🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that law enforcement had valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's phone contained information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Denial to Give Device Password

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, stating it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Anti-Terror Authority

On the final day of the trial, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities used by police are intended to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson still have connections to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover expenses from arranging a large demonstration that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Submissions

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

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from police who stated they called “partner agencies” after detaining Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

He asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

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. Williamson proposed that his client traveled to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have reduced the police concerns about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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,” said Williamson.

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