🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile contained information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to provide his password to police, claiming it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant still have connections to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there may be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to others who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial heard.

The money was reportedly from a donation drive to offset expenses from organizing a large demonstration that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 last year, faces up to 90 days in prison or a potential £2,500 penalty if convicted.

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

Citing evidence from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer claimed this was a allusion to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson said the police intervention was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to the resort frequently, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

The activist stated that his legal costs in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense said Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee 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.

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