🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement had valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained information related to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Device Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly declined to provide his password to police, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant continued to have links to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his telephone there may be information pertaining to terrorist acts,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to offset costs from arranging a large demonstration that took place the previous day in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

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

His barrister, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police 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 other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to indicate his client was a terrorist.

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

He noted that police had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. The barrister proposed that his client journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

The activist stated that his court expenses in the case 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 spoke at a rally arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson said his client 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 Williamson.

The judge said he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.