🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement had valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held material relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to officers, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the trial, prosecutor the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for holding those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there may be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are possibly involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to offset expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from officers who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

He said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out information that was already known. Williamson proposed that his client journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and lately addressed a gathering organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, the judge, after Williamson said Robinson was due 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 the barrister.

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