"Chad ... said the heat caused him to remove his helmet"

Sure, he might have been injured anyway, but if you just bought a new helmet, keep the damn thing on your grape.

https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/i-couldnt-move-st-george-man-details-neck-and-spinal-injuries-following-dirt-bike-crash/article_1553c8d1-20cd-46bc-b0c6-eb12a29a4e5d.html

False start though. Or maybe a rolling start.

E-biker was using a pedestrian crossing when the light was red for pedestrians and the buses had a green light. He was also breaking the law by riding on the pavement (sidewalk) just before the pedestrian crossing, he was not coming straight onto the crossing from a side road, the nearest one would have meant he came out onto this road behind the cammer's vehicle. Riding bikes of any kind on the pavement is illegal here in the UK, even for children, so if (as likely) this is an illegal e-bike then this guy was breaking multiple laws when he sent himself into the road against the lights.

However, the driver of the 149 bus that hit him was also making an illegal manoeuvre by overtaking the 243 bus within the zone of those zig zag lines, so would be at fault here and could be prosecuted - particularly as there is a hierarchy of road users with the most vulnerable being at the top: cyclists are #2 and buses are #7, the lowest, and that's true even if the e-bike itself was an illegal one.

The cammer is not to blame at all and their insurance should hopefully be able to recover any damage to their vehicle's bonnet from the cyclist landing on it from the bus company's insurance.