🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held information related to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to provide his password to officers, claiming it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant still have connections to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she told the court.

The prosecutor continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their attention on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are potentially engaged in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court heard.

The money was reportedly from a donation drive to offset expenses from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to 90 days in prison or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to evidence from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out information that was previously available. The barrister proposed that Robinson traveled to the resort frequently, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, the judge, after Williamson explained his client was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration from the midweek and would not return until 25 October.

{“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.