🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the tribunal that police maintained valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained material related to terrorist activities when they detained him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Password

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to hand over his phone pin to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Claims on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities used by police are intended to allow information collection. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the EDL has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is known for holding those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there could be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she told the court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to offset costs from organizing a major rally that occurred the previous day in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to testimony from officers who stated they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining him, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

He said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was scheduled to be a invitee 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,” stated Williamson.

The judge said he would deliver his verdict on the morning of 4 November.