🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held information relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Password

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 Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are intended to permit information collection. She asserted that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his telephone there could be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor added, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on July 28. It was his connection to others who are potentially involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast 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 expenses from organizing a large demonstration that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who denies non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July last year, could receive up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who detained Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

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

Williamson asserted the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. Williamson proposed that Robinson traveled to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a gathering organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the decision was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government 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 Williamson.

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