🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the court that police maintained valid concerns indicating Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's mobile held material related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his phone pin to officers, stating it included journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the trial, prosecutor Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to permit information collection. She asserted that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant still have links to right-wing groups, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” 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 potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had turned up alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Submissions

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on 28 July of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who stopped Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from officers who said they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer claimed this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been offered from the security service to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He said the officers’ action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said 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 needs to be properly policed” to try to find out information that was already known. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a rally arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained Robinson was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not return 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,” stated Williamson.

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