I can guarantee that whether she was moving forward or stopped, whether the truck was going 1 m.p.h or 100 m.p.h., regardless of what part of the truck struck what part of the bike, whether the roads were wet or whether they were dry, that if Mickey was struck, there would be some forward movement to her bike and body from being struck from behind. She may go under the truck, she may go on top of the hood, but either way, there is still forward movement of her body and bike. She only ends up under or over the truck because the truck was moving at a greater velocity than Mickey was, but still at a point that was forward of the initial impact. MOO
A vehicle breaking is still a moving vehicle. So yes, there may have been some forward movement. The truck is stronger than the bike so if a back wheel is hit and trapped under a bumper or tire of a truck, the bike is going to stop when the truck does. That's what breaks do: defy physics with force.
"When the front of the car dipped under braking application before impact, the rider was projected ahead of the car and came to rest further from the point of impact than the car did. When the car was not braking at impact, and when the rider is astride the cycle as though riding and not standing, the cyclist is thrown off the side of the car after being ramped back onto the windshield. "
"Ride time for the cyclist on the car was not discussed in any other cited treatments of this subject. Based on the findings from these nine test runs, the ride time for the cyclist struck in this manner* at velocities between 15 and 30 mph (24 and 48 km/h) is, on the average, 1.3 seconds."
*"this manner" meaning cyclist headed in same direction as vehicle and breaking applied DURING impact. The statement below is when breaking is applied BEFORE impact.
"On run number two, where the brakes were applied before impact and the dummy had to travel both back and forth across the hood, the ride time was a high of 1.5 seconds. The majority of the ride times were 1.4 seconds in duration although some were as short as 1 .l seconds."
"D2. The ride timeas used in this narrative is that period of time starting when the bumper of the striking vehicle impacts the tire of the bicycle and ending when the cyclist body strikes the ground."
This all happens really fast. The vehicle hits the bike and throws the rider and the rider has landed all in less than 1.5 seconds. The lights on mickeys bike tires are rubber. They slide through the spokes. They're easy to get on, not necessarily "easy" to get off. They don't shatter like plastic. Maybe impact was a little ahead of the truck where the misc/ unknown object seems to rest in the road, since studies show that loose object are usually found at area of impact, and the truck backed up.
If this camera is in fact like the traffic cameras this may very well be the only picture they have of the truck. Watch the cameras. One shot the vehicles are right there, the next frame, theyre 50+yards away. Thats a laps of WAY longer than 1.5 seconds. (when flooring it the Chevy Z71 goes 0-60 in 7.5 seconds) The driver may have thrown Mickey, bike,and belongings into the truck with the intention and/or promise of the quickest route to a hospital. They took the bike so it wouldn't be stolen. Somewhere along the way, the hospital went out of the window for narrsacistic self preservation.
If the camera is real time, then I wonder why they messed with the photo so much.
This of course is my own opinion. I am not a bicycle accident expert. I have read SO much on bicycle accident studies over the last six weeks it would make one sick. This study that I've quoted here is the most concise in terms of being consistent with the way Mickey would have hit. From behind. Maybe bike in motion, maybe not. It's really worth reading. The damage to the bike in the study is a bent rear wheel. There are photos in the study.
Just in case y'all missed it:
http://www.collisionsafety.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Bike-crash-trajectory-SAE-900368.pdf