🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police had valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained information related to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to leave the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused 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 Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the EDL has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there may be information relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

Morris added, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are possibly engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the encounter on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

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

Citing testimony from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

He said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was already known. Williamson proposed that his client traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, the judge, after the defense explained Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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,” stated Williamson.

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