🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police maintained reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's phone contained material related to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to provide his password to officers, claiming it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived 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 more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The funds was reportedly from a collection to cover costs from organizing a large demonstration that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who denies failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 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, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to evidence from officers who stated they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to indicate his client was a security threat.

Williamson asserted the officers’ intervention was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an special authority that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. The barrister proposed that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed 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 appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday 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 announced he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.