A road rage driver who chased an e-bike rider, ramming him with his car and killing him in the process, just to teach him a lesson for doing wheelies on the road in Birmingham, has been found guilty of murder and is expected to be sentenced for life.
Abdirahman Ibrahim, 21, was driving his car on Coventry Road near the Bullring shopping centre when he came across 22-year-old Liam Jones riding an electric bike with a friend late at night on 1 August 2023, the police said. CCTV footage showed the driver following closely behind the pair who were performing a “stand-up wheelie”. It is unclear from the police report what type of electric bike Jones and his friend were riding – road.cc has asked West Midlands Police for a clarification.
In their desperation to shake off Ibrahim the riders changed route – even going the wrong way down a one-way street — but he caught up with them again on Moat Lane. While Mr Jones’ friend managed to veer away, Ibrahim then drove at the remaining rider.
He ended up ramming Jones twice on Moat Lane in Sheldon, catapulting him into a concrete bollard. shortly before midnight. Jones suffered catastrophic injuries and was left to die in the road, as Ibrahim fled the scene.
After knocking Jones off, Ibrahim then drove over the bike before doing a U-turn and making off in his vehicle. He parked up in Golden Hillock Road, Sparkbrook, and his brother, who had been a passenger in the car, called a taxi for home.
Birmingham Crown Court heard that on the evening of August 1, 2023, Ibrahim hunted Mr Jones down in his Seat Leon after he was “wound up” by Mr Jones and a friend who were doing wheelies along a road.
Ibrahim, of Yardley, Birmingham, denied murder but was yesterday found guilty following a retrial at Birmingham Crown Court, and is expected to be jailed for life when he is sentenced on March 26.
Phillip Bradley KC, prosecuting, Bradley told the jury: “CCTV footage captured both bikes doing wheelies. You are going to have to consider the significance of that showboating.
“One possibility you may want to consider is whether the defendant took umbrage at Mr Jones’ showboating. To put it another way, did it wind the defendant up? So he wanted to teach him a lesson, following him and we know what ultimately happened.”
Ibrahim had previously admitted manslaughter, but the plea was not accepted by the prosecution and he was tried for murder for a second time after a previous jury failed to reach a verdict.
Bradley added: “This was no accident. At the time of the fatal collision, the defendant clearly intended him really serious harm.”
Detective Inspector Nick Barnes, from West Midlands Police’s homicide unit, said: “Abdirahman Ibrahim was intent on causing harm to Liam. He could have turned off at any point but he followed the riders and wanted to be in control.
“This was not a case of racing gone wrong as had been claimed by Ibrahim, but of him menacingly pursuing Liam and his friend.
“We believe he was angered by Liam’s showboating and wanted to teach him a lesson. He knew what he had done and did nothing to help, instead driving off.
“Tragically, Liam lost his life and Ibrahim will now spend many years of his own young life in prison. Ibrahim’s brother may have felt a sense of loyalty, but by trying to help his sibling he is now also a convicted criminal.
“We know Liam’s death caused a lot of concern within the community and our detectives have worked tirelessly – reviewing hours upon hours of CCTV footage and phone records — to ensure we achieved these convictions.
“While nothing will ever bring Liam back, we hope knowing those involved have been caught and are being punished will provide some solace to his family and friends.”
Last month, a driver who first abused and close passed a cyclist before speeding and deliberately ramming him and knocking him off his bike, causing him injuries, was sentenced to 18 months in prison and disqualified from driving for 21 months, for using his “vehicle as a weapon”.
43 thoughts on “Road rage driver who killed e-bike rider “to teach him a lesson for doing wheelies” found guilty of murder and set to be sentenced for life”
Oh. My. God
Oh. My. God
Good.
Good.
road.cc wrote:
Thanks to the police and justice system in this case for not aiming low and not giving up. You’d hope this was the standard – but when it comes to road death “settle for less and rarely achieve it” seems to be normal.
The last line is a reminder that homicidal behaviour on the road isn’t taken particularly seriously – unless it results in a death (and even then…). Never mind those who are just criminally unconcerned about others.
Why was this the *second*
Why was this the *second* trial?
WtF was up with the jury the first time?
Oldfatgit wrote:
He admitted manslaughter at the first trial but the jury was unable to reach a decision as to whether it was murder. Good on the prosecutors in this instance for not accepting a manslaughter plea.
It may not have got as far as
It may not have got as far as the jury even getting to consider the case – trials can collapse for a whole bunch of reasons.
[Edit] Though in this case it appears it did. So… as you were.
