🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's phone contained information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him last year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to provide his password to officers, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there could be information relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the subject for their attention on July 28. It was his association to individuals who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

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 on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to offset expenses from arranging a large demonstration that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 last year, could receive up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson said the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Date

The activist claimed that his court expenses in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and lately addressed a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday 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,” said Williamson.

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