🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's phone held material relevant to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he attempted to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to hand over his phone pin to officers, stating it included journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant still have connections to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court heard.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to offset expenses from organizing a major rally that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Submissions

The defendant, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, could receive up to three months in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained Robinson had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from police who stated they called other organizations” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He asserted the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to find out details that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Date

Robinson stated that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said Robinson 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,” stated Williamson.

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