🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained material related to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to hand over his password to officers, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities used by police are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had valid grounds to think Robinson continued to have links to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there may be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris added, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on July 28. It was his association to others who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The money was reportedly from a collection to cover expenses from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

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

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing testimony from officers who stated they contacted other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson 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.

Williamson asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson proposed that his client journeyed to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his legal costs in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist 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 decision was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back 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.

The judge announced he would deliver his ruling on the start of 4 November.