🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the court that law enforcement maintained reasonable suspicions that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained information relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Denial to Provide Phone Password

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly refused to hand over his password to officers, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Claims on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to permit information collection. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant still have connections to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on July 28. It was his connection to individuals who are potentially involved in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to offset expenses from arranging a large demonstration that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the encounter on 28 July last year, faces up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

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

Referring to evidence from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

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

He added that police had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to find out information that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson journeyed to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson explained Robinson was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek 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.

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