🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement had valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained information relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to hand over his phone pin to officers, claiming it included journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not disappeared. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there could be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she told the court.

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

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from organizing a large demonstration that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

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

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from police who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting him, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to indicate his client was a terrorist.

He asserted the officers’ action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out details that was already known. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained his client was scheduled to be a guest 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,” stated Williamson.

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