🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to provide his phone pin to police, stating it included journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial heard.

The money was reportedly from a collection to cover expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Submissions

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

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to testimony from police who stated they called “partner agencies” after detaining him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his client was a security threat.

Williamson said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was already known. Williamson proposed that his client journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a gathering organized by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israel's administration from the midweek and would not come back 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 Williamson.

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