🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that police had valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held information relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Denial to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his phone pin to police, claiming it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had valid grounds to think the defendant continued to have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there may be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.

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

Defense Submissions

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained Robinson had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his client was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ intervention was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated 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 must be properly policed” to try to discover information that was already known. Williamson proposed that his client traveled to the resort regularly, which should have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

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

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, the judge, after Williamson said Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration 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,” said the barrister.

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