🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held material relevant to acts of terrorism when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Password

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

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are designed to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even following 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 recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there may be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

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

Legal Team Submissions

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

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

Citing testimony from officers who stated they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to indicate his client was a security threat.

Williamson asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out information that was previously available. Williamson suggested that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Date

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and lately spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained his client was due 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,” said Williamson.

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