🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that police had reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile contained information related to terrorist activities when they detained him last year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly declined to provide his phone pin to police, stating it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are intended to allow information collection. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for holding those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there may be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Stop

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

The money was reportedly from a collection to offset costs from arranging a major rally that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, could receive up to three months in jail or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from officers who stated they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

He asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent 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 special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out information that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and recently spoke at a gathering organized by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said Robinson was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government 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,” said the barrister.

Goozee announced he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.