🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held information relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to hand over his phone pin to police, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the final day of the trial, state lawyer Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that police had valid grounds to believe Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be information relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told 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 potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court heard.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in prison or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from officers who said they called other organizations” after detaining Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

He said the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover information that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

The activist stated that his legal costs in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, the judge, after the defense said Robinson was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not return 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 the barrister.

Goozee said he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.