🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held material related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to hand over his password to officers, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to permit information collection. She asserted that police had valid grounds to believe Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there could be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to individuals who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to cover expenses from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July last year, could receive up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from officers who stated they contacted other organizations” after detaining Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to indicate his client was a terrorist.

He said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was already known. The barrister proposed that his client traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israel's administration from Wednesday and would not come back until 25 October.

{“I wouldn’t trouble you if this was a trip to Benidorm. I would ask him to rearrange it but he is a guest of a foreign government,” said Williamson.

The judge said he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.