🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that law enforcement maintained valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held material relevant to acts of terrorism when they stopped him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Pin

The right-wing campaigner, whose real name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly declined to hand over his phone pin to police, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the last day of the trial, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by law enforcement are designed to allow information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant continued to have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. 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 terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on July 28. It was his association to others who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to offset costs from arranging a large demonstration that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, defense counsel, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to evidence from police who stated they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from the security service to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

He said the officers’ action was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out information that was previously available. The barrister proposed that Robinson traveled to Benidorm regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Timing

The activist claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an ally of the campaigner and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in London via a livestream.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense said his client was scheduled to be a guest of the Israel's administration from the midweek 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 the barrister.

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