🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that law enforcement had valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held material related to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Password

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

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

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

Details of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to offset costs from arranging a major rally that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained Robinson had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to testimony from officers who stated they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

He said the officers’ intervention was biased” 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 noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and lately addressed a rally arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek 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,” said the barrister.

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