🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the court that law enforcement maintained reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's phone contained information related to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his phone pin to police, stating it included journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to permit information collection. She asserted that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant still have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there may be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – 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 campaigner had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the court heard.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover costs from arranging a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 last year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

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

Referring to evidence from officers who said they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson said this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to indicate his client was a terrorist.

He asserted the police action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to the resort frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Verdict Date

Robinson stated that his court expenses 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 far-right activist and lately addressed a gathering organized by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not return 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,” stated Williamson.

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