🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile held information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to provide his password to police, claiming it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the trial, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities used by police are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant continued to have links to right-wing groups, even after 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 having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his telephone there may be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to others who are potentially involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Stop

The activist had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover costs from arranging a large demonstration that took place the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

The defendant, 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 possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to testimony from police who said they contacted other organizations” after detaining Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

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

He noted that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort frequently, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

Robinson stated that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and lately addressed a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after the defense explained his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israel's administration from Wednesday 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,” stated the barrister.

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