🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's phone held material related to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

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

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson still have connections to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there may be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

The prosecutor added, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are possibly involved in illegal actions.”

Details of the Stop

The activist had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the trial heard.

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

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July last year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to testimony from police who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

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

He noted that officers had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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 the barrister.

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