🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police maintained valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile held material relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Device Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his password to officers, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities used by police are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his telephone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

The prosecutor added, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to individuals who are potentially engaged in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was reportedly from a collection to offset expenses from arranging a large demonstration that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Arguments

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on 28 July last year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

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

Referring to testimony from officers who said they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

He said the police action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister proposed that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and recently spoke at a gathering organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

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

Goozee announced he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.