🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the court that police maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held material relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Password

The right-wing campaigner, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly refused to provide his phone pin to officers, claiming it included journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are designed to permit information collection. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think the defendant still have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is recognized for holding those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on July 28. It was his connection to others who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial heard.

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

Defense Arguments

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

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from police who said they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to indicate his client was a terrorist.

Williamson asserted the police action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. Williamson proposed that Robinson journeyed to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was due 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,” stated the barrister.

The judge said he would deliver his verdict on the start of 4 November.