🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police maintained reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's phone held information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Denial to Give Phone Password

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think the defendant continued to have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there could be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on July 28. It was his association to others who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to cover expenses from organizing a major rally that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

Robinson, who denies non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from police who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting him, Williamson said this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

He said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out details that was already known. The barrister proposed that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and lately spoke at a gathering organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration from Wednesday and would not return until October 25.

{“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,” stated Williamson.

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