🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's phone held information related to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly declined to hand over his password to police, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson still have connections to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

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

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

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

Defense Arguments

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 last year, could receive up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to evidence from police who said they called “partner agencies” after detaining Robinson, Williamson said this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to suggest his client was a terrorist.

He said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to discover information that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and recently addressed a gathering organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the decision was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek 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,” said the barrister.

Goozee announced he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.