🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that police had valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material related to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, claiming it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant continued to have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his telephone there may be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor continued, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on July 28. It was his association to individuals who are possibly engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.

The money was reportedly from a donation drive to offset costs from arranging a large demonstration that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing testimony from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to suggest his client was a terrorist.

He said the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree 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 officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to find out information that was previously available. Williamson proposed that his client journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Date

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested date 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 Israeli government from the midweek 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,” stated the barrister.

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