapon.

Then layer onto that the totally ineffective police response and you get to where we are.

Avatar
KiwiMike [1421 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

Plus, he should sack his PR firm.

A more genuine apology and donation of a grand or two to a local cycle charity would have diffused 90% of the backlash.

Avatar
farrell [1946 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes
zanf wrote:

this isnt a facebook bullying of someone for a characteristic they have, a sexual orientation, or a fetish they have.

I don't know, a few people took the piss out of his ill fitting jacket, surely that must be part of some sort of kink, he couldn't possibly be wearing it for fashion reasons, right?

Avatar
CXR94Di2 [2584 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

He is Australian, they aren't known for dress sense. Much like the UK  4

Avatar
hawkinspeter [3597 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I think all cyclists can relate to the 'glee' of a dangerous bully getting his come-uppance. However, I thought the Twitter hounding crossed a line when they started linking to those images of him standing on his scales with a less than impressive manhood visible (original photo was enhanced to show his naked reflection).

It's one thing to criticise/shame someone for their behaviour, but body-shaming is not something that should be carried out by adults. He can change his attitude, but he can't easily change what he has between his legs. (Although I think he should hop on a bike and actually interact with cyclists - that would help defuse the situation).

As immature as the "Big Car Small Dick" syndrome posts were though, I did chuckle at some of them before thinking that they were unfair.

Avatar
mr_stru [25 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

The flaw in these arguments is that Jason Wells isn't really the problem so while having a go at him might make you feel better it doesn't really solve anything. If you're annoyed about this write to your MP about it. Maybe if enough MPs hear about the problems with prosecuting people in these sorts of incidents something might happen. I very much doubt that meting out twitter justice to Jason Wells, or people like him, will change anything, other than to possibly help confirm the notion that cyclists are angry, selfish people that seems to be not uncommon in comment threads.

Secondly, you don't want people to think "I should be careful round cyclists because MOB JUSTICE" and instead because they actually have some understanding of what it's like to be a cyclist. This sort of action doesn't really do much towards that goal either. Nice calm reasonable articles, or letters, explaining the issues, ideally in mainstream press and not on cycling sites, are likely to get much further than "angry cyclists angry about angry man" stories in getting our perspective across. Angry shouting very rarely changes peoples minds and surely what we want to do is change minds over exacting 'revenge' on any particular individual?

I really think that if the answer to "why did you do that mean thing" is "it made me feel better" then it was probably not the right thing to do.

So yes, I think Ronson is right, but as much because I don't think these mobs will really enact the changes we want and people's energy would be better directed elsewhere.

Avatar
congokid [328 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

None of this would be necessary if a number of things had happened differently.

Missing from your list is the need for the local council to install proper, protected cycling infrastructure that meets the needs of people on bikes of all ages and abilities in order to keep them and other vulnerable road users safe from motor traffic. The paint on a narrow shared footpath is simply not good enough. They should also do more to manage the road system in and around the park to reduce levels of through traffic.

It's a real shame that a beautiful resource such as Richmond Park is completely surrounded by traffic sewers and invaded by parking craters.

Avatar
Bez [620 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I'll sort-of-disagree with one point in this article (which I'm going to guess you may agree with, John).

A "careless driving" charge, which I know you mention because that's really as high as we have come to dream of in cases of no serious injury, obviously fails—linguistically speaking—to fit Wells's actions. This was not carelessness. Arguably, the initial pass was, but then Wells drove his vehicle directly at the chap on the bike.

This is assault. It seems quite clearly so, whether by the linguistic or legal definition. Attempted GBH is probably a bit of a stretch in this instance, but it's perfectly usable where people are assaulted with vehicles. (Look up Carl Baxter for a successful GBH prosecution for deliberately driving a vehicle into someone, in response to a cyclist waving at him after a very close pass, much like Wells responds to a cyclist shouting at him after a very close pass.)

I'm reminded of the chap who was deliberately knocked off by a driver in a funeral convoy, who then got out of the car and verbally assaulted him. The driver was sent on an "awareness" course; hardly befitting the crime as he was quite patently aware of the guy. He should have been sent on an anger management course. (And, in my idea of an ideal world, a learning-to-drive-again course to repass his test and a going-to-court-on-a-charge-of-assault course.)

