🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the court that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's phone contained information related to terrorist activities when they stopped him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Password

The far-right activist, whose real name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly declined to provide his password to police, stating it included journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is known for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there may be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had turned up alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the court was told.

The funds was reportedly from a collection to offset costs from arranging a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who denies non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from police who said they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining him, Williamson said this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

He said the police action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. The barrister proposed that his client journeyed to the resort frequently, which ought to have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his legal costs in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and lately addressed a gathering organized by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was scheduled to be a guest of the Israel's administration from Wednesday 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,” said Williamson.

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