West Midlands Police has released CCTV footage of the moments leading up to a collision in which a driver mounted the pavement to hit a cyclist in Bilston before leaving the scene. The victim was left with multiple skull fractures and other serious injuries, from which he continues to recover.
The incident occurred on St Chad’s Road at around 10.50pm on November 9.
In a post on Facebook, the force said that a 20-year-old man was cycling along the footpath with a friend, when the driver of a dark coloured car mounted the pavement and knocked him off his bike.
Police believe that the force of the impact may mean that the car sustained front end damage to the bumper and windscreen, which could have been repaired.
If you have information, call 101 and ask for the Complex Crime Team at Wolverhampton or contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.
In October we reported that West Midlands Police were attempting to trace a Birmingham motorist after he allegedly chased a cyclist before mounting a kerb and hitting him.
The mother of the 17-year-old victim believes he only survived being run over because he was on boggy grass at the time and not the road.
19 thoughts on “Video: Police appeal after driver mounts pavement to hit cyclist in Bilston”
they may have been on the
they may have been on the pavement when hit, but they were clearly riding on the road itself as the driver approached.
Looks like a targeted attack
Looks like a targeted attack with previous. They no doubt did something to this person or pissed them off in someway. These are lads on bikes, not “cyclists”, still out of order.
khisanth wrote:
Whats the difference between a cyclist (i.e a person riding a bike) and a “cyclist”?
khisanth wrote:
What are you on about? Of course they are cyclists. Anyone on a bike is a cyclist, by definition. What distinction are you making and why?
harragan wrote:
This site has a lot of “it means what I say it means” going on in relation to the word “cyclist”. I’ve never quite got to the bottom of it myself, either.
There’s surely some back
There’s surely some back story to this…
fenix wrote:
Doesn’t matter what they have done you don’t mount the pavement to run someone down.
Looks like the driver had
Looks like the driver had malicious intent from the way they sped into view, and the poor lads saw him coming and tried to get out of the way.
kids being exploited by drug
kids being exploited by drug related gangs – then it goes wrong – maybe not but a good chance
The Daily Mail will love this
The Daily Mail will love this. They can run a click-bait piece about how ALL drivers are homicidal-pavement-mounting-pyschos…
Daveyraveygravey wrote:
Nah – they’ll run a piece on how two lycra-louts were riding on the pavement.
sheridan wrote:
I think your sarcasm detector needs re-calibration.
Agree with the earlier comment – looks like a planned assault; the victim’s riding was incidental.
sheridan wrote:
…until a public-spirited motorist, who also happens to be a keen cyclist himself, thought he could not pass up an opportunity do his civic duty by putting an immediate stop to this wanton flouting of pavement cycling laws and make them safe for local grannies out and about on their zimmer frames…
Looks probably like some drug
Looks probably like some drug dealer on drug dealer action to me. That’s him taught about ‘respect’.
What a massive amount of
What a massive amount of assumptions there on here based on very little information.
Wolfcastle50 wrote:
You assume people don’t know more than the article gave…..
fenix wrote:
What a massive amount of assumptions there on here based on very little information.
— fenix You assume people don’t know more than the article gave…..— Wolfcastle50
Plus this is a “comments” section, not “further investigations/information”. Fridays in particular are for posting rampant speculation and general WAG-ing on company time.
Dr_Lex wrote:
That could be read as “wives and girlfriends-ing” on company time, which is a somewhat different message to the one I think you were trying to send!
At least we can use this
At least we can use this footage to campaign against mandatory hi-viz.