The offences in the Road Traffic Act 1988, and the wording of them, are problematic enough in cases of low standards of driving ability and lack of care; where there is clear malice and threat, there are other offences which are more appropriate, and I would suggest that it is better to focus on these.

Avatar
birzzles [138 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I'd be interested to know how much practical impact all this pathetic outpouring of hate from keyboard jockeys has actually had on the café business. Someone getting angry is unfortunate, and regrettable, but it isn't something to get outraged by.

All you professional offence takers should try taking an interest in real issues.

Avatar
Bez [620 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

PS I've not seen Jacco's tweet before and haven't read Ronson's piece about it, but it's a pretty good joke if you ask me. There is a world of difference, as noted, between making an actually pretty witty joke about at least two controversial subjects, that some people don't get, and driving a couple of tonnes of metal at someone. Just as there is between yelling at someone to "stay away from me you f— c—" and driving a couple of tonnes of metal at someone, or of then threatening violence towards them if there hadn't been a witness.

Avatar
Bez [620 posts] 4 years ago
1 like
birzzles wrote:

Someone getting angry is unfortunate, and regrettable, but it isn't something to get outraged by. All you professional offence takers should try taking an interest in real issues.

No, and pardon me for dropping the tone here, but this is bullshit.

"Taking offence" is when you choose to be upset about a remark about your choice of deity, or being upset when someone calls you fat, or finding words like "bullshit" somehow upsetting.

This is about people being given licences to drive around in a two tonne pile of metal and then using it to assault other people. This is about a massive social prejudice which fuels the people who do that. This is about calling out those violent pricks and making them realise that we're not standing for it. This is about taking the fight to a place—be it a courtroom, which I support, or TripAdvisor, which I don't—where the playing field is levelled and it's not two tonnes of metal versus 80kg of flesh and bone. This is about showing ever other violent prick on the road that yes, they may be tooled up on the tarmac, but don't you dare think that it begins and ends there. This is about making road violence—deliberate or otherwise—socially unacceptable.

Don't confuse this with offence. Fuck me I'm riled that anyone could confuse this with offence.

No-one ever got sent to the morgue by a spiteful tweet. No kids ever lost one of their parents to a swear-word.

Offence. Fucksake.

Avatar
arfa [859 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

The problem here above all else is that justice has neither been done (£90 fine is a bad joke for driving like that) nor seen to be done (the non apology from Wells sums it up). It is a total failure of justice and as history tells us, when justice fails, the vacuum is filled with unpleasantness.
For the record, I don't feel an ounce of sympathy after his lack of any genuine remorse and will make sure everyone I know locally knows who the owner of Brew is.

Avatar
KiwiMike [1421 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

Birzzles: Arse > Handed.

Chapeau Bez  41

Avatar
Bez [620 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes
Iamnot Wiggins wrote:

Except those victims of internet bullying who then chose to take their own lives as a result.

A very fair point, touché.

Avatar
dafyddp [467 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I think the lynch-mob mentality is a sign of frustration with the mainstream legal system - "if the courts won't deal with these people, we will" sort-of-thing. There are endless number of stories about careless, drunk or aggressive drivers maiming or even killing cyclists and walking away from court with quite minimal penalties. So when an incident like this happens, and the individual receives a laughable fine of £90, it's not surprising to find the 'community' using the media to hit the perpetrator where it hurts, reputation and business. Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's right.

Avatar
dafyddp [467 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I think the lynch-mob mentality is a sign of frustration with the mainstream legal system - "if the courts won't deal with these people, we will" sort-of-thing. There are endless number of stories about careless, drunk or aggressive drivers maiming or even killing cyclists and walking away from court with quite minimal penalties. So when an incident like this happens, and the individual receives a laughable fine of £90, it's not surprising to find the 'community' using the media to hit the perpetrator where it hurts, reputation and business. Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's right.

Avatar
Tim1.9 [12 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

Aside from the issue of the social media campaign or internet vigilantism, depending on your personal view, I think that there is something longer term that we as cyclists can do.

I cycle, drive, walk and run. I have had to speak to antisocial cyclists, drivers, walkers and runners about the dangerous way that they are conducting themselves. I have occasionally also made mistakes and silly decisions myself which has resulted in other road/cycle/footpath users having to accommodate me. I would like to think that my mistakes are minor and very rare, but I do not claim to be perfect.