[Edit 2] Worth noting, though, that it only takes a couple of jurors to block a guilty verdict, so decrying the jury as a whole may still be rather unfair on them.
mdavidford wrote:
“a previous jury failed to reach a verdict.”
At last, murder recognised as
At last, murder recognised as murder. RIP to the rider, thoughts with his family =/
This is awful but I’m pretty
This is awful but I’m pretty sure they were riding surrons (electric motorbikes) not bicycles.
ribena wrote:
Looks more like e-bikes than real Surrons (motorbikes) on the CCTV footage, but pictures are really blurry…
Is that justification for
Is that justification for murder?
I don’t think anyone is
I don’t think anyone is saying it is any defence or mitigation for the actions of the murderer.
But a lot of people, myself included, have repeatedly pointed out that bicycles (and lawful EAPCs) are legally distinct from electric motorbikes, and it behoves journalists to make that distinction clear and use accurate language in their reporting. Look at the backlash over that Panorama episode.
Apologies for the mail link
Apologies for the mail link but this is what he is riding
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14408597/pictured-ebike-rider-murdered-road-rage-driver.html
NO it does not justify murder, but it’s really important to distinguish between bicycles (including legal EAPCs) and motorbikes, the fact that a cycling publication is now failing to make this distinction is worrying.
ebikes get a lot of people cycling (including my elderly parents) but they are increasinly being lumped together with surrons and coblled together contraptions delivering fast food.
The result is that legal EAPCs are getting banned in a lot of places, including my own place of employment.
It’s also not really a cycling story. The surrons are capable of upto 70mph or so depending on how they are built.
ribena wrote:
— ribenaFor what reason, and are cars and motorbikes banned also?
They are considered a fire
They are considered a fire risk due to the number of shoddy DIY ebike conversions and it’s easier to implement a blanket ban than check each one.
My workplace is the same. Any
My workplace is the same. Any EAPCs are to be secured outside the building. It’s been a blanket ban across the whole estate due to the number of hacked and bodged bikes around. A bit of a pain for legitimate bike owners but understandable.
Hmm… sounds like the usual
Hmm… sounds like the usual “over-reaction due to previous under-reaction”. (Think Waverley station here has also banned these?)
Think that’s due to a complete lack of interest (top down) in separating “sheep from goats”. No leadership on this. If anything governments were toying with introducing the higher powered kit they were lobbied for. (I’m not unhappy that failed).
Result (given the resulting general irritation to the public, and a few fires)? Smaller organisations feel “we need policies to address this!” So it’s bans / restrictions which of course most affect those who most benefit from legal, safe EAPCs…
That requires widely
That requires widely attentive, professional journalists.
Pigs might fly.
I assumed the article had
I assumed the article had been updated but I can find no reports on the sentencing that should have taken place late march.
I did find this on the bbc
“Correction on 2 April 2025: This article has been amended to make it clear it was an e-motorbike which Liam Jones was riding”
ribena wrote:
And?
Even with the correct verdict
Even with the correct verdict being reached, it is still shocking that whether or not the victim was doing a wheelie is considered relevant.
A car was deliberately driven into the victim, deliberately driving something weighing over a tonne into someone should be automatically considered an attempt to murder.
anotherflat wrote:
It had to be considered in the light of the defendant’s claim that he and the men on bikes were showboating/racing each other and it was an accidental outcome of that. That’s been shown to be untrue by the evidence and the verdict but as it formed a part of the defence it had to be considered.
The way I read it was that it
The way I read it was that it formed part of the prosecution case – that it established motive and therefore intent that was necessary for a murder charge, in contradiction to the defence claim that it was just an accident from racing.
I think (guessing a bit I
I think (guessing a bit I admit as details of the original trial are not available) it probably formed part of both the defence and prosecution case; the prosecution, as you say, using it to claim that the defendant was wound up by the riders doing wheelies and that’s why he attacked them, the defence presumably claiming that when the defendant saw them racing along doing wheelies he took that as a challenge/invitation for some high jinx, during the course of which he accidentally hit one.
So the defence genuinely
So the defence genuinely thought that someone being all wound up because they saw a pair of cyclists doing a wheelie (why? jealousy?) was a defence for chasing them down and trying to run them into the ground??
Not quite I think (again,
Not quite I think (again, element of guesswork, could be wrong), I think they would have tried to claim he thought they were participating in a general arse about (technical legal term) of messing with each other and in the course of that a tragic accident occurred – his plea of guilty to manslaughter implies that he was trying to claim that he never deliberately tried to hit them.
