Kym Allen Parsons’ pleads not guilty to Bicycle Bandit bank robbery charges

Lawyers for the man accused of the infamous chain of bank robberies have abandoned their bid to slow the trial process.

The alleged Bicycle Bandit has abandoned a bid to stop his fast-tracked case in the middle of a court hearing, then pleaded not guilty, and will now stand trial in February.

In the Supreme Court on Friday, Kym Allen Parsons pleaded not guilty to 10 aggravated counts of armed robbery and one aggravated count of attempted armed robbery.

He also pleaded not guilty to one count each of possessing an unregistered and unlicensed firearm.

Mr Parsons was not due to enter pleas until next month – the hearing had been convened at his request to argue fast-tracking the case was an abuse of the legal process.

Alleged Bicycle Bandit Kym Allen Parsons outside the Adelaide Magistrates Court.

His lawyers began the day asking Justice Adam Kimber to permanently stay prosecutor’s bid for an expedited trial, warning the investigation into their client may be tainted by “illegalities”.

They further argued that, should any trial go ahead, it should be heard in the District Court – an argument that Justice Kimber said had left him puzzled.

“Why does he care which of the superior courts he has his trial in? I’m struggling to see where he’s prejudiced by the matter remaining in this court,” he said.

“I’m happy to tell you that I’ve been led to understand that this court can accommodate a trial for Mr Parsons in February of 2025 … I can list that today.”

Mr Parsons, 73, has yet to plead to allegations he was the Bicycle Bandit who stole more than $250,000 from 11 banks over a 10-year period, to which he is linked by DNA.

He was released on bail after a court heard he was terminally ill and had lost 7kg in custody – despite enjoying “the best chocolate sponge cake he had ever eaten”.

After prosecutors seized his assets, he claimed he needed taxpayer-supported Legal Aid funding before his case could progress.

On Friday, counsel for Mr Parsons argued expediting his trial would:

ABUSE the normal legal process.

DENY their client a chance to argue he has no case to answer.

PREVENT him exercising his legal right to have the evidence thrown out, by the Magistrates Court, before he enters a plea.

EXPEDITE the trial before full disclosure has been made, by SA Police, about the evidence in their case and how it was gathered.

STOP defence counsel from probing that investigation for any “illegalities” that would render some or all of that evidence inadmissable.

Specific details of their argument cannot be published due to a suppression order placed upon the hearing.

Justice Kimber imposed that order to protect the integrity of any future trial, in any court, over the allegations.

He said he understood why Mr Parsons’ counsel had made their application – but also why prosecutors had made theirs.

“It’s because of your client’s medical prognosis that the Director of Public Prosecutions has taken this unusual step,” he said.

“You say that’s improper, but solely because it would deprive him of making a no case submission before there’s been full disclosure of the evidence.

“There’s a public interest in keeping the matter moving as quickly as possible, provided that doing so does not deny your client the right to a fair trial.”

Following a short adjournment, during which he spoke with his lawyers, Mr Parsons withdrew his challenge and entered not guilty pleas to the charges.

The court heard his trial was likely to take between six and eight weeks, with 302 potential witnesses to give evidence.

He was remanded on continuing bail to face the Supreme Court again in July.