🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that police maintained reasonable suspicions indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held material relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to hand over his phone pin to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there could be information relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are possibly engaged in illegal actions.”

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was traveling to the holiday destination 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 arranging a large demonstration that took place 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 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

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

He said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was previously available. Williamson proposed that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, the judge, after the defense said his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israel's administration 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,” said the barrister.

Goozee said he would deliver his verdict on the morning of 4 November.