Manslaughter would also be
Manslaughter would also be the appropriate offence if he admitted he tried to hit them, but did not intend to cause grievous bodily harm. It’s pretty flimsy, but the defence could have been along the lines of he intended to knock them off to teach them a lesson, but didn’t intend to seriously injure them. I don’t know what the CCTV looked like but I can imagine it looked fairly obvious he was trying to hit them, but establishing intent to cause serious injury is harder. (This is all speculation.)
brooksby wrote:
No, there is no suggestion that this was his defence in court.
Wingguy wrote:
Yeah, I’ve read the article again and I think I misunderstood.
Did he shout anything before
Did he shout anything before he ran the guy over ?
Like what? “Have a care”?
Like what? “Have a care”?
Whilst I appreciate the
Whilst I appreciate the stronger than usual sentence issued, I’m wondering if it would have been the same had the driver/murderer been white.
He hasn’t been sentenced yet.
He hasn’t been sentenced yet.
If he’s convicted of murder,
If he’s convicted of murder, it will be life with a minimum term of at least 15 years.
whosatthewheel wrote:
That’s correct, but it raises an interesting question: if the defendant used a knife the starting point for a minimum term is twenty-five years, if they used a gun the starting point is thirty years, surely in a case like this when the defendant has gone looking for the victims with his car with the clear intention of using it as a weapon, surely the minimum should be consonant with those other offences of bringing a weapon to the crime scene?
What an appalling case. How
What an appalling case. How could anyone do what that driver did and then attempt to justify it?
I realise this is hardly the
I realise this is hardly the main point, but what on earth is going on in the world that there are people so angry, and willing to be angered to the point of dangerous rage by other people doing something annoying.
From the account given, it wasn’t even a brief moment of rage, it was sustained. And I find it even more remarkable that he did this with a passenger who I’d like to think might have persuaded him to calm down, or at least broken the obsession with a perverted revenge at some point before the collision.
The odds are this was not his first instance of road rage, and not the first time he’ll have had some kind of incident with another road user. This is why I admire those who record their journeys and upload near misses to police portals where available, and why I am so frustrated that some police forces are hesitant to take this kind of evidence seriously.
Exactly. It’s very rarely a
Exactly. It’s very rarely a one-off and almost always a continuation of a pattern of behaviour.
Otherwise law-abiding…
Otherwise law-abiding…
I take no pleasure whatsoever
I take no pleasure whatsoever in a young man being jailed for life, but quite frankly this needed to happen. The amount of rage and violence directed against cyclists is sickening and an example needed to be made. Let’s hope that it makes other drivers think twice before attacking cyclists.
Let’s hope that it makes
Let’s hope that it makes other drivers think twice before attacking cyclists
I share the sentiment, and without the concept of ‘deterrence’ the concept of ‘punishment’ is brought into question, but twice ‘nothing’ is still ‘nothing’
He won’t be “jailed” for life
He won’t be “jailed” for life as it will not be a “whole life” sentence. He’s 22 now, so may be out as early as when he is 37 as the minimum “jail” term for a murder is 15 years and if he gets released, the rest of the life sentence is suspended, so he will have to be on his best behaviour for the rest of his life. Being so young means there is a chance he still has the capability to sort his head out by that time if he is willing to and is taken care of by the right professionals in the prison.
This tragic case just makes
This tragic case just makes me more concerned about the attitudes of some drivers now. Just last week, while cycling home from work (at about midnight) I had a Mercedes pull alongside me telling me to use teh cyclepath (leaf and litter strewn, and gives way to every sideroad along the way). I just thanked them for pointing it out to me and they drove ahead, only to slow down to a bit less than my speed (around 20mph). Luckily another car came along behind them/me, so they moved ahead, however, only to the next lights where they held back to see which way I was going, then followed me , overtaking and slowing down again. At the next roundabout they went all the way around so they could see my exit and follow me again. I turned onto a side road and they went to follow, but I assume because it was narrow and they wouldn’t get past me, instead they raced ahead and around the block so that at the next junction they were able to get in front of me and drive straight at me sounding their horn, before swerving off at the last minute. Thankfully I was close enough to home at this point and managed to get my lights off and into the garage before they lapped the next block and came driving past again into what would have been directly at me again if I had stil been on the road. Reported to the police (I use cameras) and havent had contact with them since (incident was only 4 days ago mind), but this driver was going out of his way to follow, harrass, intimidate and threaten a cyclist just for the perceived slight of me not being on the cycle path. How much further of a step is it to just drive into them as in this reported case?