🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the court that police had reasonable suspicions indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained information relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly declined to hand over his phone pin to police, claiming it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are designed to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there may be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed the court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on July 28. It was his association to others who are possibly engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

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

Defense Submissions

Robinson, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if convicted.

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

Citing testimony from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining 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 security threat.

He asserted the police action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was already known. The barrister suggested that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately addressed a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back 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 the barrister.

Goozee announced he would deliver his ruling on the morning of 4 November.