🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police maintained valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained information related to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to provide his password to officers, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to believe Robinson continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his membership of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there could be data pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – 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 Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

The funds was said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from arranging a large demonstration that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 last year, could receive up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing evidence from officers who said they called other organizations” after detaining him, Williamson said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to indicate his client was a terrorist.

He asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and lately spoke at a gathering arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not return 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 said he would deliver his ruling on the start of 4 November.