🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that police maintained valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile held material related to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to hand over his phone pin to police, stating it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to believe the defendant 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 ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

The prosecutor continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on July 28. It was his connection to others who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover costs from arranging a major rally that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from police who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

He asserted 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 recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was previously available. The barrister proposed that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a gathering organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, 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 Williamson.

The judge announced he would deliver his verdict on the start of 4 November.