🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the court that law enforcement had valid concerns that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone contained material relevant to terrorist activities when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Password

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

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had reasonable suspicion to think the defendant continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there could be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The money was reportedly from a donation drive to offset costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the encounter on 28 July last year, could receive up to 90 days in jail or a possible £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His lawyer, defense counsel, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to evidence from police who stated they contacted other organizations” after detaining Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to suggest his client was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

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

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and lately spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson said his client was scheduled to be a invitee 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,” said Williamson.

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