The point is that as humans we are fallible, whether it be distraction, tiredness or as seen in this incident, anger. Why don't we ask cyclists do more to publicly support driverless vehicle development, with the aim of making roads safer for our community. By their very nature driverless vehicles will be much safer than 2 tonnes of metal controlled by a lump of ignorant meat.

I'm my ideal world drivers will be banned from the roads in 20 years time and these kind of incidents, and worse, will be recounted with amazement.

Avatar
rggfddne [221 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

I think all cyclists can relate to the 'glee' of a dangerous bully getting his come-uppance. However, I thought the Twitter hounding crossed a line when they started linking to those images of him standing on his scales with a less than impressive manhood visible (original photo was enhanced to show his naked reflection).

It's one thing to criticise/shame someone for their behaviour, but body-shaming is not something that should be carried out by adults. He can change his attitude, but he can't easily change what he has between his legs. (Although I think he should hop on a bike and actually interact with cyclists - that would help defuse the situation).

As immature as the "Big Car Small Dick" syndrome posts were though, I did chuckle at some of them before thinking that they were unfair.

For the record, under the criminal justice and courts act 2015, this would arguably constitute the criminal offence of "disclosing private sexual photographs with intent to cause distress" (depending on how private the original photo is). I would encourage anyone who has knowledge of someone doing this to contact the police.

The way the story is phrased does put change things. Shouting? Damn right that's a public order offence at worst, so getting on the shitter bandwagon
is stupid. Also, shitting on one person for the sake of all the bad conduct you've ever seen is stupid.

Bad driving? That is something we should be doing something about. Here (http://abcnews.go.com/US/woman-charged-murder-us-navy-sailors-traffic-de...) is what happen when you ignore that.

Long term I think whoever mentioned cameras everywhere is right. As far as roads go, privacy can take a running jump.

Avatar
KiwiMike [1421 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes
Iamnot Wiggins wrote:
Bez wrote:

No-one ever got sent to the morgue by a spiteful tweet.

Except those victims of internet bullying who then chose to take their own lives as a result.

Nah, I simply do not buy this rejoinder. What you are referring to are almost exclusively examples of typically fragile individuals in settings such as school or workplace, who are systematically bullied over months or years by a number of colleagues/classmates/social acquaintances, usually over physical or mental traits they have zero chance of changing even if they wanted to.

What we are referring to is the extremely aggressive individual using a vehicle as a weapon, actively and deliberately threatening or performing acts of violence, who is then pilloried for it.

If Wells loses his business as a result, and decides to end it all, it will be IN NO WAY the fault of anyone except himself (actually, the judiciary is probably most to blame for removing any sense of justice being done in the first place).

To argue otherwise is to defend his actions by proxy, to make out that the judicial response was appropriate, and that we as individuals must not make our voices heard in the matter. No-one corralled me into RT'ing this story, and (hopefully) hastening the demise of his business empire, shitty treatment of staff, business partners and all. I *want* him to suffer righteously for his actions. I *want* him to become an example to others of why not to bully and threaten fragile people on the public highway. People like him only understand one language.

Bring the f'ing hammer of social justice down on them I say.

Avatar
peted76 [1419 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

I say let the internet have it's day day. I particualry liked the 'reflective scales' image that was put of there of him (unsure if real or not but very funny) no crimes are being committed or physical violence towards him, it's just words and defamation of character and Jason Wells who has clearly profited 'a lot' from cyclists deserves everything he gets.

Remember today's news is tomorrows chip paper!

Worst or best scenario.. maybe all of this will mean poor old Jason Wells might have to downgrade to a £40k car instead of an £60k car next time.. and maybe just maybe the next time a car driver approaches a cyclist, they might just think the cyclist is 'cam'ed up' and consider passing them safer.

Avatar
Joeinpoole [466 posts] 4 years ago
0 likes

No, Jason Wells is simply getting what he deserves. It's not just a 'social media' campaign either, the story was considered news-worthy enough to make both the local and national newspapers.

Social media has given a voice to more people to publicly express how they feel about the issue. That has to be a good thing.

Btw, the 'disclosing private sexual photographs' originated from Well's own Twitter feed. He took the photo of his bits and *he* chose to publish it on the WWW.

Pages