🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that police maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Device Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly declined to provide his password to police, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the EDL has ceased, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there may be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor 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 engaged in illegal actions.”

Details of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover costs from organizing a major rally that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from police who stated they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson said this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was previously available. The barrister suggested that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist claimed 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 emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back 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 announced he would hand down his verdict on the start of 4 November.