🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to provide his password to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant still have connections to right-wing groups, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there could be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

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

Details of the Detention

The activist had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

The funds was reportedly from a collection to offset expenses from arranging a major rally that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the encounter on July 28 last year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

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

Referring to testimony from officers who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He asserted the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. Williamson suggested that his client traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government 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 announced he would hand down his ruling on the morning of 4 November.